Daily Archives: January 22, 2016

The mutations we've been discussing occur in a seemingly random manner by various mutagens. Mutation can also be caused in a very systematic way by viruses. Viruses can enter a host cell and then alter the DNA of the host cell by clipping it open and inserting new segments that will code for the viral protein, and they can do that by using the host cell's replication, transcription and translation mechanisms to create that viral protein.

This scenario is also related to the field known popularly as genetic engineering. Basically, it involves altering the DNA in a simple organism such as a bacterium in order to get the bacteria to produce a protein that it ordinarily would not produce, and this is done by snipping open a section of the bacterial DNA and inserting a gene from another organism. The technique is called gene splicing and it is often accomplished by inserting the new gene in a virus and then infecting the bacteria with the virus.

Here is one mechanism by which this can occur. Certain enzymes can open up the DNA sequence by breaking or hydrolyzing the phosphor ester bond in the DNA backbone.

In the lesson on proteins, I mentioned a disorder called diabetes, in which the messenger protein, insulin, is defective. Early treatment for this disease involved injecting insulin into patients in order to enable their cells to take up glucose. One problem with this treatment was that the only insulin available at a reasonable cost was insulin from cows. This insulin was slightly different and therefore not as effective as human insulin; moreover, some diabetics had what amounted to an allergic reaction to the foreign protein. In timet, genetic engineers were able to insert the gene for human insulin into a common bacterium called E. coli. When this bacterium was then grown in cultures, it produced vast quantities of human insulin which could be isolated fairly easily in pure form, for use by diabetics. Moreover, the human insulin was much cheaper when produced in this way than was the insulin from cows.

Another protein produced in this way is the protein interferon. When it was originally discovered, it was thought to be a potent cure for cancer and highly effective at preventing viral infection, and perhaps it might even be the long sought cure for the common cold. Unfortunately, it was incredibly expensive to isolate and available only in minute quantities. Not only was it impractical to use on a wide scale, it was not possible to do meaningful research with it, because such small amounts were available. A great deal of effort was expended to genetically alter bacteria to produce interferon. Effort which was eventually successful. Unfortunately, when sufficient quantities of interferon were produced to adequately test its abilities as an anti-cancer drug, it was found to be not nearly as effective as had been hoped.

Although genetic engineering would seem to be a marvelous new technique and it surely is that, it also has certain dangers associated with it. One problem is that when the genetic makeup of an organism is altered, it is not possible to predict exactly what the nature of that organism might be. If there is something inherently harmful about the new organism and that organism is released to the environment, the results could be disastrous. This danger is usually dealt with by using, as the host organism, a bacterium which is, somehow deficient and cannot survive outside the laboratory.

Another problem is that a future step in genetic engineering might well involve the ability to alter the genetic makeup of higher organisms, including humans. There are difficult ethical questions involved in how far we should go in changing our own genes, much less those of domestic animals.

Few, perhaps, would argue against the altering of the bone marrow cells of a person with sickle cell anemia to enable him or her to produce normal hemoglobin, a technique by the way, which has not yet been developed. But suppose we were able to genetically slow down, or even halt the aging process, alter fetal cells to produce certain desired characteristics in babies, such as hair color or intelligence, or increase the strength in athletes, or alter our own physiology to enable us to breathe under water, or even clone individuals with certain unique talents. Who should decide what kinds of changes are acceptable and who should be allowed to have their genes or those of their children altered? And what if something goes wrong with the procedure and a defective human is produced? These questions are not easy and the techniques are not without hazard.

Regarding genetic engineering:

(These questions are also given in Exercise 18 in your workbook.)

Top of Page

E-mail instructor: Sue Eggling

Clackamas Community College 2001, 2003 Clackamas Community College, Hal Bender

Here is the original post:
Genetic Engineering - Clackamas Community College

We have a right to food that is good for our bodies and our environment. Numerous studies show that genetically engineered foods can pose serious risks to both. Yet the U.S. Department of Agriculture keeps approving genetically engineered crops that benefit a few biotech corporations. At the same time, the Food and Drug Administration is considering approving the first-ever genetically engineered animal for human consumption, a genetically engineered salmon created by AquaBounty Technologies that supposedly grows twice as fast as its natural counterpart.

Friends of the Earth is working to keep this "frankenfish" and other genetically engineered foods off of grocery store shelves, and to ensure that all genetically engineered foods are labeled so that consumers can choose whether to feed these risky products to their families.

Research shows that genetically engineered fish pose numerous risks to wild fish populations. Of particular concern is the survival of natural Atlantic salmon, which is already listed as endangered. Research published by the Canadian government has found that genetically engineered salmon, if released into the wild, could lead to a collapse of wild populations. Genetically engineered salmon may be able to mate with wild populations, weakening their gene pool, and could even out-compete wild salmon for food, leading to ecosystem-wide impacts.

Human health is threatened too. The approval of the frankenfish would likely lead to the use of even more antibiotics in aquaculture, increasing the risks of drug-resistant bacteria and viruses. Farmed salmon are given more antibiotics than any other livestock by weight, and the companys data shows the frankenfish may require even more antibiotics, as the engineered fish could be more susceptible to disease.

Despite concerns raised by scientists, the FDA has not yet conducted a thorough, independent analysis of the dangers frankenfish pose to people or the environment.

We are pushing the FDA to take a rigorous look at the risks, partnering with members of Congress on laws to prevent the spread of genetically engineered foods and mandate labels and mobilizing the public to take action to protect our health, biodiversity and our right to choose healthy food. Check out our issue brief on the risks posed by genetically engineered fish to learn more.

Genetic engineering is moving beyond our food and agricultural systems. Friends of the Earth is also working to prevent the release of genetically engineered mosquitoes and other insects in the U.S. until proper laws have been written and risk assessments conducted to ensure these genetically engineered bugs don't harm humans or our ecosystems. Check out our issue brief on genetically engineered mosquitoes to learn more.

Originally posted here:
Genetic engineering - Friends of the Earth

Genetic engineering (GE), also called genetic modification, is a branch of applied biology. It is the changing of an organism's genome using biotechnology. These methods are recent discoveries. The techniques are advanced, and full details are not given here.

This is an overview of what can be done:

An organism that is altered by genetic engineering is a genetically modified organism (GMO). The first GMOs were bacteria in 1973;[2] GM mice were made in 1974. Insulin-producing bacteria were commercialized in 1982. Genetically modified food has been sold since 1994, including crops.

Genetic engineering techniques have been used in research, agriculture, industrial biotechnology, and medicine. Enzymes used in laundry detergent, and medicines such as insulin and human growth hormone are now manufactured in GM cells. GM animals such as mice or zebrafish are being used for research purposes.

Critics have objected to use of genetic engineering on several grounds, including ethical concerns, ecological concerns. Economic concerns are raised by the fact GM techniques and GM organisms are subject to intellectual property law. Ecological concerns are more subtle. There is a risk that some genetically modified (GM) organisms may be better adapted to some niche in nature, and will take away some the habitat of the regular species.

The ability to construct long base pair chains cheaply and accurately on a large scale allows researchers to do experiments on genomes that do not exist in nature. The field of 'synthetic genomics' is beginning to enter a productive stage.

The J. Craig Venter Institute has built a quasi-synthetic Mycoplasma genitalium yeast genome. They recombined 25 overlapping fragments in a single step. "The use of yeast recombination greatly simplifies the assembly of large DNA molecules from both synthetic and natural fragments".[3] Other companies, such as Synthetic Genomics, have already been formed to take advantage of the many commercial uses of custom designed genomes.

The team of about 20 researchers is led by Nobel laureate Hamilton Smith, DNA researcher Craig Venter and microbiologist Clyde A. Hutchison III. They plan to create Mycoplasma laboratorium a partially synthetic species of bacterium derived from the genome of Mycoplasma genitalium.

Geneticists have made the first synthetic chromosome for yeast.

As a eukaryote, yeast has cells with a nucleus. Often classified as a fungus, yeast is related to plants and animals and shares 2,000 genes with ourselves.

The creation of the first of yeast's 16 chromosomes has been hailed as "a massive deal" in the emerging science of synthetic biology.[4]

GMOs also are involved in controversies over GM food, as to whether food produced from GM crops is safe, whether it should be labeled, and whether GM crops are needed to address the world's food needs. These controversies have led to litigation, international trade disputes, and protests, and to restrictive regulation of commercial products in most countries.

We can now produce and use GM and GE seeds. Some large countries like India and China have already decided that GM farming is what they need to feed their populations. Other countries are still debating the issue.[5] This debate involves scientists, farmers, politicians, companies and UN agencies. Even those involved in the production of GM seedlings are not in total agreement.[5]

Excerpt from:
Genetic engineering - Simple English Wikipedia, the free ...

Although not completely related to genetic disorders, genetic engineering has its applications in genetic diseases area. In the world around us today, thanks to the progress of science and technology, man has to a large extent taken the responsibility of shaping as well as the mutating the natural world around us in a way that can prove to be more profitable to all of us. Genetic Engineering is, in, such a scenario, a tool that is gradually coming in more and more focus as a means of shaping the world to map to our needs and requirements.

Where can we see genetic engineering around us today?

While going out for grocery shopping, we often come across fruits, vegetables, as well as cereals, all of which have been genetically engineered or modified to mutate their nature structure in order to make them more hygienic, more palatable as well as more nutritious. In some cases, the use of genetic engineering is also conducted to remove the harmful ingredients of a substance in order to make it more accessible for people who have certain maladies. An example of this could be genetically engineered potatoes in which the sugar content has been removed to allow them to be consumed by diabetics.

However, the use of genetic engineering can have certain pitfalls and negative aspects as well, which has led to a huge debate world wide amongst scientists and technologists.

What is genetic engineering?

The DNA can be said to be the main point of origin of the living body which is in actuality a sort of blue print which allows the shaping and growth of every aspect of a living organism. Through the process of genetic engineering, the DNA of the living body is transformed and mutated by scientists, who can, through this process engineer the growth as well as the different qualities and characteristics which make up the living being.

How is genetic engineering different from the process of traditional breeding?

The science of genetic engineering has often been compared to other and older versions of the process such as traditional breeding of cells. However, the most important difference between the two processes of genetic engineering as well as the traditional breeding process is the fact that in the case of the process of traditional breeding, the mutation of the genes of the living organism is carried out as an external process.

However, in the case of the more recent processes of genetic engineering, the cells of the living organisms are mutated, modified, created or destroyed while they are within the organism itself. These processes are in turn dependent on the twin processes of molecular cloning as well as transformation, through which the qualities of the genes of the organism are transformed to add or destroy the natural characteristics of the organism.

Can genetic engineering be used in the cases of human beings?

Though the field of the studies associated with human genetic engineering is an extremely vibrant one and studies are still on to discover more facets to it, the field today has shown immense potential in displaying an ability to cure several diseases which are associated with or formed due to an abnormality or deficiency in the structure of the human genes.

Genetic engineering can be seen to have the potential to cure several diseases and also act as a medium in order to change an individuals appearance, voice, intelligence, behavior as well as his or her characteristics.

How is genetic engineering carried out in the case of human beings?

The science of human genetic engineering works by using various scientific processes to modify or transform the genotype of the individual by selecting and opting for a specific phenotype of the human being in the case of infants as well as new born babies. On the other hand, in the cases of matured adults, the science aims to change the natural phenotype of the individual with a phenotype that has been customized.

Advantages of using genetic engineering

Though there are several debates which are raging all around the world both for and against the science of human genetic engineering, the advantages of using human genetic engineering in the process of curing several presently incurable diseases which stem from the human genetic structure cannot be ruled out. If used properly, the science of human genetic engineering can help in curing diseases such as:

Besides this, the science can also be used to ensure that all babies are born healthy as any form of genetic disorder observed in the fetus can be cured before the baby is born.

Disadvantages of using genetic engineering

There are also several disadvantages which are associated with the science of genetic engineering. Notable among this is the fact that while using this, man will again be a product of mechanics and science. Out individuality will be lost. Besides this, the process can be quite expensive and many third world countries may not be bale to use this even for treating critically ill patients.

Read more from the original source:
Genetic Engineering - Genetic Diseases

NATIONAL

October 30, 2013 | By Maria L. La Ganga

SEATTLE - A year after Proposition 37 narrowly failed in California, the labeling of genetically engineered foods is back on the ballot in Washington state, complete with a lawsuit by the state attorney general, a barrage of ads and a stark example of money's effect on politics. I-522, as it is called, officially became the most expensive initiative battle in Washington history this week, with a not-so-Washington twist. Out-of-state money is driving the debate. Of the $33 million raised to fight the labeling effort, about $10,000 came from donors within the state - making up just 0.03% of the "no" campaign war chest.

OPINION

August 30, 2013 | By Henry I. Miller

Americans might soon need to get used to apple or grape juice as their breakfast drink of choice - unless, that is, they're willing to pay exorbitant prices for orange juice. Or maybe scientists, plant breeders and farmers will manage to save the day, using two critical but often-disparaged technologies: chemical pesticides in the short run and genetic engineering in the longer term. The pestilence that is devastating Florida citrus is a disease called citrus greening. It is caused by a bacterium, Candidatus Liberibacter asiaticus , which is spread by small insects called psyllids.

NEWS

June 17, 2013 | By Karin Klein

There's a dearth of evidence that genetically engineered food is dangerous to human health - but that doesn't mean consumers are wrong to have concerns about its effect on the environment and on non-bioengineered crops. U.S. agribusiness has rushed to embrace the GMO (for genetically modified organism, though genetically engineered is a more accurate term) possibilities, with almost all of our corn, soy and canola now featuring genes that have been tinkered with, usually to make them resistant to certain herbicides.

OPINION

May 24, 2013 | By The Times editorial board

The movement to force the labeling of genetically engineered food is gaining momentum. In November 2012, an initiative to require the labels in California was on the ballot; it was defeated. Now, federal legislation carried by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) would mandate labeling most bioengineered food nationwide. Yet the movement's argument is weakened by the lack of evidence that inserting fragments of DNA into crops harms our health. Pro-labeling activists - who also tend to be anti-Monsanto activists - point to polls finding that most Americans want the information labeled.

SCIENCE

March 23, 2013 | By Rosie Mestel, Los Angeles Times

When is a fish not a fish but a drug? When government regulators take old laws and twist themselves into knots trying to apply them to new technology. In the emotionally charged battle over the safety and appropriateness of genetically modified foods, people on both sides agree that the way the government oversees genetically modified plants and animals is patchy, inconsistent and at times just plain bizarre. Soon, analysts say, the system may be stretched to the breaking point.

NEWS

March 20, 2013 | By Monte Morin

Researchers at UCLA have genetically engineered tomatoes that, when fed to mice, mimic the beneficial qualities of good cholesterol, according to a new study. In a paper published Tuesday in the Journal of Lipid Research, authors used bacteria to insert genes into the cells of tomato plants, so that they would produce a peptide that mimics the actions of HDL, or "good" cholesterol. Later generations of those genetically engineered tomatoes were frozen, ground up and then fed to female mice who were themselves bred to be highly susceptible to LDL, or "bad" cholesterol.

Excerpt from:
Articles about Genetic Engineering - latimes