Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8897 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-20-2019 4:52 AM
131 online now:
Dredge, Tangle (2 members, 129 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,478 Year: 3,515/19,786 Month: 510/1,087 Week: 100/212 Day: 16/14 Hour: 0/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2345Next
Author Topic:   Artifical life
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3099
Joined: 08-11-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


(1)
Message 1 of 71 (561486)
05-20-2010 8:54 PM


http://www.sciencemag.org/...ontent/abstract/science.1190719

Research Articles
Creation of a Bacterial Cell Controlled by a Chemically Synthesized Genome
Daniel G. Gibson,1 John I. Glass,1 Carole Lartigue,1 Vladimir N. Noskov,1 Ray-Yuan Chuang,1 Mikkel A. Algire,1 Gwynedd A. Benders,2 Michael G. Montague,1 Li Ma,1 Monzia M. Moodie,1 Chuck Merryman,1 Sanjay Vashee,1 Radha Krishnakumar,1 Nacyra Assad-Garcia,1 Cynthia Andrews-Pfannkoch,1 Evgeniya A. Denisova,1 Lei Young,1 Zhi-Qing Qi,1 Thomas H. Segall-Shapiro,1 Christopher H. Calvey,1 Prashanth P. Parmar,1 Clyde A. Hutchison, III,2 Hamilton O. Smith,2 J. Craig Venter1,2,*

We report the design, synthesis, and assembly of the 1.08-Mbp Mycoplasma mycoides JCVI-syn1.0 genome starting from digitized genome sequence information and its transplantation into a Mycoplasma capricolum recipient cell to create new Mycoplasma mycoides cells that are controlled only by the synthetic chromosome. The only DNA in the cells is the designed synthetic DNA sequence, including "watermark" sequences and other designed gene deletions and polymorphisms, and mutations acquired during the building process. The new cells have expected phenotypic properties and are capable of continuous self-replication.

1 The J. Craig Venter Institute, 9704 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
2 The J. Craig Venter Institute, 10355 Science Center Drive, San Diego, CA 92121, USA.

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jcventer@jcvi.org


  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 497 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 2 of 71 (561488)
05-20-2010 8:57 PM


I didn't read this article but read the more layman article in the New York Times I believe.....so thoughts on what this means?

Could this guy (a brilliant guy no doubt), just proven that life, *gasp*, requires some sort of designer, or a "god"????

Or is this not that big of a deal and all it means is that this genius of a scientist is advancing science?

Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by RAZD, posted 05-20-2010 9:08 PM Flyer75 has not yet responded
 Message 4 by AZPaul3, posted 05-20-2010 10:00 PM Flyer75 has not yet responded
 Message 7 by Rahvin, posted 05-20-2010 11:48 PM Flyer75 has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19754
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.0


Message 3 of 71 (561489)
05-20-2010 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Flyer75
05-20-2010 8:57 PM


no barrier to mutation/s
Hi Flyer75, good question.

Could this guy (a brilliant guy no doubt), just proven that life, *gasp*, requires some sort of designer, or a "god"????

Or is this not that big of a deal and all it means is that this genius of a scientist is advancing science?

In my (obviously humble) opinion, what this shows is that there is no limitation to what can occur through mutation and replication.

Why?

Because it shows you can take random molecules and assemble them into any form of life you desire, replicate any known organism, and the result is a viable living reproducing organism.

You could take one organism, deconstruct it and reassemble it into another.

Any such change could occur by mutation in a natural process.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Flyer75, posted 05-20-2010 8:57 PM Flyer75 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by mike the wiz, posted 05-21-2010 11:01 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3798
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 4 of 71 (561490)
05-20-2010 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Flyer75
05-20-2010 8:57 PM


What Venter and company did was sequence a bacterial genome, duplicate the genome in a sequencer, inserted the sequencer-made genome into a cell replacing its natural genome then watched it continue to live and reproduce.

No great surprise, here. An Adenine molecule in position 2754 on chromosome 8 is chemically identical in form and function to any other Adenine molecule whether it was placed there by the cells natural mechanisms or by a sequencer unit.

What is significant about this experiment is that this is the first time in genetic engineering an entire genome has been sequencer produced without any of the naturally produced genome used in the resultant cell. This is significant in that it evidences that no spooky supernatural power, element or “breath of god” is necessary (since the sequencer unit is incapable of producing such things) in the genome for the processes of life to occur. Though it does not disprove a designer, rather than evidencing a designer this experiment shows that the operation of the genome is purely, and only, chemistry.

Second, though it is still cheaper and more effective to leave the natural genome in place, changing only those parts we want artificially to produce whatever application we are trying to achieve, as our knowledge of the intricacies of the genome and the resultant proteomics progresses, it may become more feasible to sequence an entirely unique genome to insert in a cell and we now know we can do that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Flyer75, posted 05-20-2010 8:57 PM Flyer75 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 05-20-2010 10:35 PM AZPaul3 has responded
 Message 15 by mike the wiz, posted 05-21-2010 10:42 AM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19754
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.0


Message 5 of 71 (561495)
05-20-2010 10:35 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by AZPaul3
05-20-2010 10:00 PM


What is significant about this experiment is that this is the first time in genetic engineering an entire genome has been sequencer produced without any of the naturally produced genome used in the resultant cell.

The potential of this process for biogenic drugs is ... inspiring.

My last chemo drug was biogenic -- produce by bacteria bred to make it in quantity.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by AZPaul3, posted 05-20-2010 10:00 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by AZPaul3, posted 05-20-2010 11:04 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply
 Message 14 by ramoss, posted 05-21-2010 9:58 AM RAZD has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3798
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 6 of 71 (561496)
05-20-2010 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by RAZD
05-20-2010 10:35 PM


The potential of this process for biogenic drugs is ... inspiring.

Indeed. The potential benefits are staggering.

Unfortunately so are the potential dangers.

We'll both keep our fingers crossed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 05-20-2010 10:35 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 1261 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 7 of 71 (561501)
05-20-2010 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Flyer75
05-20-2010 8:57 PM


I didn't read this article but read the more layman article in the New York Times I believe.....so thoughts on what this means?

Could this guy (a brilliant guy no doubt), just proven that life, *gasp*, requires some sort of designer, or a "god"????

Or is this not that big of a deal and all it means is that this genius of a scientist is advancing science?

Absurd. This particular life form was created by an intelligent designer. It proves that intelligent beings can create life.

It does not prove in any way that all life, or even any other life other than this specific example was actually created by an intelligent designer.

If I make a pile of rocks, does that mean every rock pile you ever see was made by an intelligent piler?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Flyer75, posted 05-20-2010 8:57 PM Flyer75 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Flyer75, posted 05-20-2010 11:59 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 497 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 8 of 71 (561504)
05-20-2010 11:59 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Rahvin
05-20-2010 11:48 PM


Good grief Rahvin, lighten up a bit would ya.

The point is and it cannot be denied, this new life that was made, had a creator. Are you going to deny that??? It had a designer.

It's hard absurd what I said.

Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Rahvin, posted 05-20-2010 11:48 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Meldinoor, posted 05-21-2010 12:04 AM Flyer75 has not yet responded
 Message 16 by mike the wiz, posted 05-21-2010 10:50 AM Flyer75 has not yet responded

    
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 497 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 9 of 71 (561507)
05-21-2010 12:04 AM


AZ,

Could you enlighten me to the pros and cons of this. I'm about as dumb as the pile of rocks that Rahvin just designed when it comes to this subject. Seriously.

You mentioned the drug benefits....how so? And then you mentioned the dangers.


Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Phage0070, posted 05-21-2010 2:44 AM Flyer75 has not yet responded
 Message 12 by AZPaul3, posted 05-21-2010 3:55 AM Flyer75 has responded

    
Meldinoor
Member (Idle past 2883 days)
Posts: 400
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 02-16-2009


Message 10 of 71 (561508)
05-21-2010 12:04 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Flyer75
05-20-2010 11:59 PM


He didn't deny that this life was "created". He simply pointed out the flaw in your reasoning: that you claimed this proves that all life must have been created. Surely you see that?

Respectfully,

-Meldinoor

Edited by Meldinoor, : Clarity


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Flyer75, posted 05-20-2010 11:59 PM Flyer75 has not yet responded

    
Phage0070
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 11 of 71 (561517)
05-21-2010 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Flyer75
05-21-2010 12:04 AM


Could you enlighten me to the pros and cons of this.
...
You mentioned the drug benefits....how so? And then you mentioned the dangers.

Pros: Need a drug or chemical manufactured in large quantities quickly and cheaply? Design a bacteria that eats something relatively mundane (corn mush for instance) and that poops what you want (most likely along with other stuff hopefully easily filtered out). Or how about a bacteria that eats staph infections?

Cons: Maybe you mess up and the bacteria that you engineered to eat staph and be nearly immune to antibiotics (so they could be used in conjunction) ends up mutating and instead of eating staph now eats flesh like staph. Now you just created a super-infection. Or maybe your corn-mush-eating-insulin-pooping bacteria gets into a farmer's corn field and turns it into insulin-on-the-cob and ruins the crops (maybe kills some people too).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Flyer75, posted 05-21-2010 12:04 AM Flyer75 has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3798
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 12 of 71 (561521)
05-21-2010 3:55 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Flyer75
05-21-2010 12:04 AM


You mentioned the drug benefits....how so? And then you mentioned the dangers.

As RAZD and Phage mentioned the benefit of having a bacteria spawn in great beer vats producing whatever drug of choice from insulin to biogenic amines will make such treatments more widely available and drop the costs to pennies per hundred doses instead of $$ per dose today.

Today most, if not all drugs, are proteins or molecules discovered and taken from natural substances. Designer molecules are difficult and expensive to make, even for testing purposes, and designer proteins are next to impossible except in the most simple short-chain varieties. Using designer genomes in bacterium will change this.

How about a designed bacterium that eats and cleans-up after an oil spill in some place like, oh I don't know, like maybe the Gulf of Mexico?

The dangers are legion. Besides the obvious human design errors that could inadvertently be placed into a bacterium with unintended consequences how about intentional designer plagues? The prospect of an Ebola-like hemorrhagic bacteria specifically targeted only to Blacks, Semites or Northern Europeans comes to mind.

Scary ... Boo!

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Flyer75, posted 05-21-2010 12:04 AM Flyer75 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Flyer75, posted 05-21-2010 7:52 AM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 497 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 13 of 71 (561541)
05-21-2010 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by AZPaul3
05-21-2010 3:55 AM


Thanks for the answers guys. Ya, seems like a ton could go wrong somewhere along the lines.

Not to mention how long it's going to take for the FDA to actually approve the drugs themselves.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by AZPaul3, posted 05-21-2010 3:55 AM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

    
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3099
Joined: 08-11-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 14 of 71 (561556)
05-21-2010 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by RAZD
05-20-2010 10:35 PM


Gleevec???
This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 05-20-2010 10:35 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by RAZD, posted 05-21-2010 7:40 PM ramoss has not yet responded

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4637
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 15 of 71 (561561)
05-21-2010 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by AZPaul3
05-20-2010 10:00 PM


This is significant in that it evidences that no spooky supernatural power, element or “breath of god” is necessary

It should be noted that a lot of Creationists do not even consider insects to be "life", because they are not nefesh creatures with blood.

the bible states that the "life is in the blood".

While we should expect lifeforms to certainly require an intelligent agency to put in the quartinary coding, I don't necessarily think that we should expect supernatural activity to be necessary when we are basically obeying the priniciples of nature.

i.e. It would be very odd if DNA did not work, given that we would expect it to in an orderly universe whereby certain mechanics should work, as they are set-up to work.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by AZPaul3, posted 05-20-2010 10:00 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Blue Jay, posted 05-21-2010 4:16 PM mike the wiz has responded

  
1
2345Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019