Researchers Grow Human Organs In Pigs. Dr. Frankenstein Lives

Did Ancient Greeks Perform Human-Animal Experiments Too?

In a 1990 film, Death Warrant, Jean Claude Van Damme goes undercover into a prison where inmates are killed and their organs sold. This is not a new idea. 

[From article]
Scientists in the United States are trying to grow human organs inside pigs.
They have injected human stem cells into pig embryos to produce human-pig embryos known as chimeras.
The embryos are part of research aimed at overcoming the worldwide shortage of transplant organs.
The team from University of California, Davis says they should look and behave like normal pigs except that one organ will be composed of human cells.
The human-pig chimeric embryos are being allowed to develop in the sows for 28 days before the pregnancies are terminated and the tissue removed for analysis.
[. . .]
  Pablo Ross, a reproductive biologist who is leading the research told me: "Our hope is that this pig embryo will develop normally but the pancreas will be made almost exclusively out of human cells and could be compatible with a patient for transplantation."
But the work is controversial. Last year, the main US medical research agency, the National Institutes of Health, imposed a moratorium on funding such experiments.
[. . .]
His team has previously injected human stem cells into pig embryos but without first creating the genetic niche. Prof Ross said although they later found human cells in several parts of the developing foetus, they "struggled to compete" with the pig cells. By deleting a key gene involved in the creation of the pig pancreas, they hope the human cells will have more success creating a human-like pancreas.
Other teams in the United States have created human-pig chimeric embryos but none has allowed the foetuses to be born.
[. . .]
Walter Low, professor in the department of neurosurgery, University of Minnesota, said pigs were an ideal "biological incubator" for growing human organs, and could potentially be used to create not just a pancreas but hearts, livers, kidneys, lungs and corneas.
He said if the iPS cells were taken from a patient needing a transplant then these could be injected in a pig embryo which had the key genes deleted for creating the required organ, such as the liver: "The organ would be an exact genetic copy of your liver but a much younger and healthier version and you would not need to take immunosuppressive drugs which carry side-effects."
But Prof Low stressed that the research, using another form of gene editing called TALENs, was still at the preliminary stages, trying to identify the target genes which must be removed in order to prevent the pig from developing a particular organ.
His team is also trying to create dopamine-producing human neurons from chimeric embryos to treat patients with Parkinson's disease.
[. . .]
In the mid-90s there were hopes that genetically modified pigs might provide an endless supply of organs for patients, and that cross-species transplants were not far off.
But clinical trials stalled because of fears that humans might be infected with animal viruses.
Last year, a team at Harvard Medical School used CRISPR gene editing to remove more than 60 copies of a pig retrovirus.
Prof George Church, who led the research, told me: "It opens up the possibility of not just transplantation from pigs to humans but the whole idea that a pig organ is perfectible.
"Gene editing could ensure the organs are very clean, available on demand and healthy, so they could be superior to human donor organs."
[. . .]
But organisations campaigning for an end to factory farming are dismayed at the thought of organ farms.
Peter Stevenson, from Compassion in World Farming, told me: "I'm nervous about opening up a new source of animal suffering. Let's first get many more people to donate organs. If there is still a shortage after that, we can consider using pigs, but on the basis that we eat less meat so that there is no overall increase in the number of pigs being used for human purposes."
In Greek mythology, chimeras were fire-breathing monsters composed of several animals - part lion, goat and snake. The scientific teams believe human-pig chimeras should look and behave like normal pigs except that one organ will be composed of human cells.

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-36437428

Scientists grow human organs for transplant inside pigs
By Fergus Walsh
Medical correspondent
June 5, 2016

* * *


Supporters claim it could spell an end to the shortage of donor organs – which means 1,000 people in the UK die every year while waiting for a transplant.

Cambridge, MA City Council remains non committal, issuing no comment.

[From article]

Pig-human embryos have been created in a dramatic bid to solve the organ transplant shortage.
Scientists have successfully combined human stem cells and pig DNA - with the aim of growing a human organ inside a pig.
But critics say the development of such hybrids is ‘offensive to human dignity’.
The ‘chimera’ embryos have been implanted in living sows and allowed to grow for 28 days before being tested and destroyed.
Supporters claim it could spell an end to the shortage of donor organs – which means 1,000 people in the UK die every year while waiting for a transplant.
But others have described it as terrifying ‘Frankenscience’.
The technique is being trialled on pig foetuses by US scientists who are experimenting with the genes involved in creating a pancreas.
Strict rules mean that, for now, the embryos cannot be matured past 28 days and no birth of a hybrid animal is allowed.
[. . .]
The latest breakthrough has been made at the University of California, Davis, where scientists have implanted pig-human hybrids into sows. Doctors have long discussed using pigs for human transplants, as the organs are roughly the same size as a human’s.
But they have repeatedly failed to overcome two hurdles – that the human body would instantly reject the foreign tissue, and that there is a risk of passing animal viruses into people.
[. . .]
Those challenges have been surpassed by gene-editing technology called CRISPR, which allows scientists to alter DNA with remarkable precision.
They have worked out how to remove from a strand of pig DNA the exact gene responsible for making a pancreas. This creates a void, which they hope will be filled when they inject the embryo with human ‘blank’ stem cells, capable of forming any form of tissue.
The hybrid embryo is then implanted into an adult sow – and as it grows into a foetus it develops a human pancreas.
Dr Pablo Ross, leading the research, told BBC Panorama: ‘Our hope is that this pig embryo will develop normally but the pancreas will be made almost exclusively out of human cells and could be compatible with a patient for transplantation.’
But the work is intensely controversial. The main concern is that the human stem cells might migrate to the developing pig’s brain, giving it some human characteristics.
Dr Ross insists: ‘We think there is very low potential for a human brain to grow, but this is something we will be investigating.’
[. . .]
Professor Walter Low of the University of Minnesota, which is researching a similar project, said pigs were an ideal ‘biological incubator’, adding: ‘The organ would be an exact genetic copy of your liver [for example] but a much younger and healthier version and you would not need to take immunosuppressive drugs which carry side-effects.’
Professor Low admitted that human cells spreading to the brain was a concerning prospect, but he added: ‘With every organ we will look at what’s happening in the brain and if we find that it’s too human-like, then we won’t let those foetuses be born.’
But Josephine Quintavalle, of campaign group Comment on Reproductive Ethics, said: ‘These experiments are absolutely offensive to human dignity, and no utilitarian justification whatsoever can ever bypass such opposition. We are absolutely horrified at this arrogance.’
Professor Stuart Newman, of New York Medical College, said: ‘You’re getting into unsettling ground that I think is damaging to our sense of humanity.’
Peta UK’s Julia Baines condemned the research as ‘Frankenscience’, adding: ‘Creating human-animal hybrids is bad for people and worse for animals.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3626562/Scientists-let-hybrid-embryos-develop-lab-28-days-bid-solve-transplant-shortage.html

Human organs grown in pigs: Scientists let hybrid embryos develop in lab for 28 days in bid to solve transplant shortage
Scientists have successfully combined human stem cells and pig DNA
Embryos put in living pigs and made to grow for 28 days before destroyed
Critics have dubbed it ‘Frankenscience’ and ‘offensive to human dignity’
1,000 people in the UK die every year while waiting for a organ transplant
By BEN SPENCER MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 17:57 EST, 5 June 2016 | UPDATED: 13:21 EST, 6 June 2016

Gene Editing, Now Available to Scientists And Terroroists Is Declared a Weapon Of Mass Destruction By US Spy Chief

James Clapper, U.S. director of national intelligence 

[From article]
Genome editing is a weapon of mass destruction.
That’s according to James Clapper, U.S. director of national intelligence, who on Tuesday, in the annual worldwide threat assessment report of the U.S. intelligence community, added gene editing to a list of threats posed by “weapons of mass destruction and proliferation.”
Gene editing refers to several novel ways to alter the DNA inside living cells. The most popular method, CRISPR, has been revolutionizing scientific research, leading to novel animals and crops, and is likely to power a new generation of gene treatments for serious diseases (see “Everything You Need to Know About CRISPR’s Monster Year”).
[. . .]
The choice by the U.S. spy chief to call out gene editing as a potential weapon of mass destruction, or WMD, surprised some experts. It was the only biotechnology appearing in a tally of six more conventional threats, like North Korea’s suspected nuclear detonation on January 6, Syria’s undeclared chemical weapons, and new Russian cruise missiles that might violate an international treaty.
The report is an unclassified version of the “collective insights” of the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and half a dozen other U.S. spy and fact-gathering operations.
Although the report doesn’t mention CRISPR by name, Clapper clearly had the newest and the most versatile of the gene-editing systems in mind. The CRISPR technique’s low cost and relative ease of use—the basic ingredients can be bought online for $60—seems to have spooked intelligence agencies.
[. . .]
The concern is that biotechnology is a “dual use” technology—meaning normal scientific developments could also be harnessed as weapons. The report noted that new discoveries “move easily in the globalized economy, as do personnel with the scientific expertise to design and use them.”
Clapper didn’t lay out any particular bioweapons scenarios, but scientists have previously speculated about whether CRISPR could be used to make “killer mosquitoes,” plagues that wipe out staple crops, or even a virus that snips at people’s DNA.
[. . .]
Development of bioweapons is banned by the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, a Cold War–era treaty that outlawed biological warfare programs. The U.S., China, Russia, and 172 other countries have signed it. Millet says that experts who met in Warsaw last September to discuss the treaty felt a threat from terrorist groups was still remote, given the complexity of producing a bioweapon. Millet says the group concluded that “for the foreseeable future, such applications are only within the grasp of states.”
The intelligence assessment drew specific attention to the possibility of using CRISPR to edit the DNA of human embryos to produce genetic changes in the next generation of people—for example, to remove disease risks. It noted that fast advances in genome editing in 2015 compelled “groups of high-profile U.S. and European biologists to question unregulated editing of the human germ line (cells that are relevant for reproduction), which might create inheritable genetic changes.”
So far, the debate over changing the next generation’s genes has been mostly an ethical question, and the report didn’t say how such a development would be considered a WMD, although it’s possible to imagine a virus designed to kill or injure people by altering their genomes.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/600774/top-us-intelligence-official-calls-gene-editing-a-wmd-threat/

Top U.S. Intelligence Official Calls Gene Editing a WMD Threat
Easy to use. Hard to control. The intelligence community now sees CRISPR as a threat to national safety.
by Antonio Regalado

February 9, 2016

Technology Makes It Possible To Ban Imperfect Babies From Birth, Children From School

[From article]
British scientists have been granted permission to genetically modifyhuman embryos by the fertility regulator.
The Francis Crick Institute could begin the controversial experiments as early as March after the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority(HFEA) gave the green light this morning.
The scientists want to deactivate genes in leftover embryos from IVF clinics to see if it hinders development.
It will only be the second time in the world that such a procedure has been undertaken and the first time it has been directly approved by a regulator. A Chinese team carried out similar experiments last year to widespread outcry.
[. . .]
Critics warn that allowing embryos to be edited opens the door to designer babies and genetically modified humans.
Anne Scanlan of the charity LIFE said: “The HFEA now has the reputation of being the first regulator in the world to approve this uncertain and dangerous technology. It has ignored the warnings of over a hundred scientists worldwide and given permission for a procedure which could have damaging far-reaching implications for human beings."
But lead scientist Dr Kathy Niakan said that the research could fundamentally change our understanding of human biology and give hope to prospective parents.
[. . .]
Currently it is not illegal to edit human embryos for research purposes although it has never been done before because they technology has not been available.
When China announced it had carried out similar experiments last year there was a widespread outcry.
A spokesman for the HFEA said: “Our Licence Committee has approved an application from Dr Kathy Niakan of the Francis Crick Institute to renew her laboratory’s research licence to include gene editing of embryos.
“The committee has added a condition to the licence that no research using gene editing may take place until the research has received research ethics approval.
“As with all embryos used in research, it is illegal to transfer them to a woman for treatment.”
[. . .]
Currently it is not illegal to edit human embryos for research purposes although it has never been done before because they technology has not been available.
When China announced it had carried out similar experiments last year there was a widespread outcry.
A spokesman for the HFEA said: “Our Licence Committee has approved an application from Dr Kathy Niakan of the Francis Crick Institute to renew her laboratory’s research licence to include gene editing of embryos.
“The committee has added a condition to the licence that no research using gene editing may take place until the research has received research ethics approval.
“As with all embryos used in research, it is illegal to transfer them to a woman for treatment.”
[. . .]
“It is the very future of the way in which societies accept persons with disabilities that is at play since such gene editing procedures infer that they should not have been brought into existence.”
Gene therapy has been available since the 1970s but it is only recently that scientists have developed technology which can snip out parts of genetic code
The technique could permanently remove harmful mutations which lead to inherited diseases like Huntingdon’s, cystic fibrosis and haemophilia, critics say it could have unexpected side effects any may damage healthy strands of DNA.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12133410/British-scientists-granted-permission-to-genetically-modify-human-embryos.html

British scientists granted permission to genetically modify human embryos
The Francis Crick institute will genetically edit the leftover embryos from from IVF clinics
By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor
10:00AM GMT 01 Feb 2016

* * *

[From article]
A FEW WEEKS into sixth grade, Colman Chadam had to leave school because of his DNA.
The situation, odd as it may sound, played out like this. Colman has genetic markers for cystic fibrosis, and kids with the inherited lung disease can’t be near each other because they’re vulnerable to contagious infections. Two siblings with cystic fibrosis also attended Colman’s middle school in Palo Alto, California in 2012. So Colman was out, even though he didn’t actually have the disease, according to a lawsuit that his parents filed against the school district. The allegation? Genetic discrimination.
Yes, genetic discrimination. Get used to those two words together, because they’re likely to become a lot more common. With DNA tests now cheap and readily available, the number of people getting tests has gone way up—along with the potential for discrimination based on the results. When Colman’s school tried to transfer him based on his genetic status, the lawsuit alleges, the district violated the Americans With Disabilities Act and Colman’s First Amendment right to privacy. “This is the test case,” says the Chadam’s lawyer, Stephen Jaffe.
[. . .]
When the family first sued the school district in 2013, a district court dismissed the case. The Chadams appeal the dismissal to the federal Ninth Circuit court in January. The Departments of Justice and Education have also written a brief in support of the Chadam’s case, which suggests the federal government has taken an interest in the case and its outcome.
[. . .]
To experts in genetics law, four letters are conspicuously missing from the legal wrangling: GINA, or the federal Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008. GINA bars genetic discrimination in just two cases: employment or health insurance. That obviously doesn’t include getting education and housing and plenty of other situation where discrimination might happen. “This case is an useful reminder about the limitations of the federal statute,” says Jennifer Wagner, a lawyer and contributing editor toGenomics Law Report. That’s why the Chadam’s case does not rest on GINA but the ADA, where its application to genetic discrimination is untested.
[. . .]



Back in 2001—before GINA passed—the railroad company Burlington Northern Santa Fe was looking for genetic markers for carpal tunnel syndrome in its workers who filed for worker’s comp. (The workers claimed their carpal tunnel syndrome came from operating BNSF machinery; the company was clearly looking for another excuse.)
The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit on behalf of the workers, and they eventually reached a settlement in 2002. The workers got $2.2 million—but because the suit ended in a settlement rather than a court decision, it did not establish a legal precedent for the ADA covering discrimination based on genes. The outcome in Chadam’s case could, if a trial goes forward, spell out exactly who gets to access genetic information and what decisions can be made based on it.
In the fifteen years since Colman got a DNA test as a baby, tests have only gotten cheaper and more popular. You have 23andMe’s $199 spit test, of course, but also the National Institutes of Health pumping $25 million into baby sequencing studies. “As we do more screening earlier and earlier in life, there’s potential for misuse of information in ways that are harmful, that could potentially discourage parents from seeking genetic testing even if it’s medically indicated,” says Michelle Lewis, a pediatrician, attorney, and research scholar at the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics. The genetic discrimination future is here.

http://www.wired.com/2016/02/schools-kicked-boy-based-dna/

DNA GOT A KID KICKED OUT OF SCHOOL—AND IT’LL HAPPEN AGAIN
Sarah Zhang

02.01.16 7:00 AM

Oxford Ethicist Talks Culling The Herd at Harvard Law School

Savulescu promotes eugenics in MA joining Walter Fernald, and Everett Flood, early advocates of sterilizing defective persons. The Oxford ethicist wants to "test for certain genes that predict aggressive behavior, which would potentially alter the criminal justice system." 



An ethicist (are there licenses to practice ethics?) wants to change the Constitution without even an executive order. Like the Nazi doctors he divides "human beings into low and high risks, [. . .] pointing to potential societal benefits." At the Nuremberg trials the doctor who used human subjects argued the benefit to society outweighed harm to individuals. The same argument is often heard among medical researchers today. Focusing on “the best chance of the best life.” he sounds like Peter Singer another "ethicist." Singer says parents of severely disabled babies should be allowed to kill their babies within the first six months in order to increase happiness in the world. Julian Savulescu wants “to select those embryos [. . .] that are healthy, [. . .] who have [a] lower risk of violent aggression[.]” 



He argues "both potential victims and criminals would be better off." without providing details of what he means by good (better off). “When the cost to you is small and the benefit to somebody else is large, you ought to perform that action.” See defense argument (above) at Nuremberg trials.



http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2015/10/21/oxford-professor-science-morality/

Oxford Professor Talks Science and Moral Behavior
By MAXWELL J. SIMON, CONTRIBUTING WRITER
Harvard Crimson
October 21, 2015

Deleting Genes Can Lengthen Life

Switching off parts of the genetic code could help people live longer, scientists believe Photo: Alamy

One potential problem is that the human body is extremely complex. Scientists may think they know everything but there is much still to learn. As with any huge complex system there may be connections between parts that remain unknown until that part is altered or removed. In the 1960s IBM's OS computer operating system was large. They stopped making fixes, when they learned that every time they fixed one problem another one popped up somewhere else. The human body is more complex and the relationship of the parts remain unknown. The same situation exists with psychiatric drugs. Though they are taken widely by an unsuspecting public there are no medical professionals or scientists who know all of the effects of one of the drugs on the body, no less when these prognosticators prescribe a cocktail of these chemicals. The potential to create unintended problems remains.

[From article]
The secret of extending life by decades may lie in switching off certain genes, scientists believe, after showing that small genetic tweaks can make organisms live 60 per cent longer.
Ten years of research by the Buck Institute for Research on Ageing and the University of Washington has identified 238 genes that, when silenced, increase the lifespan of yeast cells.
Many of the genes are present in mammals, including humans, suggesting that switching them off could dramatically increase lifespan.
“This study looks at aging in the context of the whole genome and gives us a more complete picture of what aging is,” said lead author Dr Brian Kennedy.
"Almost half of the genes we found that affect aging are conserved in mammals.

[. . .]
Earlier this year academics from the University of Southern California found that a five day diet which mimics fasting can slow down ageing, add years to life, boost the immune system and cut the risk of heart disease and cancer.
The plan restricts calories to between one third and a half of normal intake.
Last year the same team discovered that fasting can regenerate the entire immune system, bringing a host of long-term health benefits.
When humans tested out the regimen, within three months they had reduced biomarkers linked to ageing, diabetes, cancer and heart disease as well as cutting overall body fat.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11925154/Deleting-genes-could-boost-lifespan-by-60-per-cent-say-scientists.html

Deleting genes could boost lifespan by 60 per cent, say scientists
Scientists have discovered more than 200 genes linked to ageing and have found switching them off extends life

By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor
2:26PM BST 11 Oct 2015

Genetic Manipulation of Human Embryos

The genetic manipulation of human IVF embryos is set to start in Britain for the first time (Rex)


[From article]
When Chinese scientists announced earlier this year that they had genetically altered “spare” human IVF embryos using Crispr/Cas9 for research purposes, there was deep concern among many who thought that they had gone too far – the US Government later imposed a moratorium on federally-funded research in America.




However, critics of the manipulation of human IVF embryos – even when done for research purposes – have argued that it is a slippery slope to genetically-enhanced “designer babies” that might be engineered with desired traits such as intelligence or athletic ability.
The scientists behind the proposed study in the UK said they have no intention of altering the DNA of future generations but accept that this may at some point in the future be safe, medically justifiably and ethically acceptable – for instance to avoid inherited disorders or to confer disease resistance on IVF babies.
[. . .]
“There are suggestions that the methods could be used to correct genetic defects, to provide disease resistance, or even to introduce novel traits that are not found in humans. However, it is up to society to decide what is acceptable – science will merely inform what may be possible,” she added.
Parliament amended the UK’s IVF legislation in 2008 to allow genetic manipulation of embryos less than 14 days old, provided it was for research purposes and sanctioned by the HFEA. Under the HFE Act 2008, it remains illegal to create GM embryos for implanting into the womb, or to edit the “germline” DNA of chromosomes passed on to future generations.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/ivf-embryos-to-be-genetically-manipulated-as-scientists-investigate-repeated-miscarriages-10506064.html
IVF embryos to be genetically manipulated as scientists investigate repeated miscarriages
STEVE CONNOR, SCIENCE EDITOR
Friday 18 September 2015

UK Legalizes and Promotes Eugenics In The Name of Preventing Illness

A group of Italian politicans have slammed the idea of three-parent babies

Say goodbye to imperfect humans. Only the most pure will be allowed to live under these principles and guidelines. Who said the British people fought Hitler in vain. He is winning in death.

[From article]
The group of Italian politicians have called on the House of Lords to reject a law to allow so-called three-parent babies - stating the notion "cannot possibly be contained within the confines of the United Kingdom". The stern warning comes after MPs in Britain voted overwhelmingly in favour of the controversial technique of mitochondrial donation - which would allow children to be conceived with genetic material from a trio of individuals. In a strongly worded letter to The Times, the Italian Mps wrote that the legalisation of such a technique "could have uncontrollable and unforeseeable consequences, affecting future generations and modifying genetic heritage in an irreversible way, inevitably affecting the human species as a whole". The letter also argues that "the greater part of the scientific community maintain that the scientific data currently available is insufficient to even consider intervention on human subjects, and there cannot therefore be any guarantee for the safety of any eventual off-spring".
[. . .]
Earlier this month, MPs voted 382 to 128 in favour of an amendment to the 2008 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, which will allow the creation of IVF babies with DNA from three different people. Mitochondrial donation techniques aimed at preventing serious inherited diseases will now be legalised, subject to any amendments made in the House of Lords

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/559628/Three-parent-babies-risk-human-race-says-Italian-MPs

Three-parent babies could risk the future of the human race, warn 55 Italian MPs
THREE-PARENT babies could risk the future of the human race by "modifying genetic heritage in an irreversible way", warned 55 Italian MPs.
Published: 12:21, Sat, February 21, 2015

GMO Labeling on Colorado and Oregon Ballots

[From article]
Oregon and Colorado on Nov. 4 will decide the fate of labeling laws for genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, the latest fronts in a battle over packaging. Measure 92 in Oregon and Proposition 105 in Colorado call for labeling food so that purchasers know whether they are buying products that contain materials that have been genetically engineered or modified.
The states could become the first to pass such a referendum; Washington and California rejected similar measures after expensive campaigns in 2013 and 2012, respectively. Vermont approved such labeling through the legislative process, but the issue is still being fought in the courts.
[. . .]
In Colorado, the supporters of the labeling campaign are heavily outweighed by their opponents: $700,000 to an estimated $12 million, Cooper said.
“It’s definitely a David-versus-Goliath thing,” Cooper said, adding he was proud of the grass-roots support his side had marshaled.
[. . .]
In Oregon, the battle has become the costliest over a ballot measure in the state’s history.
As of the weekend, the two sides have raised $16.7 million, the Portland Tribune reported.
Monsanto has donated more than $4 million to defeat Measure 92, it was reported.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-81740543/

Battles rage in Oregon, Colorado over genetically modified foods
BY MICHAEL MUSKAL
October 21, 2014, 7:03 p.m.

New Book On Race, Genetics and History

[From article]
This pseudo-scientific perspective slips into bathos when Mr. Wade writes: “Religion was crucial in detribalization and then in instituting the rule of law.” Which religion? Islam?! Has he read history or noticed the crucible of tribalism in the Muslim Middle East and in Africa and Asia? I guess he must mean Judeo-Christianity, whose doctrines and practices have detribalized as well as established the rule of law in much of the world.
[. . .]
with Wade’s narrow understanding of history, anthropology, and theology, he also repeats the legend that Islam was more advanced than the West until the so-called Renaissance. This legend gained traction because Islam in its conquests of Egypt, Persia, and Byzantium translated their works into Arabic, making it appear that the contributions of the dhimmis were products of Islam. But conflating Islam with these superior though subjugated civilizations is inaccurate.
[. . .]
Mr. Wade’s work does not perform that service. In the meantime, read books by Thomas Sowell, especially Race & Culture, for a rich perspective on the differences between various peoples and how they shape their environments and vice versa.

http://americanthinker.com/2014/09/a_troubling_book_nicholas_wades_genetic_theory_of_race_and_history.html

September 13, 2014
A Troubling Book: Nicholas Wade's Genetic Theory of Race and History
By Terry Scambray

Desperate Attempt To Connect Science With Psychiatry

"Mental illnesses are only accessible to researchers through new understandings of genetics." Gasp! Decades of using human subjects for psychiatric research were simply all exercises in sadistic criminal abuses? "progress in the study of mental illnesses seems more attainable than ever, those involved with the center say." $650 million will fund more researchers to look for progress in studying mental illnesses? Much cheaper to simply continue consensus definition of mental illnesses, and pizza parties to study progress? “'Human genomics has begun to reveal the causes of these disorders,' said Stanley, the founder and chairman of MBI, a company that sells collectibles," The founder of a collectibles company founded the psychiatric research center? Yikes! Prior to discovery of the human genome, causes of mental illnesses were unknown? "The topic of mental health is personal for Stanley. His son, Jonathan, suffered from severe bipolar disorder," There is an national lobbyist entity for drug companies which promotes drug treatment founded by parents of mental patients. Why are persons with disabilities prevented from speaking for themselves? Do homosexuals, black people and women need their mentors to speak for them, to tell others what they need? These alleged illnesses, created by consensus, are symptoms, protected behavior and speech, which are treated with drugs. How will these drugs affect the human genome? Will future treatment be genetically enhanced humans to "cure" mental illnesses, i.e., to curb undesirable speech and behavior? The goal of connecting psychiatry to science, without evidence, is getting exponentially obtuse and absurd. More, more money is needed. Is obsession with fund raising a possible new mental disorder? 
[From article]
Mental illnesses are only accessible to researchers through new understandings of genetics.
[. . .]
progress in the study of mental illnesses seems more attainable than ever, those involved with the center say.
[. . .]
“Human genomics has begun to reveal the causes of these disorders,” said Stanley, the founder and chairman of MBI, a company that sells collectibles,
[. . .]
“This kind of commitment makes it possible to take risks...to design projects that are high-risk but would be transformational if they succeed,” McCarroll said.
The topic of mental health is personal for Stanley. His son, Jonathan, suffered from severe bipolar disorder,

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2014/7/27/broad-record-psychiatric-gift/

Record-Setting $650M Donation Paves Way for Psychiatric Research at Broad
By TYLER S. OLKOWSKI

Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
July 26, 2014

Scientists Suggest Humans May Live to 500

[From article]
Adding the two together might have been expected to extend longevity by 130 per cent, but the combined impact turned out to be much greater.
The research may explain why it has proved so difficult to identify single genes responsible for the long lives enjoyed by human centenarians.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2523086/Could-humans-live-500-years-old-Scientists-believe-genetic-tweaks-significantly-extend-lifespan.html

Could humans live to 500 years old? Scientists believe genetic tweaks could significantly extend our lifespan
Californian scientists tweaked two genetic pathways in the worm Caenorhabditis elegans to amplify its lifespan
They said the worms lived to the human equivalent of 400 to 500 years
Research raises the prospect of anti-ageing treatments based on genetic interactions, and the next step is to investigate if the effects occur in mice
By SARAH GRIFFITHS
Daily Mail (UK)
PUBLISHED: 06:16 EST, 13 December 2013 | UPDATED: 06:40 EST, 13 December 2013

Screening For Gene Flaws in Fetuses Soon Possible

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2155666/Scientists-soon-screen-unborn-babies-3-500-genetic-disorders-raising-fears-increase-abortions.html

Scientists could soon screen unborn babies for 3,500 genetic disorders, raising fears of an increase in abortions
Daily Mail (UK)
PUBLISHED: 19:31 EST, 6 June 2012 | UPDATED: 04:08 EST, 7 June 2012

SCOTUS, To District Court, Rehear DNA Patent Case

[From article]
"The justices' decision sends the case back down for a continuation of the battle between the scientists who believe that genes carrying the secrets of life should not be exploited for commercial gain and companies that argue that a patent is a reward for years of expensive research that moves science forward."

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/top-us-court-throws-out-human-gene-patents-20120327-1vv6d.html

Top US court throws out human gene patents
March 27, 2012 - 7:24AM
AP
Sydney Morning Herald (Australia)

Test Tube Meat Coming Soon

[From article]
"Last autumn the Telegraph reported that Prof Mark Post of Maastricht University in the Netherlands had grown small strips of muscle tissue from a pig's stem cells, using a serum taken from a horse foetus."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9091628/Test-tube-hamburgers-to-be-served-this-year.html

Test tube hamburgers to be served this year
The world's first test tube hamburger will be served up this October after scientists perfected the art of growing beef in the lab.
By Nick Collins, Science Correspondent, in Vancouver
8:00PM GMT 19 Feb 2012

Congress Bans GM Salmon

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2004315/Congress-bans-FDA-approving-genetically-modified-fish.html

No 'Frankensalmon' in America: Congress bans FDA from approving genetically modified fish
By Daily Mail (UK) Reporter
Last updated at 4:42 PM on 16th June 2011

Sloppy Science Uses Gene Theories

The same kind of sloppy science applies to what psychiatrists (including Paul Appelbaum) try to show about mental illnesses, which are created by consensus. See Margaret Hagan's Whores of the Court, e.g. A mental illness is behavior or speech that psychiatrists do not like or do not understand. Many times the speech and behavior are protected by the US Constitution, but are punished by the psychiatric industry with the help of the police power of the state. What other disease requires police to enforce diagnoses?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-12-07/does-the-slut-gene-exist/2/

Does the Slut Gene Exist

Daily Beast

December 7, 2010

by Casey Schwartz Info

Casey Schwartz is a graduate of Brown University and has a Masters Degree in psychodynamic neuroscience from University College London. She has previously written for The New York Sun and ABC News. Currently, she's working on a book about the brain world.

Liberal Gene Found

What is the definition of "friends" for this study?

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/weird/Scientists-May-Have-IDd-Liberal-Gene-105917218.html

Scientists Find 'Liberal Gene'
Study conducted by researchers at UCSD, Harvard
By ERIC S. PAGE
Updated 5:16 PM PDT, Wed, Oct 27, 2010

What is a Jew?

[From article]
"JEWS were expelled from what is now Israel in roughly the sixth century BC and again in the second century AD.
[. . .]
Both studies also find that Jews have a strong genetic link to modern Palestinians, Druze and Bedouins,

[. . .]
The question is whether the children of intermarried couples who identify themselves as Jewish are actually Jewish. Genetics might say no, but tradition and Jewish law would (in most cases) say yes.

[. . .]

To the religious, Judaism is defined by customs and beliefs. To the secular, Jews are members of an ethnic “tribe,” a tribe that knows from good bagels."

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/genetic_testing_raises_people_religion_JfhLi1jF4WntIkfx46Mi6J

Genetic testing raises an age-old question — are the Jews a people, or a religion?

By MAYRAV SAAR

New York Post

Last Updated: 5:15 AM, June 13, 2010

Posted: 12:15 AM, June 13, 2010