Tag: human genome (page 1 of 2)

Think the Anti-GMO Movement is Unscientific? Think Again

Sayer Ji, Green Med Info“Anyone that says, ‘Oh, we know that this is perfectly safe,’ I say is either unbelievably stupid, or deliberately lying. The reality is, we don’t know. The experiments simply haven’t been done, and now we have become the guinea pigs.”  ~ David Suzuki, geneticistNow that the mainstream media is catching on to the public sentiment against GMO food, or at least against unlabeled GMO food, to the tune o [...]

View Article Here   Read More

CRISPR-Cas9 modifies your DNA, under legal fire ~ Video




Excerpt from slashgear.com

A revolutionary method of editing the human genome has this week become the subject of a patent war. Back in April of 2014, patents were awarded by the USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office) to the Broad Institutes’ Dr. Feng Zhang, MIT, and Harvard to develop the technology behind "CRISPR-Cas9". 
This April, the UC Board of Regents’ legal team spoke with the USPTO about reconsidering their action, suggesting they award the patent to the inventor of the original method, UC Berkeley’s Jennifer Doudna. One way or another, this radical DNA modifier must be made. 

We need X-Men, after all.


The following video will explain what this genome-editing piece of technological breakthrough is all about. CRISPR-Cas9 is what it's called, and getting in to your body to make changes on a DNA level is what it's going for.

CRISPR-Cas9 works as a tiny scissors.

Utilizing the natural bacterial-level protective system used by your body to fight infections, CRISPR-Cas9 replicates the sequences of target DNA strands and latches on.

It's the connector that CRISPR-Cas9 makes real, and really programmable.

Your body provides the Cas9.* The Cas9 is the nuclease enzyme that cuts DNA strands.

*Correction - BACTERIA have Cas9, not our human selves. As helpful commenter "John" put so eloquently, "So far it has only been found in bacterial cells, and that's one of the things that makes it so amazing--a relatively simple molecular system that replicates many of the functions of our elaborate adaptive immune response, all in a single prokaryotic cell!"

Screen Shot 2015-05-15 at 10.11.42 AM
ABOVE: Image comes via Nature; Addgene, By Jonathan Corum, via NYT.

When a DNA sequence is cut, it may attempt to re-form. In doing so, it can create mutations.

But that's a discussion for another day.

fx1

Genetically altered twin monkeys have been made using the CRISPR-Cas9 method. As you'll see in DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2014.01.027 in Cell Symposia "Generation of Gene-Modified Cynomolgus Monkey via Cas9/RNA-Mediated Gene Targeting in One-Cell Embryos", these monkeys are living large on gene-altered action.

12DOUDNAjp-articleLarge

Today what's important is that two groups are fighting for the patents involved in CRISPR-Cas9.

A paper published online June 28 2012 by Science authored by Martin Jinek, Krzysztof Chylinski, Ines Fonfara, Michael Hauer, Jennifer A. Doudna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier describes the method: "A Programmable Dual-RNA–Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity."

You can find this paper under code DOI: 10.1126/science.1225829.

Dr. Zhang suggests he demonstrated the CRISPR genome editing method before the 2012 paper was published by Dr. Doudna and Dr. Charpentier and crew. Dr. Doudna and Dr. Charpentier and crew suggest say Dr. Zhang's notebook (used as proof for patents) does not prove genome editing before the 2012 paper was published.

Can't we all just get along? Think of the monkeys!

Click to zoom

View Article Here   Read More

7 Reasons You Need More Magnesium

Margie King, GuestMagnesium is the fourth most abundant mineral in your body.  But few people fully appreciate this miraculous mineral. The human genome project reveals that 3,751 human proteins have binding sites for magnesium.[i]  And so far we know this one essential mineral activates over 350 biochemical processes in the body to keep things flowing.Here are just seven good reasons to get more magnesium today. 1. Prevent Migraines. According to University of Vermo [...]

View Article Here   Read More

Biologists fear DNA editing procedure can alter human DNA




Excerpt from themarketbusiness.com

A group of biologists was alarmed with the use a new genome-editing technique to modify human DNA in a way that it can become hereditary.
The biologists worry that the new technique is so effective and easy to use that some physicians may push ahead with it before its safety can be weigh up. They also want the public to understand the ethical issues surrounding the technique, which could be used to cure genetic diseases, but also to enhance qualities like beauty or intelligence. The latter is a path that many ethicists believe should never be taken.


“You could exert control over human heredity with this technique, and that is why we are raising the issue,” said David Baltimore, a former president of the California Institute of Technology and a member of the group whose paper on the topic was published in the journal Science.

Ethicists have been concerned for decades about the dangers of altering the human germ line — meaning to make changes to human sperm, eggs or embryos that will last through the life of the individual and be passed on to future generations. Until now, these worries have been theoretical. But a technique invented in 2012 makes it possible to edit the genome precisely and with much greater ease. The technique has already been used to edit the genomes of mice, rats and monkeys, and few doubt that it would work the same way in people.

The new genome-editing technique holds the power to repair or enhance any human gene. “It raises the most fundamental of issues about how we are going to view our humanity in the future and whether we are going to take the dramatic step of modifying our own germline and in a sense take control of our genetic destiny, which raises enormous peril for humanity,” said George Daley, a stem cell expert at Boston Children’s Hospital and a member of the group.

The biologists writing in Science support continuing laboratory research with the technique, and few if any scientists believe it is ready for clinical use. Any such use is tightly regulated in the United States and Europe. American scientists, for instance, would have to present a plan to treat genetic diseases in the human germline to the Food and Drug Administration.

The paper’s authors, however, are concerned about countries that have less regulation in science. They urge that “scientists should avoid even attempting, in lax jurisdictions, germ line genome modification for clinical application in humans” until the full implications “are discussed among scientific and governmental organizations.”

Though such a moratorium would not be legally enforceable and might seem unlikely to exert global sway, there is a precedent. In 1975, scientists worldwide were asked to refrain from using a method for manipulating genes, the recombinant DNA technique, until rules had been established.

“We asked at that time that nobody do certain experiments, and in fact nobody did, to my knowledge,” said Baltimore, who was a member of the 1975 group. “So there is a moral authority you can assert from the U.S., and that is what we hope to do.”

Recombinant DNA was the first in a series of ever-improving steps for manipulating genetic material. The chief problem has always been one of accuracy, of editing the DNA at precisely the intended site, since any off-target change could be lethal. Two recent methods, known as zinc fingers and TAL effectors, came close to the goal of accurate genome editing, but both are hard to use. The new genome-editing approach was invented by Jennifer Doudna of the University of California, Berkeley, and Emmanuelle Charpentier of Umea University in Sweden.

Their method, known by the acronym Crispr-Cas9, co-opts the natural immune system with which bacteria remember the DNA of the viruses that attack them so they are ready the next time those same invaders appear. Researchers can simply prime the defense system with a guide sequence of their choice and it will then destroy the matching DNA sequence in any genome presented to it. Doudna is the lead author of the Science article calling for control of the technique and organized the meeting at which the statement was developed.

Though highly efficient, the technique occasionally cuts the genome at unintended sites. The issue of how much mistargeting could be tolerated in a clinical setting is one that Doudna’s group wants to see thoroughly explored before any human genome is edited.

Scientists also say that replacing a defective gene with a normal one may seem entirely harmless but perhaps would not be.
“We worry about people making changes without the knowledge of what those changes mean in terms of the overall genome,” Baltimore said. “I personally think we are just not smart enough — and won’t be for a very long time — to feel comfortable about the consequences of changing heredity, even in a single individual.”
Many ethicists have accepted the idea of gene therapy, changes that die with the patient, but draw a clear line at altering the germline, since these will extend to future generations. The British Parliament in February approved the transfer of mitochondria, small DNA-containing organelles, to human eggs whose own mitochondria are defective. But that technique is less far-reaching because no genes are edited.

There are two broad schools of thought on modifying the human germline, said R. Alta Charo, a bioethicist at the University of Wisconsin and a member of the Doudna group. One is pragmatic and seeks to balance benefit and risk. The other “sets up inherent limits on how much humankind should alter nature,” she said. 
Some Christian doctrines oppose the idea of playing God, whereas in Judaism and Islam there is the notion “that humankind is supposed to improve the world.” She described herself as more of a pragmatist, saying, “I would try to regulate such things rather than shut a new technology down at its beginning.”

Other scientists agree with the Doudna group’s message.
“It is very clear that people will try to do gene editing in humans,” said Rudolf Jaenisch, a stem cell biologist at the Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, who was not a member of the Doudna group. “This paper calls for a moratorium on any clinical application, which I believe is the right thing to do.”
Writing in Nature last week, Edward Lanphier and other scientists involved in developing the rival zinc finger technique for genome editing also called for a moratorium on human germline modification, saying that use of current technologies would be “dangerous and ethically unacceptable.”

The International Society for Stem Cell Research said Thursday that it supported the proposed moratorium.

The Doudna group calls for public discussion but is also working to develop some more formal process, such as an international meeting convened by the National Academy of Sciences, to establish guidelines for human use of the genome-editing technique.

“We need some principled agreement that we want to enhance humans in this way or we don’t,” Jaenisch said. “You have to have this discussion because people are gearing up to do this.”

View Article Here   Read More

Another Problem for Evolution Theory? ‘Big Brain’ Gene Found in Humans, But Not in Chimps



Image: Mouse brain
M. Florio and W. Huttner / Max Planck Institute
This embryonic mouse cerebral cortex was stained to identify cell nuclei (in blue) and a marker for deep-layer neurons (in red). The human-specific gene known as ARHGAP11B was selectively expressed in the right hemisphere: Note the folding of the neocortical surface.

Excerpt from  nbcnews.com

By Tia Ghose

ave the way for the rise of human intelligence by dramatically increasing the number of neurons found in a key brain region. 

This gene seems to be uniquely human: It is found in modern-day humans, Neanderthals and another branch of extinct humans called Denisovans, but not in chimpanzees. 

By allowing the brain region called the neocortex to contain many more neurons, the tiny snippet of DNA may have laid the foundation for the human brain's massive expansion.
"It is so cool that one tiny gene alone may suffice to affect the phenotype of the stem cells, which contributed the most to the expansion of the neocortex," said study lead author Marta Florio, a doctoral candidate in molecular and cellular biology and genetics at the Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics in Dresden, Germany. 

She and her colleagues found that the gene, called ARHGAP11B, is turned on and highly activated in the human neural progenitor cells, but isn't present at all in mouse cells. This tiny snippet of DNA, just 804 genetic bases long, was once part of a much longer gene. Somehow, this fragment was duplicated, and the duplicated fragment was inserted into the human genome. 

In follow-up experiments, the team inserted and turned on this DNA snippet in the brains of mice. The mice with the gene insertion grew what looked like larger neocortex regions. 

The researchers reviewed a wide variety of genomes from modern-day and extinct species — confirming that Neanderthals and Denisovans had this gene, while chimpanzees and mice do not. That suggests that the gene emerged soon after humans split off from chimpanzees, and that it helped pave the way for the rapid expansion of the human brain. 

Florio stressed that the gene is probably just one of many genetic changes that make human cognition special.

The gene was described in a paper published online Thursday by the journal Science.

View Article Here   Read More

Evolution and the Problem of Suffering ~ A short but thought provoking discussion with former Human Genome Project Director Francis Collins

Geneticist and former Human Genome Project Director Francis Collins explain show we should be careful not to overestimate the role of suffering in evolution. A tiny reduction in reproductive fitness can have a big effect. And will we will ever unde...

View Article Here   Read More

Scientists Admit There Is a Second, Secret DNA Code Which Controls Genes

Contributed by Michael ForresterThe fascinating and recent discovery of a new, second DNA code further lends credence to what metaphysical scientists have been saying for millennia -- the body speaks two different languages.Since the genetic code was deciphered in the 1960s, researchers have assumed that it was used exclusively to write information about proteins.But biologists have suspected for years that some kind of epigenetic inheritance occurs at the cellular level. The different [...]

View Article Here   Read More

Scientific proof human race was created by aliens

ufosightingshotspot.blogspot.com A group of researchers worked for 13 years at the Human Genome Project (Project completed in 2003) indicate that they made an astonishing scientific discovery: They believe so-called 97% non-coding sequences in human...

View Article Here   Read More

3/19/12 Bob Dean:Extraterrestrial Contact, UFO’s, Human Genome, Disclosure – InLight Radio

{mainvote}

March 19, 2012--Graham Dewyea interviews internationally known ufologist and retired US Army Command Sergeant Major Bob Dean.

Bob discusses his top secret clearance that inspired his work to raise awareness about the presence...

View Article Here   Read More

Making The New You

{mainvote}

16 March 2012

from 'Your First Contact" by Sheldan Nidle

Good day! This is your guide, Sandara, speaking.

So far, the journey into your ever-expanding consciousness has explored the reasons you stand poised at ...

View Article Here   Read More

Multidimensional News ~ January 2012

{mainvote}

23 January 2012

Channeler: Suzan Caroll Ph.D

January 21, 2012

Bringing In The Light

Have you been tired lately? Does it seem that no matter how much sleep you get, you still feel like you need more? That is how it has ...

View Article Here   Read More

Christmas Message From God To All

{mainvote}

Suzanne Poulson Spooner

Dec 23 2011

My Dear Ones,

I Am. In those simple words are all you are.

May I share with you a story of love and hope. Once there was a baby born to a woman named Mary and a man named ...

View Article Here   Read More

The manuscript of survival – part 28

{mainvote}

Thanks to Eleanor for the link.

EagleEyes

2 October 2011

Chapter 21 We would like to take this opportunity to delve somewhat deeper into a very interesting topic, namely that of the scientific community and how they will...

View Article Here   Read More

Older posts

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
.
unless otherwise marked.

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy



Up ↑