Any gene splicers out there?

Status
Not open for further replies.
andyd

andyd

Joined
Sep 25, 2004
Messages
9,875
Location
Marshfield , MA
Just finished a presentation about nano biology and convergence. The history and development of micro-biology is fascinating. It is what is going keep US on top. The speaker was a former Pres of MIT, and talks about water filters and ecoli growing batteries. I'm thinking of aiming higher up the ladder. What about using electrocytes? They are muscles that electric eels and rays use, as well as several other species use, for powering echo-location cells. Turns out, electric fish have developed high power electricity developed and transmitted by living tissue. The speaker developed a membrane that could be incorporated into fabrics or seat covers, dashboards etc. Mine would be a battery plant for when the sun isn't out or the wind isn't blowing, Maybe composting household waste for nutrition?
grin2.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Meanwhile, I ripped the pocket off one of my favorite pairs of Levi's this morning. That counts as gene splicing right?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by andyd
I'm thinking of aiming higher up the evolutionary ladder. Wabbout using electrocytes?


Brawndo has Electrolytes.


[Linked Image from ih1.redbubble.net]




OK, just a joke.

On a much more serious note, we have this mistaken impression that lifespan is improving and people are living longer. An objective look at the data shows that's simply not true for the majority of those who make it to 55 years old. As that removes early demise from the equation.

Despite what we consider "amazing advances", the human condition remains relatively unchanged. Few of our advances have led to significantly longer lives. I hold out hope for the best. But even the mighty Cleveland Clinic can't treat my autoimmune issues. They simply don't understand why these things happen and what to do about them.
 
Last edited:
The last two years alone have shown rapid progress in the understanding of aging. We don't have treatments in humans yet, but the US military is part-funding a company that's applying that knowledge to extending the lifespan of dogs, because they want to keep their military dogs in service for longer.

And one researcher claims he can now make mice younger and older at will.

One of the big issues until now has been regulations in the US which made drug tests for ageing difficult to run; most of the existing tests are working on treatment for ageing-related diseases which are hoped to improve ageing in general. But I understand that progress has been made there, too.
 
Originally Posted by emg
One of the big issues until now has been regulations in the US which made drug tests for ageing difficult to run; most of the existing tests are working on treatment for ageing-related diseases which are hoped to improve ageing in general.


Government hopes you die before 65 for obvious reasons.
 
Originally Posted by atikovi
Government hopes you die before 65 for obvious reasons.


Before long, it may be cheaper to rejuvenate people rather than pay to treat all their diseases.

Of course, pensions will be doomed.
 
Originally Posted by emg
The last two years alone have shown rapid progress in the understanding of ageing. We don't have treatments in humans yet...


I don't know why I should believe the medical community this time around.

An interesting tidbit that may or may not be relevant to lifespan. https://curiosity.com/topics/scient...nergy-limit-of-the-human-body-curiosity/ It seems mammals have a finite number of heartbeats, about 1 billion, regardless of size. With some notable exceptions of course.

I believe mortality has tormented human consciousness since time immemorial and humankind has perpetually searched for a therapy that extends life. I believe this is the basis for funding, and is not backed up with facts. In fact, none of us are old enough to remember the claims of "breakthroughs" from the 1800's. But the medical claims of extended life have been made for nearly 2 centuries now. Not one has come true.
 
Originally Posted by Cujet
I believe mortality has tormented human consciousness since time immemorial and humankind has perpetually searched for a therapy that extends life. I believe this is the basis for funding, and is not backed up with facts. In fact, none of us are old enough to remember the claims of "breakthroughs" from the 1800's. But the medical claims of extended life have been made for nearly 2 centuries now. Not one has come true.


The most promising advancements and treatments have only come out the last two decades. Besides, aliens have to travel for hundreds if not millions of years to get here so they must have eliminated aging somehow.
 
Originally Posted by Cujet
But the medical claims of extended life have been made for nearly 2 centuries now. Not one has come true.


Probably because they were nowhere near the level of understanding we have of the human body and how it systematically fails with age. Much of which we've learned in the last couple of years, and most of what we thought we knew about ageing twenty years ago was wrong.

Two hundred years go scientists didn't even know about DNA. Now we learn more every day about how it works and how to change it. In fact, we're at the point where, by the time an anti-ageing treatment gets to early trials, it often looks like it may be obsolete because we've found a better way of doing things.

Here's an interesting video from one of the leading researchers in the field. There are others who are working on specific problems that need to be fixed, like mitochondria decay and the decline of the immune system due to the Thymus shrinking, but Sinclair is looking at ageing from a more general level, which might even cure some of the other problems as a side-effect.

It's possibly worth noting that the treatment he's working on would likely involve an injection with a virus to add genes to roll back the age of cells, which would be activated periodically by something as simple as a course of antibiotics. So if it works, it won't be terribly expensive to do on a large scale (i.e. millions or billions of people).
 
I've heard they are practicing cloning humans in China, as well as organ harvesting. Corn has been weaponized. Everyone has Roundup in their blood.
 
The Chinese are heavily invested in the hunt for intelligence genes. There's a rumour that those genetically-modified kids were modified not for disease-resistance, but for IQ, because the genes that were changed seem to affect both.
 
What if you could directly use photosynthesis to create electricity instead of carbohydrates? Electric trees? series-ed together by roots. No clue as to the how, I'm more of an idea guy
grin2.gif
 
Originally Posted by andyd
What if you could directly use photosynthesis to create electricity instead of carbohydrates? Electric trees?


I'm pretty sure I read an article about this a few weeks ago, but I don't remember any of the specifics. I know some people have been working on it.
 
Photosynthesis is less efficient than a photovoltaic panel but you might be able to store the carbohydrates easier or convert them to hydrocarbons. But if you're looking for electricity the solar cells easily win.
 
Depends on the cost. If I can just plant a few seeds, grow some trees and wire them up to the house, it may be a better option than solar panels, even if it's much less efficient. I'm looking at solar for our next house, and we'll have a lot more land available than money.

Looks like this was the article I was thinking of, but they're not actually using photosynthesis, they're just adding biological proteins to existing cells:

https://news.psu.edu/story/593718/2...l-material-boosts-solar-cell-performance
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top