Category Archives: Genetic Engineering

Hidden topics amp; journalists Genetic Engineering

By: WORLD FOOD INSTITUTE

Read more from the original source:
Hidden topics & journalists Genetic Engineering - Video

The breakthrough was achieved by Harvard and Yaleuniversities They modified E. coli so it couldn't survive without an amino acid Scientists say they could stop supplying amino acid to kill bacteria It is possible to extend the technique to genetically modified crops This may ease concerns about GM strains mixing with organic food

By Ellie Zolfagharifard For Dailymail.com

Published: 12:18 EST, 21 January 2015 | Updated: 20:17 EST, 22 January 2015

Extreme gene manipulation has been used to modify bacteria that die if they get out of human control.

Instead of using traditional genetic engineering - which moves a gene from one organism to another - scientists have rewritten the language of genetics.

The breakthrough is a potential step toward better management of genetically engineered organisms, including crops.

Extreme gene manipulation tools have been used to modify bacteria that die if they get out of human control

Genetically altered microbes are used now in industry to produce fuels, medicines and other chemicals.

The new technique might also reduce the risk of using them outdoors, such as for cleaning up toxic spills.

Scientists from Harvard and Yale introduced the new approach in two papers released this week by the journal Nature.

Go here to read the rest:
Self-destructing bacteria could lead to artificial life: Scientists build 'kill' system into GM organisms to ease ...

Future of Food - film animation
Film documentary produced by Lily Films. I conferred with experts while helping design depictions of the stages of genetic engineering process. Integrated a wide variety of source materials...

By: Kyle Kosup

Read more from the original source:
Future of Food - film animation - Video

Jamie Metzl: The US-China Rivalry at the Genetic Frontier (11/12/2014)
Jamie Metzl, Novelist; Former U.S. Security Official Bruce Pickering, Ph.D., Executive Director, The Asia Society of Northern California Moderator Novelist...

By: Commonwealth Club

Go here to read the rest:
Jamie Metzl: The US-China Rivalry at the Genetic Frontier (11/12/2014) - Video

Cloning Genetic Engineering

By: Rejaul Alam

View original post here:
Cloning & Genetic Engineering - Video

Scientists reprogrammed the common bacterium E. coli so it requires a synthetic amino acid to live. BSIP/UIG via Getty Images hide caption

Scientists reprogrammed the common bacterium E. coli so it requires a synthetic amino acid to live.

Researchers at Harvard and Yale have used some extreme gene-manipulation tools to engineer safety features into designer organisms.

This work goes far beyond traditional genetic engineering, which involves moving a gene from one organism to another. In this case, they're actually rewriting the language of genetics.

The goal is to make modified organisms safer to use, and also to protect them against viruses that can wreak havoc on pharmaceutical production.

To understand what they've done, you may need to remember a bit of basic biology. The enzymes and other proteins in our bodies are all built from building blocks called amino acids. There are usually just 20 amino acids in nature. But George Church, a professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School, has created a bacterium that requires an additional amino acid, one made in the lab and not found in nature. His lab did that by rewriting the bacteria's genetic language to add a "word" that calls for this unnatural amino acid.

"So this really makes it a completely new branch of life," Church says.

These modified E. coli bacteria essentially speak a different genetic language from all other life on Earth. That means they can't easily swap genes, which bacteria often do to pick up or get rid of traits. And it also means that these modified E. coli must be fed the synthetic amino acid to survive.

"It will die as soon as you remove that essential nutrient," Church says.

The scientists say this radical re-engineering actually makes these synthetic life forms safer, because if they escape into the wild they'll die. One key question is whether these engineered bacteria can shed the traits that make them dependent on the synthetic amino acid. (Bacteria mutate all the time, picking up new traits and dropping others).

See more here:
Scientists Give Genetically Modified Organisms A Safety Switch

Mediscan/Corbis

Synthetic biologists hope to treat disease in the gut by making Lactobacillus bacteria (pictured) that are dependent on an artificial amino acid.

Critics of genetic engineering have long worried about the risk of modified organisms escaping into the environment. A biological-containment strategy described this week in Nature1, 2 has the potential to put some of those fears to rest and to pave the way for greater use of engineered organisms in areas such as agriculture, medicine and environmental clean-up.

Two US teams have produced genetically modified (GM) bacteria that depend on a protein building block an amino acid that does not occur in nature. The bacteria thrive in the laboratory, growing robustly as long as the unnatural amino acid is included in their diet. But several experiments involving 100billion or more cells and lasting up to 20days did not reveal a single microbe capable of surviving in the absence of the artificial supplement.

Our strains, to the extent that we can test them, wont escape, says Dan Mandell, a synthetic biologist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, and an author on one of the two studies describing the strategy.

The microbes also do not swap their engineered DNA with natural counterparts because they no longer speak lifes shared biochemical language. Establishing safety and security from the get-go will really enable broad and open use of engineered organisms, says Farren Isaacs, a synthetic biologist at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, who led the other study.

Biocontainment could provide added safety in the biological production of drugs or fuels, where microbes can be kept separate from their surroundings. But the modified bacteria could also permit controlled release into the human body or the environment. Containment might no longer be of the physical kind, says Tom Ellis, a synthetic biologist at Imperial College London who was not involved in the research.

The new technique originated in the laboratory of George Church, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School. Two years ago, Church and his team (which included Isaacs) reported the synthesis of a strain of Escherichia coli that had a reprogrammed genetic code3. Instead of recognizing a particular DNA triplet known as the amber stop codon as an order to terminate protein synthesis, the recoded bacterium read the same instruction as a directive to incorporate a new kind of amino acid into its proteins.

Church and Isaacs have independently made this engineered microbe reliant on unnatural amino acids. The Isaacs team used genomic sequencing to identify sites in essential bacterial proteins where the microbes could incorporate synthetic amino acids without affecting overall function, whereas Churchs group started with the protein structures and added elements to help integrate and accommodate the artificial amino acids.

This is really the culmination of a decade of work, says Church.

The rest is here:
GM microbes created that cant escape the lab

Dangers of genetic engineering Vinny Eastwood 7 1 11 2 3

By: Naza Quita

More here:
Dangers of genetic engineering Vinny Eastwood 7 1 11 2 3 - Video

Heres the headline:

80% Of Americans Support Mandatory Labels On Foods Containing DNA. DNA!

Hahaha! Americans are so dumb etc etc. As Robbie Gonzalez writes, Not GMOs. DNA, the genetic material contained in every living thing known to science and practically every food . . . The results smack of satire, but theyre real. . . . The results indicate that most Americans do not understand the difference between DNA and a genetically modified food. . . . The survey results are also symptomatic of chemophobia, an irrational fear of chemicals . . .

I dont buy it. I agree with Thomas Lumley, who writes:

Theres no way this is a sensible question about government policies: it isnt a reasonable policy or one that has been under public debate. Most foods will contain DNA, the exceptions being distilled spirits, some candy, and (if you dont measure too carefully) white rice and white flour. Nevertheless, 80% of people were in favour.

There was also a question Do you support mandatory labeling for foods produced with genetic engineering. This got 82% support.

It seems most likely that many respondents interpreted these questions as basically the same: they wanted labelling for food containing DNA that was added or modified by genetic engineering.

As Lumley puts it:

If you ask a question that is nuts when interpreted precisely, but is basically similar to a sensible question, people are going to answer the question they think you meant to ask. People are helpful that way, even when it isnt helpful.

As the philosopher H. P. Grice noted many years ago, people try to give informative answers. And this leads to problems when you try to directly interpret the responses to trick survey questions. The psychologist Gerd Gigerenzer has made related points in the context of tricky psychology experiments that make people look really foolish. Sometimes a respondent will look foolish in the context of trying to solve an artificial problem. Or, as Lumley writes, Ask a silly question, get a silly answer.

Here is the original post:
Monkey Cage: Why you can ignore that survey showing Americans want to label food containing DNA

IMAGE:Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking is an authoritative peer-reviewed journal published monthly online with Open Access options and in print that explores the psychological and social issues surrounding the Internet... view more

Credit: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers

New Rochelle, NY, January 20, 2015--When Facebook users share information on important life events, do they prefer to do so directly (detailed status updated or wall posts) or indirectly (photos, change of job title)? How a person chooses to share such news depends on whether the event is positive or negative, according to a new study published in Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, a peer-reviewed journal from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers. The article is available free on the Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking website until February 20, 2015.

In the article "How Are Important Life Events Disclosed on Facebook? Relationships with Likelihood of Sharing and Privacy," Jennifer Bevan and coauthors, Chapman University, Orange, CA, focus on significant life events related to romantic relationships, health, work, and school. They report that the specific event itself did not determine how an individual would share the news on Facebook, rather whether it was positive or negative. Users tended to share positive life events indirectly and negative life events directly.

"As social networking sites become more a part of our daily lives, understanding of the delicate dance between negotiating disclosure while maintaining some level of privacy is vital," says Editor-in-Chief Brenda K. Wiederhold, PhD, MBA, BCB, BCN, Interactive Media Institute, San Diego, California and Virtual Reality Medical Institute, Brussels, Belgium.

###

About the Journal

Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking is an authoritative peer-reviewed journal published monthly online with Open Access options and in print that explores the psychological and social issues surrounding the Internet and interactive technologies, plus cybertherapy and rehabilitation. Complete tables of contents and a sample issue may be viewed on the Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking website.

About the Publisher

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers is a privately held, fully integrated media company known for establishing authoritative peer-reviewed journals in many promising areas of science and biomedical research, including Games for Health Journal, Telemedicine and e-Health, and Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology. Its biotechnology trade magazine, Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News (GEN), was the first in its field and is today the industry's most widely read publication worldwide. A complete list of the firm's 80 journals, books, and newsmagazines is available on the Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers website.

See original here:
How do people post important life events on Facebook?