Fake sperm
By Michael J.W. Stickings
Or, rather, sperm from bone marrow:
It's all quite interesting, although, as one biologist put it, "we are still many years away from developing any therapies for infertility using such techniques". As well, "manipulating stem cells to develop into mature sperm could cause permanent genetic changes in the sperm, making the cells unsafe to use in fertility treatments".
**********
Now, I know what you're thinking: What about sex? Well, reproduction doesn't require sex anymore, and soon it may not even require the male sex at all:
Of course, this would, if even possible, produce only female offspring (XX, not XY -- the male sex would still be required, in some capacity, for suppying the Y). Still, "[t]he latest research brings the prospect of female-only conception a step closer".
**********
I'm hardly a Luddite, but one wonders if we're not flying a little too close to the sun for our own good.
Or, rather, sperm from bone marrow:
Scientists say they have successfully made immature sperm cells from human bone marrow samples.
If these can be grown into fully developed sperm, which the researchers hope to do within five years, they may be useful in fertility treatments.
It's all quite interesting, although, as one biologist put it, "we are still many years away from developing any therapies for infertility using such techniques". As well, "manipulating stem cells to develop into mature sperm could cause permanent genetic changes in the sperm, making the cells unsafe to use in fertility treatments".
**********
Now, I know what you're thinking: What about sex? Well, reproduction doesn't require sex anymore, and soon it may not even require the male sex at all:
Women might soon be able to produce sperm in a development that could allow lesbian couples to have their own biological daughters, according to a pioneering study published today.
Scientists are seeking ethical permission to produce synthetic sperm cells from a woman's bone marrow tissue after showing that it possible to produce rudimentary sperm cells from male bone-marrow tissue.
Of course, this would, if even possible, produce only female offspring (XX, not XY -- the male sex would still be required, in some capacity, for suppying the Y). Still, "[t]he latest research brings the prospect of female-only conception a step closer".
**********
I'm hardly a Luddite, but one wonders if we're not flying a little too close to the sun for our own good.
Labels: science, sex, technology
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
1:00 AM
5 Comments:
Damn, soon we'll be seen as mere parasites or worse, when females won't have any need for us at all!
By
nolocontendere, at 1:49 AM
Nah - somebody has to open jar lids and take out the garbage. Who's going to fix the mini-vans?
The strangest thing to me is that it may one day be possible for someone to actually take Dick Cheney's advice to Patrick Leahy!
Only they'd have to be female, of course.
By
Capt. Fogg, at 8:32 AM
I wondered how long it would be before this was addressed. Brian Sykes,the genetics professor from Oxford University's Institute of Molecular Medicine, wrote about a future w/o men in his book "Adam's Curse". The issue is not one of WANTING to get rid of men, but having no choice----female genomes (both sides being 'x') self-repair during recombination; male genomes do not and thus have been accruing damage and mutations for millenia.
THAT, unfortunately, is what guides the fearful hands of these researchers.
By
Anonymous, at 12:30 PM
I think we're flying too close to the sun myself. Genetic tinkering at this level makes me very nervous.
By
Libby Spencer, at 9:49 AM
Well if nature's way leads to people like George Bush, Pol Pot, Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin and all the hordes who follow them in their patriotic fervor, could a little tinkering make it worse?
On the other hand, those mutations have made us into thinking beings with opposable thumbs. Without mutations we would be bacteria.
By
Capt. Fogg, at 10:01 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home