James_xeno Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Scientists create a sheep that's 15% human Scientists have created the world's first human-sheep chimera - which has the body of a sheep and half-human organs. The sheep have 15 per cent human cells and 85 per cent animal cells - and their evolution brings the prospect of animal organs being transplanted into humans one step closer. Professor Esmail Zanjani, of the University of Nevada, has spent seven years and £5million perfecting the technique, which involves injecting adult human cells into a sheep's foetus. He has already created a sheep liver which has a large proportion of human cells and eventually hopes to precisely match a sheep to a transplant patient, using their own stem cells to create their own flock of sheep. The process would involve extracting stem cells from the donor's bone marrow and injecting them into the peritoneum of a sheep's foetus. When the lamb is born, two months later, it would have a liver, heart, lungs and brain that are partly human and available for transplant. "We would take a couple of ounces of bone marrow cells from the patient,' said Prof Zanjani, whose work is highlighted in a Channel 4 programme tomorrow. "We would isolate the stem cells from them, inject them into the peritoneum of these animals and then these cells would get distributed throughout the metabolic system into the circulatory system of all the organs in the body. The two ounces of stem cell or bone marrow cell we get would provide enough stem cells to do about ten foetuses. So you don't just have one organ for transplant purposes, you have many available in case the first one fails." At present 7,168 patients are waiting for an organ transplant in Britain alone, and two thirds of them are expected to die before an organ becomes available. Scientists at King's College, London, and the North East Stem Cell Institute in Newcastle have now applied to the HFEA, the Government's fertility watchdog, for permission to start work on the chimeras. But the development is likely to revive criticisms about scientists playing God, with the possibility of silent viruses, which are harmless in animals, being introduced into the human race. Dr Patrick Dixon, an international lecturer on biological trends, warned: "Many silent viruses could create a biological nightmare in humans. Mutant animal viruses are a real threat, as we have seen with HIV." Animal rights activists fear that if the cells get mixed together, they could end up with cellular fusion, creating a hybrid which would have the features and characteristics of both man and sheep. But Prof Zanjani said: "Transplanting the cells into foetal sheep at this early stage does not result in fusion at all." It sounds a lot like those pigs from GitS. So, how do you guys feel about this? Worry something might go wrong? One step closer to Dr. Comet? >_> Oh and.... lol comments lol Link to comment
J-Stop Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 One step closer to Dr. Comet? >_> One can only hope. Link to comment
Chris Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 We kill animals for food, so there is no reason why this shouldn't be alright. Link to comment
darkon Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 We kill animals for food, so there is no reason why this shouldn't be alright. Now we're just turning them into the most soulless, evil species to ever live. We need to give animals a break. Link to comment
JeremyGEE Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Fuck giving animals a break I EAT TO LIVE. Link to comment
Chrono of The Black Howling Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 can you say slipery slope :whistling: Link to comment
James_xeno Posted March 31, 2007 Author Share Posted March 31, 2007 I hate slippery slope arguments of every variety. That's like saying because homosexuality is legal, we'll also make pedophilia legal. But some are starting to say that... :mellow: Link to comment
Ceraziefish Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 But some are starting to say that... Just because some people are saying it doesn't make it right. Link to comment
Cleese Posted April 2, 2007 Share Posted April 2, 2007 WE ONLY LIVE IN A BLACK AND WHITE SOCIETY , GRAY AREA IS HERESY. If you can't tell the difference between saying one thing is good while another is bad (I.E. homosexuality and pedofilia), then you're in for a derailment. Link to comment
amy Posted April 2, 2007 Share Posted April 2, 2007 WEIRD WEIRD WEIRD WEIRD IT'S WEIRD Scientists are cool though, i'm sure they'll do it ok and it'll be beneficial, but it's pretty weird Link to comment
James_xeno Posted April 2, 2007 Author Share Posted April 2, 2007 Just because some people are saying it doesn't make it right. Obviously. But that's not the point here! Burb said, and I qoute "I hate slippery slope arguments of every variety. That's like saying because homosexuality is legal, we'll also make pedophilia legal." Then I attested to the fact that people are already starting to argue it on that exact basis. A situation, or the beginnings of one, that meets the definition of a slippery slope in motion. I don't necessarily agree that it's reason enough to not start/do/change something in a case like this. But I do acknowledge the fact of the slippery slope, which may be created from it. WE ONLY LIVE IN A BLACK AND WHITE SOCIETY , GRAY AREA IS HERESY. If you can't tell the difference between saying one thing is good while another is bad (I.E. homosexuality and pedofilia), then you're in for a derailment. What the hell are you talking about?! Link to comment
Cleese Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 I hate slippery slope arguments of every variety. That's like saying because homosexuality is legal, we'll also make pedophilia legal From this sentence is where I based my post. WE ONLY LIVE IN A BLACK AND WHITE SOCIETY , GRAY AREA IS HERESY. sarcasm was applied thusly to the previous sentence via caps lock. I applied the use of caps lock because I cannot expect everyone to understand the implied sarcasm without it, thusly making the point lost and misconstrued. If you can't tell the difference between saying one thing is good while another is bad (I.E. homosexuality and pedofilia), then you're in for a derailment. Finally, for this sentence I posted my thoughts directly about the origionally posted quote, stating (dare I say threatening) to attempt to direct the thread in a totally unrelated topic. Consequences of doing so would be labeled as derailment. Combining these sections you have what I was talking about. Anything else I can help you with today? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now