Should Scientists Be Allowed to Edit Genes of Wild Animals? Top Conservation Groups Just Voted Yes (nbcnews.com) 26
It's the world's largest network of environmental groups, according to NBC News, with more than 1,400 members from roughly 160 countries. It meets once every four years.
And in a vote Tuesday, the International Union for Conservation of Nature "approved further exploration of the use of genetic engineering tools to aid in the preservation of animal species and other living organisms." Researchers are already pursuing projects that involve changing some species' DNA. Scientists are genetically modifying mosquitoes to reduce transmission of diseases like malaria, for example, and synthesizing horseshoe crab blood, which is used in drug development. Controversial efforts to "de-extinct" archaic creatures — such as the so-called "dire wolf" that a biosciences company announced it had revived this spring — fall under the umbrella, as well. So do possibilities like modifying organisms to help them adapt to a warming world, which are on the table but further off in development.... The decision is applicable to work on a range of organisms, including animals, plants, yeasts and bacteria....
The notion of introducing genetic engineering into wild ecosystems would have been considered a nonstarter in most conservation circles a decade ago, according to Jessica Owley [a professor and environment law program director at the University of Miami]. But the intensifying effects of climate change and other stressors to biodiversity are bolstering arguments in favor of human intervention that could make endangered species resistant to those threats... The IUCN vote, she added, reflects a feeling of desperation among conservationists and governments, as existing regulations and conservation efforts fall short and species continue to disappear worldwide.
"A separate measure, a proposed moratorium on releasing genetically modified organisms into the environment, failed by a single vote..."
And in a vote Tuesday, the International Union for Conservation of Nature "approved further exploration of the use of genetic engineering tools to aid in the preservation of animal species and other living organisms." Researchers are already pursuing projects that involve changing some species' DNA. Scientists are genetically modifying mosquitoes to reduce transmission of diseases like malaria, for example, and synthesizing horseshoe crab blood, which is used in drug development. Controversial efforts to "de-extinct" archaic creatures — such as the so-called "dire wolf" that a biosciences company announced it had revived this spring — fall under the umbrella, as well. So do possibilities like modifying organisms to help them adapt to a warming world, which are on the table but further off in development.... The decision is applicable to work on a range of organisms, including animals, plants, yeasts and bacteria....
The notion of introducing genetic engineering into wild ecosystems would have been considered a nonstarter in most conservation circles a decade ago, according to Jessica Owley [a professor and environment law program director at the University of Miami]. But the intensifying effects of climate change and other stressors to biodiversity are bolstering arguments in favor of human intervention that could make endangered species resistant to those threats... The IUCN vote, she added, reflects a feeling of desperation among conservationists and governments, as existing regulations and conservation efforts fall short and species continue to disappear worldwide.
"A separate measure, a proposed moratorium on releasing genetically modified organisms into the environment, failed by a single vote..."
People do it all the time (Score:5, Insightful)
It's called breeding.
Ever saw a Chihuahua?
That's a formerly wild wolf.
Re: (Score:1)
Then you'd have a harder time working people to death if there's no sense that they'll get to retirement at some point.
Re: (Score:2)
Then you'd have a harder time working people to death if there's no sense that they'll get to retirement at some point.
That's not so hard. Just mandate religious bullshit about how you'll get your reward only if you play servant your entire life, sprinkle in some bullshit about in the end-times how the meek shall inherit the Earth, add a little more bullshit about how being a good person means serving your rulers dutifully and badda bing, most will grumble a bit, but they'll serve dutifully.
There's a reason we're trying to spin-up a Christofascist state right now. Christianity offers the blueprint for *ANY* form of abuse he
Re: (Score:2)
Nature already made it that way, when you have procreated, you can die.
Science prolonged it.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeap but here they're establishing that the next 'civilisation'-ending virus which jumps from wild animals to humans was as a result of a vote by people considered to speak for the natural world.
Perhaps there's a DNA modification which would prevent people from experiencing the urge to commit genocide or support it ?
Just return to hunter gatherer days, and end all civilization. Like it or not, if it can be done, it will be done.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Just return to hunter gatherer days
Return to? Just come to Seattle. They couldn't close drug stores and grocery stores fast enough to stay ahead of the hunter-gatherers.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm sure you mean a non-existing genocide, where people are killed because of their geographical location, not their ethnicity.
Making it a GEOcide.
Re: People do it all the time (Score:2)
Ok, Father Brennan...
Re: People do it all the time (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Its not just the wolf -> dog, Its every animal and plant we use. Our cats, cows, sheep, pigs. Think about it, how long would a sheep or cow or pig survive in nature amongths carnivores ? They all have been bred to not run away, be calm and relaxed until we are hungry and kill and eat them. Or if we want to use other parts of their body like their wool, or milk.
Or our food, apples? cherries ? tomatoes ? corn ? All these have natural ancestors, all of them have been modified through human selectio
About those extinct animals. (Score:3)
The people at Colossal aren't actually trying to bring back any of the extinct animals as the news articles often imply. They're trying to engineer existing species so that they merely resemble the old ones. In the case of the "dire wolf" in TFS, they're just trying to make versions of contemporary wolves with white fur.
Impressive in its way but disingenuous bordering on deceitful to use phrases like "de-extinct" when the goal is to create something that never existed before.
Welcome to ... (Score:3)
Top Conservation Groups Just Voted Yes? (Score:3)
Who elected them to make this decision, either way?
Internal survey (Score:4, Informative)
They did not pass a law. Someone came up with this question, thought, "Hey, I am not important enough to make this decision by myself, so lets ask everyone else that is part of our organization."
So the organization put out a vote to all the members. They voted and now the official position of this International organization is in favor of genetic engineering on wild species.
Now, the organization will lobby governments to make it legal.
You can do the same thing if you are part of some respected organization.
Mutatis mutandis (Score:2)
Your Scientists... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Why they want to do this: (Score:2)
Lets say you are trying to save a near-extinct species. Say for example the Capitalist Republicanus. (These are pretty rare, because the current Republicanus King hates capitalism. He is a Mercantilist that likes tariffs, something Adam Smith hated so much, he created Capitalism.)
So there are only 150 C.Republicanus left, where there used to be millions of them. And of course, most of them are related to each other, as they all live in small communities. This has significantly reduced genetic diversi
I really don't see the problem here (Score:1)
DNA (Score:2)
If you don't have a back-up then it's not that important.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Altered Carbon" saw that one too!
Nice, I recall it from an Arthur C Clarke book - not sure which one though.