Scientists decode genetic secrets of the Great White shark

[NoLifeLine]

In a significant step for marine and genetic science, researchers have decoded the genome of the great white shark.

Scientists have unlocked the secrets of the shark genome and the information they have discovered may help create new treatments for genetic damage and even cure cancers. Over 400 milion years sharks have had a long time to come up with novel methods to protect against genetic damage.

The team of scientists now intend importing shark genes into lab mice to see if they can immunise them from cell damage.

Would you like imported shark genes in your DNA? I dont think i would mind.

Check out this very interesting article below.
https://www.nowscience.co.uk/single-post/2019/02/19/Scientists-decode-genetic-secrets-of-the-Great-White-shark (https://www.nowscience.co.uk/single-post/2019/02/19/Scientists-decode-genetic-secrets-of-the-Great-White-shark)

[Mermaid Jaffa]

Who are you?

[Trade Winds]

No one's becoming an animal-human hybrid anytime soon, bye

[SirenGita]

Lol wut

All species have cross dna slippage through bacteria and nobody is half plant or spider or bird loool

Must be a bot??

[NoLifeLine]

Not a bot. Nobody said anything about being half spider half bird. Having shark genes that mean I am immune from damage to my DNA seems very adventurous. Which is what the team who released this paper say too.

[NoLifeLine]

Who are you?

Thats a very open question. Who are any of us?

[NoLifeLine]

No one's becoming an animal-human hybrid anytime soon, bye

There's some mice in a lab that are about to become mouse/shark hybrids. Mice and humans are not very different at all.

[SirenGita]

If you are a new mer, please follow the rules and introduce yourself. A random series of posts is suspicious and does make you seem either a bot or a troll.

Esp. With the content you are posting!

[NoLifeLine]

If you are a new mer, please follow the rules and introduce yourself. A random series of posts is suspicious and does make you seem either a bot or a troll.

Esp. With the content you are posting!

Well its plainly obvious I am not a bot. And I am not trolling anyone. I just thought that scientific information would be of interest to this group.

You shouldn't be so suspicious of outsiders.

[PhaylennMurúch]

you might not want your opening salvo on the message boards to be about human/shark hybridization. We're a rather accepting group of people but this is way out there even for us

[Echidna]

I think this is not about "hybridization". Scientists have for decades tried to (ab)use the fact that sharks are apparently immune to cancer.

(In a great show of scientific proceedings, sharks have been forcefully injected with cancer cells again and again without developing any. Don't you love those scientist guys, always working to make the world a better place!)

That team claims they will find a way to use shark DNA to make other species profit from the shark immunity.
My take on that?
Don't screw around with stuff you don't understand.
I know many humans, especially those in that working field, think of themselves as gods, but you are not.
And if you fiddle around with things far beyond your understanding, the results are usually devastating.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

Link doesn’t work for me. Anyway, I’m curious to see where this kind of research will go. But OP, I don’t think you’ll be getting any shark genes any time soon, lol.

[SirenGita]

Im actually well acquainted with gmos. He wont :)

Also, yes this is interesting but most of these projects take years if not decades and then rarely work outside the lab, good example : "golden rice" and gmo salmon (which a friend actually helped engineer).

Even if they do "figure it out" i sure dont have any interest living to 200+ in this fd up world...we have much bigger problems right now than living forever.

Living that long would most certainly destroy the earth with no other changes, even more and faster than we have managed now.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

Yeah, the media is generally pretty bad at science reporting and loves to sensationalize things. Whatever comes of this research probably won’t be as exciting as all cancers easily cured and we all live forever, lol. Thing about cancer is, there are so many different kinds, they work differently, it’s highly unlikely that we’ll get a single cure for all of them.


Sent from my iPhone using MerNetwork

[NoLifeLine]

Im actually well acquainted with gmos. He wont :)

Also, yes this is interesting but most of these projects take years if not decades and then rarely work outside the lab, good example : "golden rice" and gmo salmon (which a friend actually helped engineer).

Even if they do "figure it out" i sure dont have any interest living to 200+ in this fd up world...we have much bigger problems right now than living forever.

Living that long would most certainly destroy the earth with no other changes, even more and faster than we have managed now.

Yes I see where you are coming from. However I think the problem with humanity currently is that we live and think in such short timescales. We know we only have decades to live so we dont worry too much about the future (even though we know we should). Imagine if you could live healthily to 200 or 400. The expertise and contribution to the world you could make in that time would be huge. At present we spend 20% as a child learning, 35% contributing and 45% old. if we live to around 90 years. Longer life means greater active life span, fixing the issues of their lifetime. That wouldnt necessarily mean a huge population boom because people would not have to rush into having babies at 30>.

I think it would take a period of adaptation but it would in the end be beneficial for the world as the population would be generally more educated and experienced, so would make better long term decisions.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

Yes I see where you are coming from. However I think the problem with humanity currently is that we live and think in such short timescales. We know we only have decades to live so we dont worry too much about the future (even though we know we should). Imagine if you could live healthily to 200 or 400. The expertise and contribution to the world you could make in that time would be huge. At present we spend 20% as a child learning, 35% contributing and 45% old. if we live to around 90 years. Longer life means greater active life span, fixing the issues of their lifetime. That wouldnt necessarily mean a huge population boom because people would not have to rush into having babies at 30>.

I think it would take a period of adaptation but it would in the end be beneficial for the world as the population would be generally more educated and experienced, so would make better long term decisions.

True, though we would also run the risk of public policies being even more stagnant than they already are because politicians (and other people in positions of power) would be able to hold their positions so much longer. We don't see much change when the same people have been in power for 50 years, it will be even worse if people could hold their positions for 100 years or more. However, some of this problem could be avoided with mandatory term limits on every political position.

Personally I'm more interested in science creating apples that taste like raspberries. Also, cloning the extinct dwarf elephants. Think about it, guys, we could all have little elephants as pets!

[NoLifeLine]

That is a persuasive argument right there. I’m sold.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

That is a persuasive argument right there. I’m sold.

Finally, someone who gets me! What sealed the deal for you, the apples or the elephants? I want the elephants the most. Everyone talks about cloning mammoths, but come on, those would be way too impractical to have as pets!

[NoLifeLine]

Miniature elephants are a must have for every home in the future.

[tealmermaid]

Speaking as someone who is allergic to pretty much everything, genetic engineering is evil. When science starts splicing weird genes in to our food to make it pest-resistant, hardier, whatever, it causes those foods to register as "not-food" items as far as my immune system is concerned. Our entire food supply is slowly being destroyed by GMO items.

Don't even get me started on "vegetarian chickens". Even organic "vegetarian-fed" chickens and farmed fish are fed on GMO corn and soy at many farms.

Let's not irritate Ma Nature any more than we already have. We have made enough of a mess of the only planet we have.

[Echidna]

^
our bodies evolved for millions of years to digest natural food. Gene-spliced stuff is NOT natural.
That's where all the many new allergies and diseases come from.
Let's not even go into what long-term side effects this has on the entire ecosystem.

Humans eff up everything they touch. Keep your hands off of stuff far too complex for monkeybrains to handle...

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

Ya’ll know that domestication and selective breeding are forms of genetic modification, right? If “we don’t understand it” was a good reason to avoid studying something, we’d never learn anything.

[Echidna]

Ya’ll know that domestication and selective breeding are forms of genetic modification, right? If “we don’t understand it” was a good reason to avoid studying something, we’d never learn anything.

apples and oranges.
selective breeding doesn't change any genes, you just favor some (which already exist naturally) over others.

while this may have far-reaching implications as well, it's still nothing compared to messing with the code itself.

[Mermaid Momo]

Whew chile never have i ever thought anyone would have to explain GMOs in the year of the lord 2019. There are multiple types of GMOs that range from selective breeding to creating plant hybrids. People want to believe that GMOs are scientist adding who knows what into the DNA of plants but in reality it is usually crossing species of plants to create a hardier plant. One plant immune to pests? Cross it with another to get more pest immune plants. Your corn not growing as large? Cross it with a large variety.

GMOs while yeah, some can be iffy are probably the only reason why the human race hasn't run out of food yet and not only that but new advances in GMO are being used to help people in war torn, drought prone areas where food and nutrition are scarce.

I honestly think one of the things holding back scientific studies are people who refuse to research the discoveries and decide they don't like it just because of a few (usually downright wrong and misleading) "facts (cough, *antivaxers*)

Research what you are against instead of going with what media says because i promise usually the paper written by the scientist includes info the media chooses to gloss over. Then decide if you don't like it.

Sent from my [device_name] using MerNetwork mobile app

[Mermaid Momo]

Also vegetarian chickens? As in they only eat a vegetarian diet? Isn't that animal abuse since chickens are not herbivores?

Sent from my [device_name] using MerNetwork mobile app

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

Mermaid Momo is right. I also want to add in that GMOs are studied and tested extensively before they go out onto the market. They're not just putting out this stuff and crossing their fingers. Besides, Earth got 7.5 billion people and counting. We're not gonna be able to adequately feed everyone on "all natural" (whatever that means) organic food, at least not without further environmental destruction.

The media is truly terrible about scientific reporting. Is it really that hard to find someone who can read and understand a scientific study and also write a decent article about it? Scientific literacy isn't THAT rare, right? Right? Well, the bad reporting is probably a combination of legit ignorance and the fact that fearmongering sells.

[tealmermaid]

our bodies evolved for millions of years to digest natural food. Gene-spliced stuff is NOT natural.
That's where all the many new allergies and diseases come from.
Let's not even go into what long-term side effects this has on the entire ecosystem.

Humans eff up everything they touch. Keep your hands off of stuff far too complex for monkeybrains to handle...
I agree. We have made enough of a mess of things. Less humans would not be a bad thing at all. The main reason for the population boom was the discovery of how to fix nitrogen -- which increased the food supply.

Even selective breeding isn't really a good thing in many cases. I've had enough heavily hybridized plants that never had more than one bloom before deciding that enough was enough. I do not intend to grow tulips for the foliage. I do not intend to bother with orchids that refuse to rebloom for me. I don't want to think about what has been done to corn and wheat to render them inedible as they are now.

We brought this on ourselves IMO. There are too many humans for Our Mother to support us. I imagine that she is tired of our nonsense. We would do well to remember that humans are small and breakable.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

I agree. We have made enough of a mess of things. Less humans would not be a bad thing at all. The main reason for the population boom was the discovery of how to fix nitrogen -- which increased the food supply.

Even selective breeding isn't really a good thing in many cases. I've had enough heavily hybridized plants that never had more than one bloom before deciding that enough was enough. I do not intend to grow tulips for the foliage. I do not intend to bother with orchids that refuse to rebloom for me. I don't want to think about what has been done to corn and wheat to render them inedible as they are now.

We brought this on ourselves IMO. There are too many humans for Our Mother to support us. I imagine that she is tired of our nonsense. We would do well to remember that humans are small and breakable.

So who’s gonna volunteer to die? I sure as hell won’t, lol.


Sent from my iPhone using MerNetwork

[tealmermaid]

So who’s gonna volunteer to die? I sure as hell won’t, lol.

The balance will return if we stop trying to feed more people than we can support on this planet. We are not equipped to colonize other planets any time soon, so this is all we have to work with.

For what it's worth, diseases keep the population in check if we stop interfering. All these children who never catch the common childhood diseases seem to end up with them later when the vaccine's effectiveness runs out. On the other hand, having those diseases once as a child -- and surviving -- means lifetime immunity. Let Nature take her course.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

The balance will return if we stop trying to feed more people than we can support on this planet. We are not equipped to colonize other planets any time soon, so this is all we have to work with.

For what it's worth, diseases keep the population in check if we stop interfering. All these children who never catch the common childhood diseases seem to end up with them later when the vaccine's effectiveness runs out. On the other hand, having those diseases once as a child -- and surviving -- means lifetime immunity. Let Nature take her course.

I have a feeling that you wouldn't support this view if you (or your loved ones) were the one in danger of dying from starvation or preventable disease. Go tell your stance to a bunch of starving refugees in a third world country and get their input. At least Thanos had the decency to kill half of all life randomly and not favoring some over others. If you're concerned about overpopulation, education and birth control are the best solutions, not letting poor and marginalized people die because you think science is scary.

[tealmermaid]

Seriously? I wasn't vaccinated, and I have had all the usual childhood illnesses. I have full immunity, unlike what you get with a vaccine. Childhood illnesses are not the least bit scary if you get them during childhood. Don't try fear-mongering like the immunologist who tried to scare me that "people die of chicken pox". Exposure to these illnesses is good for the immune system; otherwise it gets bored and starts looking for something else to destroy.

I'm not even going to touch the plea to "think of the starving children" because I don't think you want to hear my view on that.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

Seriously? I wasn't vaccinated, and I have had all the usual childhood illnesses. I have full immunity, unlike what you get with a vaccine. Childhood illnesses are not the least bit scary if you get them during childhood. Don't try fear-mongering like the immunologist who tried to scare me that "people die of chicken pox". Exposure to these illnesses is good for the immune system; otherwise it gets bored and starts looking for something else to destroy.

I'm not even going to touch the plea to "think of the starving children" because I don't think you want to hear my view on that.

And what about illnesses like smallpox or polio? What about kids (or adults) who have weakened immune systems? You can say "this happened to me and I turned out fine". Someone who died can't exactly give their opinion on the subject.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

Also vegetarian chickens? As in they only eat a vegetarian diet? Isn't that animal abuse since chickens are not herbivores?

Sent from my [device_name] using MerNetwork mobile app (http://MerNetwork mobile app)

I looked up "vegetarian chicken" and there are a bunch of articles saying that a vegetarian diet is bad for chickens. If that's true, then yeah, I'd consider that animal abuse. What's even the appeal of vegetarian chicken eggs anyway? I guess if you're hardcore enough to not want to kill bugs, but if you're that hardcore, you probably prefer chickens being free-range, which means they'll be eating bugs anyway. I dunno.

On that note, I wonder what non-vegetarian chickens are fed? I've always assumed that most chickens were just fed grain and corn, at least in the big farming operations.

[tealmermaid]

And what about illnesses like smallpox or polio? What about kids (or adults) who have weakened immune systems? You can say "this happened to me and I turned out fine". Someone who died can't exactly give their opinion on the subject.
You do I hope realise that this is how things work in nature. Predators cull the weak. If someone's immune system is that weak, those genes are probably better off not being passed to the next generation. Selective breeding to favour weakness is a bad idea IMO.

Probably draconian, but true.

And just for the record, chickens in their natural state eat insects. They are not vegetarian. "Free range" means they technically have access to the outdoors, but in practice it doesn't happen. Unless a farmer is focusing on the restoration of an ecosystem through the use of those Eggmobiles or similar (basically a mobile chicken coop), the chickens aren't going to get insects or any outdoor time. The average chicken is in a similar state to feedlot cows or pigs.

Food labelling drives me batty even with a secret decoder ring.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

You do I hope realise that this is how things work in nature. Predators cull the weak. If someone's immune system is that weak, those genes are probably better off not being passed to the next generation. Selective breeding to favour weakness is a bad idea IMO.

Probably draconian, but true.

And just for the record, chickens in their natural state eat insects. They are not vegetarian. "Free range" means they technically have access to the outdoors, but in practice it doesn't happen. Unless a farmer is focusing on the restoration of an ecosystem through the use of those Eggmobiles or similar (basically a mobile chicken coop), the chickens aren't going to get insects or any outdoor time. The average chicken is in a similar state to feedlot cows or pigs.

Food labelling drives me batty even with a secret decoder ring.

Our intelligence is our strength. Some animals get by with speed, others with claws, others with brute force. If we only lived "naturally", with no tools or medicines or study or manipulating our environment, we would have died off long ago. Hell, humans aren't even the only animals that use medicine (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/animals-use-medicine-too-21320503/).

On that note, I don't think anything we do is "unnatural". We are not outside of nature. Everything we use comes from nature in some way, and we're still subjected to natural laws. We aren't "cheating nature" by using medicine, we're just using our own adaptations to survive like any other animal does. That doesn't mean that everything we do it ultimately good for ourselves or the environment, but I don't think there's such a thing as "going against nature" or "playing god". Hell, one of the advantages of our intelligence is that we actually can recognize when we're doing harm and can take steps to stop it.

[tealmermaid]

Humans in general aren't all that bright. People like Stephen Hawking whose intelligence more than compensated for physical shortcomings are few and far between. Case in point: foolish humans who can't or won't cease destroying the only planet we have. Recycling is not enough, for example. We need to reduce our footprints to the bare minimum.

And yes, such things as genetic engineering including GMO crops do constitute "playing God". What's next, designer human babies with genes customized to the specifications of the parents? Just because the technology exists to do such things doesn't mean we should use that technology.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

Humans in general aren't all that bright. People like Stephen Hawking whose intelligence more than compensated for physical shortcomings are few and far between. Case in point: foolish humans who can't or won't cease destroying the only planet we have. Recycling is not enough, for example. We need to reduce our footprints to the bare minimum.

And yes, such things as genetic engineering including GMO crops do constitute "playing God". What's next, designer human babies with genes customized to the specifications of the parents? Just because the technology exists to do such things doesn't mean we should use that technology.

Where is the line between acceptable research and science and “playing god”? Why is it okay to use computers and airplanes and polyester clothes but not GMOs? Yeah, we do need to discuss the ethics of science but that doesn’t mean we should reject advancement outright. We do need to reduce our footprints, but we’ve also done so much damage that we should try to reverse what we’ve done along with preventing further damage.

[tealmermaid]

Where is the line between acceptable research and science and “playing god”? Why is it okay to use computers and airplanes and polyester clothes but not GMOs? Yeah, we do need to discuss the ethics of science but that doesn’t mean we should reject advancement outright. We do need to reduce our footprints, but we’ve also done so much damage that we should try to reverse what we’ve done along with preventing further damage.
Polyester clothes are itchy -- that should be reason enough not to experiment with them! ;)

As far as reducing our footprints and GMOs and such, we need to understand the extent of the damage caused before we cause even more damage trying to repair anything. I know so many people who label-watch just as carefully as I do because of documented reactions to supposedly safe GMO "foods". If we keep playing around without giving that experimentation a generation or two to wash out, we may not be able to undo or even mitigate the damage. We need to sit back and watch how this round plays out before any further experimentation.

[Mermaid Momo]

Google "eugenics" outs basically what you talked about with the whole "survival of the fittest" thing and eugenics is a bad thing. Eugenixs is the belief that disabled people are weaker and they're genes not fit for reproduction and as such with "survival of the fittest" there should die because they are weaker.

Also note, survival of the fittest doesn't mean shrvival of the strongest. It means survival of individuals who are most adapted to their environment and grow to reproduce.

Also vaccines work by introducing a DEAD version of a virus and vaccines don't have an expiration date. Why? Because once your body encounters the virus it remembers it. And vaccines are safer than exposing your child to mumps and polio and going "May the odds be ever in your favor" because a dead virus is introduced not a live one. (And don't get me started on people ruining herd immunity)

Also the entire thought of "we don't need this" is showing extreme privilege. Poor and marginalized people would KILL to have access to What we have. Heck people in the US would kill to be able to buy the big bad gmo produce since the only produce they ever see in their life are on billboards or fast food burgers. There are people out there saying goodbye to their loved ones waay too early because they didn't have access to What is made available to the priviledged.

Sent from my [device_name] using MerNetwork mobile app

[SirenGita]

That is not eugenics... that is what bad people make eugenics INTO.

Also, I'm not sure who you are priviledge checking but calm down. ;) <3

[SirenGita]

Ps: gmos can be good, but are almost NEVER TESTED for LONG TERM effects, like say, massive environmental destructions due to monoculture, and IGNORES actual solutions, like GMO salmon. Sure these salmon are twice as big...but actual salmon are dying out bc they still can't navigate the waterways and dying of pollution. Farmed salmon cant return either...and the result is destroying the eco system!

The j pod of orcas has been here my whole life and are dying and leaving bc the salmon die off. I believe the j pod was the pod of the mother that carried her dead calf for weeks as her pod died around her.

[SirenGita]

After reading this teal...i don't tolerate those who kill children by giving them diseases they are too young to be vaccinated against as well as immunoconpromised cancer patients etc. We wont be friends. I'm putting you on ignore. This is why.

Big reason it is so crucial isn't just you.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

That is not eugenics... that is what bad people make eugenics INTO.

Also, I'm not sure who you are priviledge checking but calm down. ;) <3

I mean, saying people should die because they're weak is eugenics. Yeah, you're not killing them directly but it's not much better.

Momo is "privilege checking" Teal by pointing out that Teal, as an American, lives in a position of privilege where she wouldn't be hurt by the policies that she promotes. It's easy to say "vaccines are bad" when you live in a place where some diseases have already been wiped out by vaccines and you're protected by herd immunity. Good luck saying no to vaccines when you're in a place with malaria everywhere. It's easy to say that GMO crops are bad when you're not at any risk of starvation.

That's not to say that we shouldn't discuss the pros and cons of scientific development, but you do also have to consider other viewpoints on the matter. Otherwise you just end up looking like a clueless jerk and fewer people will consider your argument. This issue comes up a LOT in environmentalism, you HAVE to take the needs and desires of local people into account if you want to get anywhere and you're only gonna look like an uninformed jackass if you tell a bunch of rural Africans "You're horrible people for killing that lion" when you've never lived in a place where wildlife posed a significant threat to you or your livelihood, and yeah, you say that it's wrong that your ancestors drove all of the wildlife out of your area but you're still benefiting from damage and maybe you'd have a different viewpoint if that wildlife was still in your backyard. I'm getting off-topic though, I think I just needed to rant about that, lol.

[tealmermaid]

I'm going to be the realist who points out why so many third-world countries have a time-honoured tradition of large families: because they expect most of the children to die -- by various means -- before reaching adulthood. So long as one or two survive to take care of the parents in their old age, everything is good for them.

Now, what happens when all the children in a large family survive into adulthood? They outpace their food supply. Those "feed the starving children for 25 cents a day" pleas have been running for at least forty years now. If we keep feeding them and they all live, we get to go through this cycle again when all 10+ survivors have children of their own. So: either they put aside the custom of large families to reduce their family size, or we need to let the population find its own balance.

We cannot support this population boom and bust cycle. If everyone insists on having so many children when it is no longer necessary, Ma Nature should probably take Her course.

[Mermaid Delphinidae]

Family size goes down as quality of life and access to opportunities (and birth control) goes up. If you actually care about the people you’d support access to birth control and better education, not letting them die.


Sent from my iPhone using MerNetwork

[Mermaid Momo]

Large families are common in impoverished areas not because they expect them to die. It's because when you live off of your own land you need hands to help maintain the land and the fields and help out in general and also because they're still hsving sex anf what are they supposed to do when they're pregnant without access to health services. Also impoverished areas don't have access to birth control and sexual education which would drop the birth rates down tremendously.

People are so disconnected with poor and people below the poverty line that they believe they have lots of kids because they expect them to die... Oh lordy lordy.

Sent from my [device_name] using MerNetwork mobile app

[Mermaid Momo]

And i just gotta note, those "help the starving children" things? Yeah thise aren't from having too many children. It's from people being forced to migrate by war, drought, famine, or children who are orphaned because you guessed it: war, drought, famine, displacement, and disease.

I'm attemping to be curteous and nice in this argument but the blatant disregard and no understanding of how poor, impoverished, refugee, etc ppl live is really grinding my gears.

Sent from my [device_name] using MerNetwork mobile app

[tealmermaid]

Family size goes down as quality of life and access to opportunities (and birth control) goes up. If you actually care about the people you’d support access to birth control and better education, not letting them die.

That is definitely a major issue here. Girls being educated through high school keeps them out of the breeding pool for a longer period of time. Further education and not marrying immediately after high school would help. Instructions in the use of birth control would hopefully reduce the population to sustainable levels within a few generations.

The important thing would be to determine how much population can be supported by a particular environment. They have to be able to take care of their own needs long-term rather than just trucking in more food to throw at the problem.

[AniaR]

woooo boy. This is a mermaid forum folks. Maybe let's get away from eugenics and back to what the forum is for? Since when did we become reddit?

[Slim]

Truth! It got way off topic to what the original conversation was about.


woooo boy. This is a mermaid forum folks. Maybe let's get away from eugenics and back to what the forum is for? Since when did we become reddit?