helixrenovator Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 For a brief introduction: I am new to this forum, 14 years old, and to curious for my own welfare, directly in disregard of authority, and bursting with adolescant hormones. To place a grand finale on it all, I am intrigued by science. Now the query: I have come to the conclusion that the homo sapien would fare alot better if they had increased cellullar dedifferentiation, and could regenerate limbs, blood cells, brain cells, ect. This ability has been discovered in adult urodele amphibians, (newts for example), as well as echinoderms. I was unformed by my somewhat reliable readings, that we, those in the bio-tech industry, are quite a distance from actually being able to splice the exact section of DNA which contains those genes responsible for limb regrowth, into a section of our DNA. So, if the right technology was discovered, and if the right procedure was developed, and if the new DNA managed to be held together, and the bonds, even with the ligases, weren't to brittle, would the end product be considered human? What are the direct genetic defintions of a human?
YT2095 Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 well if it were done using the subjects own DNA, then of course it would be human and it would in fact be part of YOU as well, just the same as the original arm or leg ever was. I lose billions of skin cells each day, and every 7 or so days I have a new layer of skin in which to operate, I never consider myself a new person however your idea is good though, and would certainly be of bennefit to use were it to be possible, I for one would like 2 new legs "For a brief introduction: I am new to this forum, 14 years old, and to curious for my own welfare, directly in disregard of authority, and bursting with adolescant hormones. To place a grand finale on it all, I am intrigued by science" 14 is good I wish I was 14 again! interest in Science is a most admirable persuit also you worry for you welfare? that part I don`t quite understand?
Radical Edward Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 well being able to breed with other members of homo sapiens sapiens might be a plus point. Of course if you had so much tinkering done, you might end up in a whole new genus, such as homo sapiens nobilis or something. There is no real genetic definition for a human though... there is no real genetic definition for anything. Species classifications are just a rather convenient tool for us to divide things up, and we usually define a species by it's ability to breed with other members of that species and prodice viable offspring (which in themselves can breed). Even this isn't a totally black and white area though, since even horses and donkeys can produce offspring which are sometimes fertile in themselves. as can horses and zebra, lions and tigers, Dolphins and False Whales, and so on.
Radical Edward Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 oh, welcome to the forums good opening question I say.
helixrenovator Posted January 16, 2004 Author Posted January 16, 2004 Firstly, thanks for your prompt replies. Much more informative than my slightly dull witted biology teacher. Back to topic: So, would a person with such rapid cell dedifferntiation be totally impregnable to bullets, cuts, ect., since both skin and blood cells would regnerate faster. Would this have any impact on aging? I gather that when you age in your appearence because your cells dont divide at such a quick rate any longer, your skin looses elasticity,ect. But if you were capable of regrowing your right arm after it was torn off by a testosterone bloated diabolical canine, wouldn't something less dramatic like skin cells regenerate or divide at a faster rate, keeping you at that fresh 25 year old look for a couple of centuries...(okay, maybe not quite THAT long)...
blike Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 That's more thought that I've seen most 14 year old's exhibit in the span of a year. You write very well for your age. As to the OP, I'll respond to it when I return :from o-chem
Skye Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 This is a pretty good look at what people are doing at the moment with regenerating animals (it's a pdf file by the way): http://planaria.neuro.utah.edu/sanchezsite/NatureNews.pdf
YT2095 Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 I think by the "bullets" comment what it is he actualy fears about his welfare, your IP is from Lebanon, am I correct? or is it New Jersey (same thing)
Skye Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 Regeneration doesn't help much in those circumstances, we can regenerate from most gunshot wounds but the intermediate blood loss and organ failure can mean the heart is unable to do it's job for long enough for us to die.
helixrenovator Posted January 16, 2004 Author Posted January 16, 2004 YT2095 said in post # :I think by the "bullets" comment what it is he actualy fears about his welfare, your IP is from Lebanon, am I correct? or is it New Jersey (same thing) I'm from New Jersey, quite the boreing place in my opinion, but about the bullets comment, I'm thinking of working as a scientist for the CIA, and being inundated with steriotypical situations, (though my parents have prohibited any form of Televison in our home), bullets and the CIA sort of collaborate as one. And another brief intrusion...I'm a girl, by the way...That "He" comment was a bit infuriating... Anyways...So, I'll drop the bullet penetration theory, and skim over, or should I say back, to the whole aging topic. Would increased cell regeneration help at all? What can I say? I'm a teenager obsessed with staying young...
YT2095 Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 hey, hands up, guilty, sorry about the HE usage, my bad ewww repressive parents suck! (no offence). as for regeneration with current technology, well that dates back to time imemmorial. a healthy lifestyle, lots of protein helps with muscular re-genereation, carbs for energy, vits for all round needed things, plenty of cardio-vascular and pulminary excersize. fish for the old brain matter and joints (the bone type of joints, LOL). and that`s about as good as it gets, though a good positive attitude towards life helps a good deal too (but that`s personal opinion on my part).
Dudde Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 the fact that she's a girl probably explains the intelligence at that age, I haven't seen many males with these kinds of questions (though I have to admit, I haven't met many women who would call their bio teachers slightly dull witted) anywho, YT has a point, we're back to the whole immortal thing I'll try and answer that when I get back, but some evil person will probably beat me to it:-( welcome to the forums^_^
helixrenovator Posted January 16, 2004 Author Posted January 16, 2004 YT2095 said in post # :hey, hands up, guilty, sorry about the HE usage, my bad ewww repressive parents suck! (no offence). as for regeneration with current technology, well that dates back to time imemmorial. a healthy lifestyle, lots of protein helps with muscular re-genereation, carbs for energy, vits for all round needed things, plenty of cardio-vascular and pulminary excersize. fish for the old brain matter and joints (the bone type of joints, LOL). and that`s about as good as it gets, though a good positive attitude towards life helps a good deal too (but that`s personal opinion on my part). Yeah, oppresive and vegeterian. Tofu is as important as the prime meridian, though I suppose that doesn't exactly qualify for the supreme metephor of the century award, but I wouldn't like being in the spotlight anyways. I suppose staying, (or rather looking), young can be achieved by a good diet, vitamin supplements, regular engagement with the treadmill, but I think that perfecting the human genome, ( well, actually just making additions to), would result in a much more desirable outcome. What exactly could stop aging anyways?
YT2095 Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 Death seems to work pretty good but there is however a part of the DNA strand that seems to "know" or count the amount of times it`s been copied or replicated within a system, perhaps a reset to that count or a ceasation of it may work, but I fear that is a little beyond our current tech at the moment
helixrenovator Posted January 16, 2004 Author Posted January 16, 2004 I wonder if any one will develop the tech before my time frame of aproxematly 1200 months finds itself expired? Though I suppose if the unlikely commences, if thiers a theory on how to perform the delicate operation, not just the blank technology, the whole process will be thoroughly faster. Any recomendations on literature on the topic recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid? (I just love typing that colassal word, please dont ask why, but I'm infatuated with the inteligent stuck up air it releases into my post ) I have acsess to a public library or two, and limited internet, and parents who think advances in science promise a high mortality rate to all on earth, so books are a bit more reachable than websites. Any recomendations are helpful.
blike Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 parents who think advances in science promise a high mortality rate to all on earth What? How do they justify that thought?
Skye Posted January 17, 2004 Posted January 17, 2004 The basic process of recombinant DNA techniques is pretty simple: you isolate the gene, put it into a vector (a plasmid or virus), let the vector multiply, then put them in the cells. In terms of books to explain it, you'll want any biology, molecular biology, genetics or cell biology textbook. I don't know if you would find these in a public library though. Links: Page of links Molecular cloning and creating a library of clones Plant biotechnology
Giles Posted January 18, 2004 Posted January 18, 2004 Principles of Development, by Wolpert et al, is an excellent book. Although it is a textbook, its not a gigantic one, and it is quite readable. I don't know of anything smaller which covers the ground. Unfortunately it's a UK publication, so i don't know if you will be able to get hold of it. I don't think there is a settled reason why mammals can't regenerate (except a few tissues - mainly liver and bone) - i would guess it may be because our initial developmental environment is highly unusual and controlled, whereas ampibia occupy the same enviroment from egg onwards. Our development is also more complex (hence it takes so much longer) and regeneration is expensive. Finally, the right mutations may have never come up (usually if you mutate cell differentiation/proliferation genes you just get cancer).
helixrenovator Posted January 18, 2004 Author Posted January 18, 2004 blike said in post # : What? How do they justify that thought? My parents are consumed by the thought that humans were much better off before technology, in particular genetics, attained a healthy standpoint in the world. They, for lack of a better word, are very...ummm...organic. That is, they are certain to hate all forms of technology, feeling it corrupts the natrual standing point of our species. I see no sense in it at all, but then again, I'm largely young. Thanks for the book recommendations, as well as the websites. They confirm well with any questions I had, pertaining to the subject in consideration and discussion.
Aegir Posted February 4, 2004 Posted February 4, 2004 helixrenovator said in post # : What exactly could stop aging anyways? I can't remember where I read this to save my life... it could very well have been on these forums, but I somewhere that every time a cell replicates a little piece at the end is cut off and eventually it gets to actually genes and starts screwing with operational genetic code. Kind of like recompiling a computer prgram's source code over and over again but deletein the last character from the code each time it was recompiled. It would be un-noticable for some time... but once it got to the program itself it would render the program incabable of functioning (ie death) realatively quickly.
MishMish Posted February 4, 2004 Posted February 4, 2004 Aegir, don't know anything about it either, but believe you're referring to telomeres No idea who this guy is, but seemed an interesting read: http://freedom.orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/telomere.htm
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now