Hybrid Embryos Created

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
UK's first hybrid embryos created By Fergus Walsh Medical correspondent, BBC News Scientists at Newcastle University have created part-human, part-animal hybrid embryos for the first time in the UK, the BBC can reveal. The embryos survived for up to three days and are part of medical research into a range of illnesses. It comes a month before MPs are to debate the future of such research. The Catholic Church describes it as "monstrous". But medical bodies and patient groups say such research is vital for our understanding of disease. They argue that the work could pave the way for new treatments for conditions such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. Egg shortages Under the microscope the round bundles of cells look like any other three-day-old embryos. In fact they are hybrids - part-human, part-animal. They were created by injecting DNA derived from human skin cells into eggs taken from cows ovaries which have had virtually all their genetic material removed. So what possible justification can scientists offer for doing what the Catholic Church has branded "experiments of Frankenstein proportion"? The Newcastle team say they are using cow ovaries because human eggs from donors are a precious resource and in short supply. The hybrid embryos are purely for research and would never be allowed to develop beyond 14 days when they are still smaller than a pinhead. Scientists want to extract stem cells, the body's master cells, from the embryos, in order to increase understanding of a whole range of diseases from diabetes to stroke and ultimately to produce treatments. Professor John Burn from Newcastle University says the research is entirely ethical. "This is licensed work which has been carefully evaluated. This is a process in a dish, and we are dealing with a clump of cells which would never go on to develop. It's a laboratory process and these embryos would never be implanted into anyone. "We now have preliminary data which looks promising but this is very much work in progress and the next step is to get the embryos to survive to around six days when we can hopefully derive stem cells from them." The research in Newcastle was approved by the UK's fertility regulator, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. It acted ahead of the passing of new legislation which will specifically allow the creation of hybrid embryos so as not to hold back research. The bill setting out the new legislation is not due to be debated in the House of Commons until next month. It is highly controversial and last week Prime Minister Gordon Brown gave in to demands for a free vote on the issue. Critics from the Roman Catholic Church say the creation of hybrids is immoral. "It is difficult to imagine a single piece of legislation which more comprehensively attacks the sanctity and dignity of human life than this particular bill," Cardinal Keith O'Brien, archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh declared last week. Dr David King, of Human Genetics Alert, said: "For anyone who understands basic biology, it is no surprise that these embryos died at such an early stage. "Cloning is inefficient precisely because it is so unnatural, and by mixing species it becomes even more unnatural and unlikely to succeed. "The public has been grossly misled by the hype that this is vital medical research. "Even if stem cells were ever to be produced, like cloned animals, they would have so many errors of their metabolism that they would produce completely misleading data." Not for the first time developments in science have outpaced the debate from legislators. For supporters of embryo research the creation of hybrid embryos is a small but significant move forward. For opponents it is a step too far. Story from BBC NEWS:
 

Wakka

Super Member
Jun 4, 2007
1,461
4
0
33
That's terrible! Honestly, I just want to denounce my ties with any English government. Be it American, or be it British.
 

Telerea

New Member
Apr 4, 2008
26
0
0
39
My opinion, offered somewhat flippantly (and identical to my response to this on another board), is going to annoy some people.So...This is potentially useful for health care research... that's a good thing.They're not deliberately destroying life (because they can't keep it alive for all that long)... nothing exceptionally questionable there. But, could an embryo suffer?? That may become problematic.It's creepy, but, the two species involved share the vast majority of their DNA... [Most eukaryotic life (cells that have a nucleus) share a staggering amount of their DNA just because the process of cell division for eukaryotes is so complex. So that covers everything from moss to elephants really.]... so if these academics can find something usable out of this, then for now, I don't see a whole lot of grounds for objection. Although, isn't one of the Catholic church's new social sins related to messing around with stem cells?meh.Flame away.
 

followerofchrist

New Member
Nov 22, 2007
688
2
0
32
You know we are nearing the end when something like this doesn't even come as a surprise. There is nothing good going to come from something so awful!
 

Telerea

New Member
Apr 4, 2008
26
0
0
39
But why is it awful? We were given minds and reason to use them... is this not an example of those gifts?
 

followerofchrist

New Member
Nov 22, 2007
688
2
0
32
(Telerea;44261)
But why is it awful? We were given minds and reason to use them... is this not an example of those gifts?
Why is the mixing of species awful? Because its unnatural!
 

Telerea

New Member
Apr 4, 2008
26
0
0
39
So a mule (a combination of horse and donkey) is?And selective breeding in general (aka how we ended up with so many different species of domesticated cats and dogs, let alone livestock breeds) is?
 

followerofchrist

New Member
Nov 22, 2007
688
2
0
32
I actually didn't know that is what a mule was, you learn something new everyday eh!And it is true that selective breeding is responsible for the many different types of cats. But they are all still cats. It wasn't half cat half dog. It was just two different cats. A human and cow, that is completely different.
 

Telerea

New Member
Apr 4, 2008
26
0
0
39
Between a human and a cow there is still a vast amount of shared DNA. (Between mice and humans it's 99%.)
 

followerofchrist

New Member
Nov 22, 2007
688
2
0
32
We also share 50% of our DNA with a Banana but that doesn't mean anything. Just because we share a large amount of DNA doesn't mean we should try and create hybrids
 

Telerea

New Member
Apr 4, 2008
26
0
0
39
Really? 50%? Where is that data from?And actually, yes, that does mean something - it means that a whole lot of lifeforms are similar! You know, we are all related etc. etc. etc.... By looking after the Earth, we look after ourselves.Also - there is a whole lot of ground between 50% to 99%.And finally (to reiterate one more time): - we share a vast amount of DNA - hybrids exist in nature - this work in its current stage does not cause suffering - this work has the potential to do tremendous good and considerably expand our knowledge of ourselves and the World as a whole - we have brains and the ability to use them, it is our duty to do so, particularly when we may be able to actually reduce sufferingAt this time, there is no problem here.