opinion
- the ongoing dna debate : : ian
clothier
well
hello dolly, you're looking swell dolly…oh yeah?
Central
to strategies that may result in human cloning, is the use of embryonic stem cells
that have the capacity to form virtually any tissue within the body. In the early
stages of embryonic development, any such stem cell can become a liver, a heart,
or any other organ. There is hope in the medical community that eventually, treating
health disorders and developing organs for transplant, could result from genetic
science. On the domestic level, couples with particular reproductive problems
are offered the hope of children truly genetically theirs.
At
the 2001 annual meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology,
held in Switzerland, the subject of cloning was discussed in detail. In order
to develop successful health treatment and organs via cloning, it will be necessary
to precisely control the stem cell growth process.
Whilst
Dolly the sheep is the most well known instance of cloning alive today, less well
known is that Dolly has an uncomfortable life: she is obese. Genetic obesity in
humans should not of course, be frowned upon. But genetic obesity as a result
of deliberate medical intervention is problematic.
What
went wrong? In a US study of cloned mice, Professor Rudolf Jaenisch and Dr David
Humphrey found that while mice cloned using the same procedure as that for Dolly
appeared normal - had identical genetic information - the way in which the genes
consequently made proteins was flawed, and worse, unstable.
Even
though the genetic blueprint is the same, it appears that the way the blueprint
is read and interpreted is flawed. Dr Humphrey stated "it is quite likely that
just the animals that are most nearly normal make it to birth, but our study shows
that doesn't mean they are completely normal… there may be changes in gene expression
that could affect them later in life." Gene expression refers to the action of
genes in embryo and foetal development.
In
their study, researchers made mouse clones from stem cells, removed the DNA from
the created cells and inserted it into a mouse egg that had been stripped of it's
DNA. The resultant embryos were implanted into mother mice and allowed to grow
to birth. In the living children of this experiment, the expression of the stem
cells was different. The details of science in action can be breathtaking, to
say nothing of the ethical implications. Jaenisch and Humphrey found that even
in the laboratory dish, stem cell behaviour was unstable.
Other
experiments with mice, pigs, sheep and cattle and found similar problems. "It
takes only one thing going awry at the wrong time and place to have a seriously
flawed individual" commented Indiana State University's professor of life sciences,
Dr David A Prentice.
Whilst
gene expression is acknowledged to be a finely orchestrated ballet of the right
timing at the right place, a full consideration of the components of the human
self seems lacking in the DNA debate. Human identity is often thought to be contained
within the genetic blueprint - DNA can identify criminals and release the wrongly
prosecuted. But what ultimately constitutes our identity concerns not simply what
can be documented in quantifiable ways, but the unfolding of the quantifiable
in time.
Genetic
science has celebrated the ways in which genetically identical human twins separated
at birth nonetheless develop similar lifestyle characteristics. Missing from that
research however, is an explanation of such fundamental considerations as to what
makes these people happy, or sad.
As
a corollary to the genetic debate, is a consideration of the previous supposed
barriers between humans, animals and less complex life forms, such as trees. Here
we have a discussion of mice, which is impacting the debate on human well-being.
It is true; some of our distinctions are dissolved by this research. A tree and
a human share 20% of the same DNA. If you have ever hugged a tree, perhaps now
you know why - a fifth of you and the tree are distant cousins.
That
might seem like wafty new age mentality, but as a matter of fact, it is a quantifiable
truth of reality today. Before scientists can solve the complexity of DNA unfolding
in time, and migrate animal experiments to the human arena, they must first have
a clear picture of where exactly humanity is now. And for that, they may well
need an artist's integrated understanding of who we are.
links
to dna sites
This
page, part of an exhibition made possible by the Smithsonian Institution Libraries
and the Washington Project for the Arts, has a jpg of the original paper by Watson
and Crick molecular structure of nucleic acids: a structure for deoxyribose
nucleic acid.
http://www.sil.si.edu/Exhibitions/Science-and-the-Artists-Book/bioc.htm#27
This page
has many dna graphics, including animated gifs of dna. http://academy.d20.co.edu/kadets/lundberg/dna.html
For
a readable introduction to the Human Genome Project, this site created by the
Australian Academy of Science is a good place to start.
http://www.science.org.au/nova/006/006key.htm
The Human Genome
Mapping Consortium is an international group of institues working on the genome
project. Here is their press release on the publishing of the human genome map.
http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/NEWS/physical_map.html
For academic
papers on the subject, visit the website of the academic journal nature,
found here:
http://www.nature.com/genomics/
