this is one of the coolest paragraphs I've read in a while. if it's accurate, serves as a great reminder that we're in the future as we speak
this is one of the coolest paragraphs I've read in a while. if it's accurate, serves as a great reminder that we're in the future as we speak
See: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/05/20/cr...
Delivery of Cas9, sgRNA, and associated complexes into cells can occur via viral and non-viral systems. Electroporation of DNA, RNA, or ribonucleocomplexes is a common technique, though it can result in harmful effects on the target cells.[43] Chemical transfection techniques utilizing lipids and peptides have also been used to introduce sgRNAs in complex with Cas9 into cells.[44][45] Types of cells that are more difficult to transfect (e.g. stem cells, neurons, and hematopoietic cells) require more efficient delivery systems, such as those based on lentivirus (LVs), adenovirus (AdV), and adeno-associated virus (AAV).[46][47][48]
What isn’t clear to me is that if this is targeted at the liver cells in particular, or splicing it for every cell in the body. In other words, this could be a germline mutation (passed to children) or it could be a somatic mutation (no change to future children), it depends on how targeted the treatment was.
Mind you, this is just the beginning. First we would have all kinds of diseases being cured using this, 1. It would change the whole medical diagnostics industry to correctly diagnose the pathogen, 2. Then destroy the pathogen using DNA cutting 3. It would cure cancers of many kind by enabling the T-cells to fight the cancer cells effectively
Then we would start with reprogramming cells to do what we want. For instance, we can cure baldness, completely regenerate cardiac cells after heart attack.
However, it would not stop at this. We would have bio-machines which can capture carbon dioxide, generate medicines, make clothes/cotton and food. We would have bio solar cells. We would bio light bulbs which ingest light during the day and glow at night. We would have artificial meat produced using this technology. We would have carbohydrates produced using this. Plastic and sewage eating bacteria would be a reality soon.
Next 30-40 years is going to be biotechnology as last 30-40 were computing.
But like all decisions, you weigh the good vs the bad and you make a decision. In many cases it will be the best choice by far. Additionally, the more we use it the more we will understand the down side and we can plan for it.
Yup, it has a down side but we'll be able to balance the good and bad parts. Techies love to focus on the good of technology but I think it's good to point out the bad as loud as possible so we can plan for it. The fact is that the genie is out of the bottle and it won't go back in. So CRISP is part of our future.
It seems like the scientists interviewed (some of them leaders in CRISPR) were of the opinion that we should stay the hell away from editing the human germ line (not sure if I used the right term, but basically stuff that would be passed to offspring).
Why would you manufacture anything if you can grow it? This’ll probably remove great deal of the maintenance too.
I'm not anti-GMO but i've been more wary ever since I realized it will inevitably be used to make better citizens (and not by making them better humans).
GE is a double edged sword just like nuclear energy. With great power comes great responsability.
This is often said in defense of GMO, but surely cross-breeding and hybridization - a farmer or gardener attempting to combine the entire genetic entity of one plant with another one (which must therefore be naturally compatible), to increase the potential utility of the result - is totally different to inserting a single gene from a totally arbitrary source (which can therefore be a completely separate life-form)?
... Or is that a logical fallacy?
If your program won’t compile, it has a bug somewhere.
If your program will compile, it almost certainly still has a bug somewhere.