Quantcast
Connect with us

Scientists editing human genes to fight cancer raises fears about Jurassic Park and replacing God

Published

on

A federal safety and ethics panel at the National Institute of Health approved the first ever clinical trial involving gene-editing of human cells using the technology Crispr-Cas9.

Crispr-Cas9 is a “gene editor” and short for “clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats.” The work is part of the “moon shot” to end cancer being done at the University of Pennsylvania. Their goal is to edit immune cells so that they will attack cancer like they would a virus, according to Fusion.

ADVERTISEMENT

The technique is what Vice President Joe Biden would call a BFD in the world of genetics and if it is effective, can be used not only to fight some cancers but tested on other fatal and debilitating diseases. According to a presentation acquired by biotech reporter Antonio Regalado, the work involves removing patients’ T cells and using Crispr to slice two genes that they hope will allow the cells to attack and kill tumor cells. A similar experiment has been done on blood cancers but proved unsuccessful.

The experiment must still pass approval from the Food and Drug Administration and the boards of the three medical centers where the researcher will be conducted.

Some oppose the work being done. Last year, a group of 30 scientists and activists called for a global ban on genetic modification. Fearful science fiction addicts look to films like Gattaca and Jurassic Park that resulted in a dystopian future for the world. Others believe this is a baby step toward genetically engineering humans and replacing what some believe is a holy entity with a scientist. Chinese scientists have already claimed to have genetically created embryos but did not bring the embryo to term to test if it could live. Those on the left fear “Monstanto-style” GMOs.

Some bring up the ethical question on whether something constitutes a genetic defect or simply a different life experience. Anti-intervention advocates might argue that “God made me blind for a reason” as an example. While other would want to take advantage of scientific advancements to restore sight.

ADVERTISEMENT

Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Fox News viewers freak out on Bret Baier for criticizing Trump and calling Yovanovitch ‘sympathetic’

Published

on

Fox News host Bret Baier -- and his colleague John Roberts -- infuriated Fox News viewers who follow their Twitter feeds for praising the performance of former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch during her House impeachment testimony while they also condemned Donald Trump for attacking her as she spoke.

According to Roberts in his tweet, "Wow....this is really unprecedented. @realDonaldTrump and Amb Yovanovitch are talking to each other in real time through @Twitter and Television... Something I never thought I would ever see."

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Viewers baffled as GOP counsel appears to push anti-Trump talking points during Yovanovich cross-examination

Published

on

House Republican impeachment inquiry attorney Steve Castor on Friday baffled viewers with a line of questioning that appeared to be beneficial to House Democrats' case for impeaching President Donald Trump.

Among other things, Castor referred to ambassador Bill Taylor as a man of integrity and also didn't challenge former ambassador Marie Yovanovich's story that she had been the subject of a smear campaign launched by Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani.

In fact, Castor's line of questioning was so friendly to House Democrats, that some Twitter users joked that he was a "deep state plant" who's secretly helping to impeach the president.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

CNN legal analysts rip apart Jim Jordan’s ‘nonsensical’ defense of Trump witness intimidation

Published

on

CNN legal analyst Elie Honig blasted Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) for arguing that President Donald Trump hadn't engaged in witness intimidation by tweeting attacks on a former ambassador as she testified against him in the impeachment inquiry.

Jordan argued the tweet can't be witness intimidation because Marie Yovanovitch wouldn't have known about the attack if Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) hadn't read it to her, but Honig said the GOP lawmaker's claim was ridiculous.

"His point is nonsensical," Honig said. "Of course, she was going to find out about a tweet that went out to 60 million people-plus. The law covers any way you look regarding timing."

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image