Genetic Preservation - Human Gene Bank?

Here is a new phenomenon that will only be dealt with in the near future.

So, how about 1000 years later, when we have totally stopped making apendix, tonsils, pinky toe nails, body hair, a brain, etc. I sure hope not but what if a dominant gene that is negative takes over, such as, aggression, or violence, or jealousy, or disease.

Is our genetic preserved technology ( our sperm and eggs ) that can be preserved and used as hybrid seed stock going to become the new big thing?

Thoughts? Any thoughts?

The oldest sperm being used to make a human is 21 years. Surely we inherently own the right to sell our OWN genetic technology/information, and also the right to sell or license anothers under a contract?

I guess this is the whole sperm bank thing....but in da future.....and without failure to keep everything preserved for vveeeerry long.

dam i dont think i wana be cloned?

They already have opened up shop for dogs, cats, and livestock. And for some reason, they have babies on the front page. Just need the $$$. Haha, well it looks like they closed down business, or something. Seems kinda hush hush, but they work with a company in Korea. There is evidence of a couple paying $150k to clone their labrador, if that puts it into any prospective what a korean-born clone-baby would cost.

http://www.bioarts.com/

I think we need to keep our own genetic bank.

soon the star wars clone wars will be real... hehehe

"producing cancerous tumors" please explain. cn

I'd be willing, only if I was paid a substantial fee and an on-call requirement of yummy fems for the "hands-on" procedures

I'm quite genetically flawed... no company serious about preserving human DNA would accept mine...

I don't mean to be abrasive but this thread seems nonsensical and frankly silly.

So, how about 1000 years later, when we have totally stopped making apendix, tonsils, pinky toe nails, body hair, a brain, etc. I sure hope not but what if a dominant gene that is negative takes over, such as, aggression, or violence, or jealousy, or disease.

Click to expand...

How is this going to happen? Is natural selection just going to magically become irrelevant so disadvantageous genes get passed down over advantageous ones? Really how the fuck are the people who are unusually prone to getting disease or lack major organs going to survive and breed at a rate greater then that of people with normal disease resistance and a full set of working organs? Without some plausible explanation of how this is to come about it is downright silly.

Is our genetic preserved technology ( our sperm and eggs ) that can be preserved and used as hybrid seed stock going to become the new big thing?

Click to expand...

Short answer is no.

Surely we inherently own the right to sell our OWN genetic technology/information, and also the right to sell or license anothers under a contract?

Click to expand...

Don't be so sure. Many corporations already have pattens on various parts of the human genome and usually donating sperm or eggs involves giving the bank ownership of said genetic material. I don't see you getting IPR on your sperm or eggs anytime soon.

I guess this is the whole sperm bank thing....but in da future.....and without failure to keep everything preserved for vveeeerry long.

Click to expand...

The future lies not in the kind of crude breeding that has been the staple of agriculture for ages but rather in more direct genetic engineering. Basically what you are proposing is a past that is rapidly being superseded by more modern methods of genetic engineering. If anything is the future its in-vitro genetic screening and modification.

Natural selection doesn't work so well nowadays for the human population Mr forgetfulpenguin... The western world has no natural selection, the concept is completely irrelevant, Disadvantageous genes are getting passed down much more frequently nowadays thanks to modern healthcare...

Shannon, I used to think the same, but it turns out natural selection is more subtle than that. Traits that meant nowt 20 thousand years ago (ability to hold a job, for example) are suddenly quite important. Healthcare has eased (not erased) some of the purely physical selection pressures, but other socioeconomic ones have emerged. cn

Hi all, gonna jump on the pile: Have any of you seen the movie "Idiocracy"? If not, go see it, then come back to this discussion! Haha I like money.

The ability to hold down a job has no relevance in a welfare state. Those with jobs are too busy working to breed and usually want a higher standard of living before they include children in their lives. I grew up in a neighbourhood full of 3rd and 4th gen unemployed who usually had a kid or two before finishing high school and do nothing all day but root and drop kids (my govt. pays a cash bonus for having a baby and pays extra every fortnight for each kid for the long-term unemployed).

My personal opinion, and this is not from any standpoint of prejudice, is that we should preserve some genetics. The European phenotype has been in massive decline for over a century for example, and some have theorised that it will be gone in another hundred. The genes will all be there mixed in so... whatever.

You mentioned about a sperm bank. I have seen on television of sperm banks and men receiving money for their sperm. I was curious if this is an actual place, If people will pay for sperm? lol I bet a lot of guys could be making some easy money.

DevolvedPenguin,

many genes related to the presence of cancer and other diseases are DOMINANT. If you don't see how that works out with "natural selection" please do genetic research.

I wouldn't depend on natural selection to keep us alive as much as I would depend on the medical profession to cure me of any disease. Its quite obvious our genepool has been on a degenerative decline ( look at IQ studies, the mean IQ of the world has been steadily declining ).

"...Really how the fuck are the people who are unusually prone to getting disease or lack major organs going to survive and breed at a rate greater then that of people with normal disease resistance and a full set of working organs?..."

Organ Donors, palliative "Health Care" that consistently gets delivered to the highest bidder, crutches, drugs, eye glasses, fake hair, etc etc etc

Advice #1. Based on your argumentative and incorrect nature, and additionally a failure to see the world for what it is, if I were you I would look into licensing some other peoples genes for your children's future ;D

Human Genome "patents" were ruled unconstitutional in 2010.

See advice #1, and Idiocracy.

You also ignored the fact and role that 1000+ year old genetics would have on our genepool of the future. The oldest is only 23 years due to simply it being new technology.

Troll another thread. lol. Your vew ( the last couple sentences ) could have been added without quoting and ridiculing my comments with your stinky opinions.

Rather than say genes like cancer are dominant, I would say natural selection only works in a natural setting. Genetic factors among animals, plants, even bacteria- such as cancer, (in fact almost any mutations are deleterious) lead to decreased fitness in nature- which means shorter lifespan, less appeal to the opposite sex, etc. As such, those genes are not passed on at all. Many genes such deleterius genes in humans have been proven to be recessive, e.g. sickle cell aenimia is caused by a recessive mutation, that when only present from one parent, actually confers resistance to malaria! Therefore it is beneficial to carry one copy if you live in Africa, so sickle cell aenimia survives but is not dominant, and two such sick people are unlikely to have children together, so the numbers stay low.
Among us though, as you said, dtp5150, with medical science etc. many deleterious genes are not so limiting because the same natural pressures don't apply. There are other examples but it's late and I'm baked, but I have definately done genetic research!
Peace

Miyagi: you are completely ignoring "palliative" health care and the fact we keep people just barely alive for decades and their genetics alive for generations on welfare or whatever

do a google search for "dominant cancerous genes"

i like to live in fantasy land too but i think i took the red pill or blue pill whatever

dtp5150 said:

Miyagi: you are completely ignoring "palliative" health care and the fact we keep people just barely alive for decades and their genetics alive for generations on welfare or whatever

do a google search for "dominant cancerous genes"

i like to live in fantasy land too but i think i took the red pill or blue pill whatever

Click to expand...

Sorry bro, I think you missed something there... I was agreeing about how we keep them alive etc... as far as goolgle search, anyone can post shit on the net, show me some proof of dominant cancer genes (I'm also not saying they don't exist, just that they are not predominantly dominant). I'm also sorry to say that a google search does not equate to 10 years of uni studying genetics and evolution, followed by many more intermittent years of lab work for the university of queensland, Monash, and a little labwork in osaka. I'm not pulling things out of my arse mate and I'm certainly not living in a fantasy land.
Read it again.
Peace.

Then there is the quagmire of partial dominance. Also you fail to mention the role of epi-genetics, which means in a nutshell, there are mechanisms in place that turn on and off varius genes in relation to environmental stimuli, regardless of dominance. There is a can of worms I don't think we should open here, but it is far more complicated an issue than you seem to realise.

thank you for your contributions! i gotta admit i didnt read ur whole post for some reason at first. but lets say you leave a bunch of rats in a cage to breed for infinte generations. there would be no negative consequences? the "cage" is just bigger for us....

am i missing something?

and if we artifically inseminated the rats who couuld not normally reproduce ( too small genitals , weak bad ciruclation, too stupid, etc )

and kept alive the rats and reproduced the rats who had tumors and disfigurments etc

basically it will lead to a generation of rats that are dependent upon the "crutches" and will also have tumors n shit

therefore the original rat genetics would be prized for the strength it gives to the genepool

we already killed off every other homosapien like species. and any indigenous "race" are treated like barely humans

Let me riddle you this then... We have genetic immunity to many, many forms of pathogen, but these things are built up for the time we are in. We carry some imunity for diseases of the past (e.g.Delta32, very interesting, I'll get back to it) and some of these may help against future diseases but even a cold from 2535 would possibly kill us dead, as it will have mutated over trillions of generations by then. What value a specimen that pops out and dies from the sniffles? Epigenetic factors help turn on genes that will help our progeny survive environmental stresses and keep our immune system up to date... Just playing devils advocate for a second... your last post was not wrong, but the example given would actually lead to problems far quicker, as you are starting with a far smaller gene pool and as such, only a relative few combinations are possible. Have you ever seen a hairless Guinea pig? These are a direct result of long term inbreeding in labs and through a lot of outcrossing and backcrossing, have been made strong enough to be viable and breedable.
***I said I agreed with the point that we are passing on deleterious genes that would not normally be passed on via all these methods you mention, I agree totally with that!!!

The delta32 gene is a mutation that occurred in europians centuries ago. It was in very small numers of the population however, until a certain black death showed up and cleared out many of the non-carriers. Delta 32, seemed to convey some sort of resistance... fast forward... HIV sweeps the world and funnily enough, there are a portion of europeans that show either partial or full immunity to the disease(homozygous/heterozygous) and plotted on a map, they are predominantly found in formerly plague ravaged areas. Some things from the past would no doubt be good to dig up for future use if they die out, but then we get into eugenics, and millions have died over that topic already,
Peace,
Miyags!