DailyDirt: GMO, GMO, Wherefore Art Thou, GMO?

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Genetically modifying animals and plants is a growing concern -- with some people totally against the idea. And there are now a variety of biotech tools that make defining GMOs a bit less clear-cut for the general public. Taking a gene from a sea animal and putting into a pig sounds extremely unnatural, but does simply removing a gene sound as bad? Or what if farmers used traditional breeding techniques to get to a particular genetic end goal that was discovered by less "natural" genetic experimentation?

• If scientists merely remove genes, not add any new genes, does that qualify as a genetically modified organism? Using CRISPR/Cas9 techniques, a researcher created a button mushroom that doesn't brown after it's cut -- by removing some genetic material to turn off an enzyme -- and the USDA says that's not a GMO mushroom. (However, this decision may change.) [url]
• There are at least a couple engineered genetic "kill switches" for genetically modified microbes. Have researchers not seen/read Jurassic Park? Or Blade Runner? [url]
• Off-patent generic GMO soy beans are starting to enter the market since it's been about 20 years since Monsanto developed them. Out of about 84 million acres of soybeans planted in the US, only a couple thousand or so acres will be seeded with generic Roundup Ready knockoffs. Monsanto has a Roundup Ready 2 variant that's still under patent protection (as well as another version still pending approval), so don't worry about not being able to buy the authentic stuff. [url]

After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Filed Under: biotech, crispr, genetically modified organism, gmo, jurassic park, kill switch, roundup ready
Companies: monsanto

DailyDirt: Nature Vs. CRISPR

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The reality of designer babies seems to be more and more likely -- especially now that gene editing tools like CRISPR are becoming more refined and widespread in labs around the world. Legitimate concerns over a modern form of eugenics are being raised, and the ethical debates are getting less theoretical as the science pushes the boundaries of what can be done. People might be able to activate or delete genes without fully understanding the results, and the advances that can eliminate genetic disorders could also eliminate certain minorities or traits that are not necessarily disabilities.

• British researchers will be performing gene-editing experiments on human embryos, but they're not going to be making full-term babies -- yet. Britain's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority is the first regulator to approve this kind of genetic tinkering (although plenty of countries don't require permission at all), and British lawmakers have previously voted in favor of allowing babies to be made from the DNA of three parents to prevent genetic disorders. (So perhaps a modified clone of Benedict Cumberbatch will actually become Khan Noonien Singh someday.) [url]
• Genetic discrimination is going to be a thing soon. A kid was removed from school because he has genetic markers for cystic fibrosis (and not the actual condition). A lawsuit is now working its way through the system to determine if the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) or the Americans With Disabilities Act will apply to future such cases of discrimination. [url]
• Someone might have the genes for a particular trait, but it may never be expressed. Researchers have discovered a way to activate some genes that are inaccessible and non-functioning -- but so far only in mice. Are you pondering what I'm pondering? [url]

After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Filed Under: ada, biology, biotech, crispr, designer babies, dna, eugenics, gattaca, gene activation, gene editing, genetics, germline, gina

DailyDirt: Creating Superfoods For Fun Profit

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Feeding billions of people isn't an easy task. Farming isn't actually the hardest part. Food distribution and food waste are much more challenging than simply growing more food for people. It's good that we have multiple biotech solutions for making plants and animals that are easier to raise and grow, but some of the concerns about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) aren't totally unfounded. Turning back the clock on genetic research isn't going to happen, but we should also keep an eye on what's going on.

• Dupont and Caribou Biosciences are working on CRISPR technology to modify the genes of food crops, predicting that CRIPSR GMO foods will be on dinner plates by 2020. Genetically modified corn and wheat plants are already being grown in greenhouses, and many other plants are being tested, too: soybeans, rice, tomatoes, potatoes -- even allergy-free peanuts. The resulting plants have no genes from other species, so it may be much easier to avoid GMO regulations with these kind of gene-edited crops. [url]
• Yum yum. A succulent red marine algae called dulse looks like translucent red lettuce, is high in protein, and tastes like bacon when cooked. This strain of dulse is patented, but the claims don't mention its bacon-y goodness. So get back in the lab and start creating more bacon-flavored species, already! [url]
• Many scientists are hard pressed to find the harm in creating genetically modified organisms -- because genes are genes. However, there are still concerns with monoculture crops and creating a food supply chain that is dominated by a handful of companies. [url]

Hold on. If you're still reading this, head over to our Daily Deals to save an additional 10% on any item in our Black Friday collection -- using the code: 'EARLY10' -- just through this Sunday, November 22nd.

Filed Under: algae, bacon, biotech, crispr, dulse, farming, food, food supply chain, genes, genetics, gmo, plants
Companies: caribou biosciences, dupont

DailyDirt: What's In Your... DNA?

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Biotechnology doesn't have quite the same milestones of progress as Moore's Law, but as we unravel how biology works, we're going to have incredibly powerful tools to change the world. Sure, we're going to need to figure out the ethical ramifications of a GATTACA-esque future where designer babies are possible and replicants/clones can be grown for replacement parts. But it might take a while still before we're engineering lifespans and curing the disease of aging.

• Remnants of an ancient virus have been found in human stem cells' DNA, and this kind of viral material was once considered "Junk DNA" -- but may actually play a critical role in human development. Apparently, human embryonic stem cells require certain bits of DNA to act like stem cells (ie. be pluripotent, able to turn into over 200 different kinds of cells in the human body) -- and those critical bits of DNA are from a retrovirus that infected our ancestors' DNA millions of years ago. [url]
• Chromosomal proteins are intertwined with DNA, and these proteins play a critical role in determining when DNA is triggered to do its job. It's still not completely known how these chromosomal proteins evolved, but changes in these proteins can cause harmful mutations and cancer -- as well as improved cell performance. Learning more about these proteins and how they interact with DNA could lead to a much better understanding of certain diseases -- and even more fundamental clues to how life has evolved. [url]
• CRISPR is an incredibly important biological tool, allowing scientists to edit DNA much more easily than ever before... and it's a tool that can be used to delete HIV from human DNA. HIV is a retrovirus (so it puts its own genetic information into a host's DNA), and being able to remove it from a living cell could someday provide a cure -- and lead to other effective treatments for various intractable viral infections. [url]

After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Filed Under: biotech, cancer, chromosomal proteins, crispr, dna, genetics, junk dna, stem cells, viruses

Will Molecular Biology's Most Important Discovery In Years Be Ruined By Patents?

from the GNU-Emacs-for-DNA dept

Techdirt readers hardly need to be reminded that, far from promoting innovation, patents can shut it down, either directly, through legal action, or indirectly through the chill they cast on work in related areas. But not all patents are created equal. Some are so slight as to be irrelevant, while others have such a wide reach that they effectively control an entire domain. Patents on a new biological technique based on a mechanism found in nature, discussed in a long and fascinating piece in the Boston Review, definitely fall into the second category. Here's the article's explanation of the underlying mechanism, known as CRISPR-Cas:

Bacteria use CRISPR-Cas to attack the DNA of invading viruses. The workings of this natural defense mechanism were elucidated through basic research carried out mostly within universities. By hijacking and recombining its bacterial parts -- a flexible kind of engineering that is the hallmark of molecular biology -- researchers have shown how CRISPR-Cas can be used to edit the human genome, or any genome, in principle.

CRISPR-Cas can be thought of as the first really powerful and general-purpose genome editor -- a GNU Emacs for DNA. It is widely expected that it will have a massive impact on molecular biology, both for pure research and in industrial applications. Given those very high stakes, it will not come as a surprise to learn that there is already a fierce tussle over who owns a key patent in this field:

A patent battle is raging between the University of California, Berkeley and the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. MIT's Technology Review has called the legal dispute a "winner-take-all match" with "billion-dollar implications," as the contenders all have stakes in startup companies based on the technique. The Broad team was granted the first patent in 2014, but the Berkeley group filed paperwork contesting the decision.

As the Boston Review rightly points out, the Broad Institute patent is problematic for several reasons. It is very general, and lays claim to using CRISPR-Cas to edit all animal and plant DNA. The Broad Institute has granted an exclusive license for therapeutic applications, which means that the company concerned has a monopoly on what is expected to be one of the most important areas for CRISPR-Cas. Any other company wanting to use the technique, even for non-therapeutic work, must pay for a license. To top it all, it's generally accepted that CRISPR-Cas is the result of a global, collaborative effort:

Academics around the globe, from Japan to Lithuania to Spain and the United States, have contributed to our understanding of CRISPR-Cas. No group can claim sole credit for discovering the system or the know-how for using it to edit genomes.

And yet the winner of the current patent battle, whether the Broad Institute, or the University of California, is likely to end up with immense power over the use of CRISPR-Cas. The article notes:

Monopolizing a core technology developed collectively using public funding ought to require an extraordinary argument. Even if we limit ourselves to looking through the economic lens, this would require making the case that a monopoly on CRISPR-Cas therapeutics would be so wildly effective -- and wide enough in scope to tackle the huge range of diseases mentioned in the patent -- that it would far outweigh competitive efforts with tens, or hundreds of other companies. In the current debate, no such argument has been given.

As well as giving many other details about this important case and its historical background, the Boston Review article goes on to suggest an alternative approach to one based on intellectual monopolies, one that builds on the fact that CRISPR-Cas is a tool for editing the biological software at the heart of all life:

We can take a leaf from the software world's book and sketch a free biology (as in "free software") that respects these responsibilities. This will require new mechanisms for describing research ownership and sharing that are in the public interest and that support the university’s research branch.

Although that may sound Utopian, for biology at least, it's starting to happen:

Synthetic biology is already making steps in this direction, with projects such as BioBricks that provide a mechanism for scientists to contribute their work to a public registry and allow others to build on it.

Moreover, for those who think the idea of free biology will never really take off, it's worth remembering people said the same about free software, which now powers most of the digital world.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+

Filed Under: crispr, dnam crispr-cas, patents
Companies: cal, harvard, mit, university of california berkeley

DailyDirt: Creating A New Best Friend For Us...

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Dogs are often referred to as man's best friend, but it's not certain how this relationship developed in the first place. Did early humans purposefully domesticate dogs from their wild ancestors, or did we just stumble upon nearly tame dogs and develop a bond? Experiments such as the domesticated fox demonstrate that it's not too hard to tame certain animals in a relatively short period of time. Perhaps we're on the cusp of even more advanced domestication techniques, and hyper-intelligent parrots are just around the corner. GMO pets could be our next best friends.

• Micropigs are genetically modified pigs that were originally created to serve as a convenient animal model for studying human diseases, but they're just so darn cute that they'll be sold as pets, too. Pigs are naturally closer to human physiology than rats or mice, but growing full-size (~200 lb) mature pigs is a daunting task for a research lab. A micropig that's about the size of a small dog is a more efficient for studying -- and there just happens to be a market for people who want tiny pigs as pets. [url]
• Genetically engineered dogs are an obvious target for creating customized dogs for various purposes, as pets or police/military or hunting tools. Super-strong beagles may be the first genetically modified dog breed using CRISPR techniques, and the resulting dogs could start a germline editing revolution for a number of different animals... including our own offspring. [url]
• A hairless guinea pig was created in a Canadian lab in the mid-70s, and now, these "skinny pigs" are becoming a pet. The research variety is available from 1-800-LAB-RATS if you ever need to do some dermatological testing. [url]

After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Filed Under: biotech, crispr, dogs, domesticated animals, gattaca, genetics, germline, gmo, lab rats, micropigs, pets, skinny pigs

DailyDirt: Growing Backup Organs

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Medical science has advanced quite a bit with organ transplants, but there's still the problem of matching donors and the "availability" of organs. Obviously, there are some ethical issues with buying/selling human organs, but getting organs from non-human mammals has its own set of problems, too. The engineering challenges are slowly being solved, and we might be able to grow backup organs in a few years. Maybe.

• Pigs have long been a leading candidate for growing replacement human organs, despite concerns over genetic differences, disease transmission and organ rejection. Still, researchers have edited over 60 genes in some pig embryos to make these animals more compatible in human transplant recipients. Don't go destroying your liver just yet, though; it'll be a while before these genetically engineered pigs are ready to donate their organs safely to people. [url]
• Primitive human kidneys have been grown from stem cells in a lab -- possibly leading to growing more mature kidneys for organ transplants someday. The "organoids" that have been grown so far have some, but not all, of the key features that a full kidney has. So this development is still pretty far from preventing people from needing dialysis, but it could be useful for studying how kidneys react to new drugs and help researchers understand how other complex organs might be grown from stem cells. [url]
• Xenotransplantation isn't a new idea, but getting organs from different species to avoid rejection is still a significant challenge. Genetically modified pigs have been used as organ donors for baboons with encouraging results: a baboon lived for 2.5 years with a pig heart implant, another baboon lived 4 months with a "life-sustaining" pig kidney. [url]

After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Filed Under: biotech, crispr, gene editing, gmo, kidneys, medicine, organ transplant, organoids, stem cells, xenotransplantation

DailyDirt: Biotech's Own Exaflood?

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Studying biology takes time. Computer software/hardware has a Moore's law clockcycle that keeps things chugging along at a pretty good clip, but the biotech revolution is growing at a slightly slower pace. Sure, we've seen some cloning, genetically modified organisms and a wide variety of promising medical advances. Perhaps the biotech industry doesn't have an exponentially-growing metric to rally around, but solid progress is leading to an enormous amount of accumulated data, knowledge and possibilities.

• Gene editing technology may become an incredibly important tool, but if the entire field becomes bogged down in a patent thicket, people may die needlessly. Researchers have developed an alternative to CRISPR-Cas9 techniques, but the patent fights and commercialization rights surrounding gene editing techniques will likely continue. [url]
• The "telomerator" is a genetic tool that will allow researchers to study the yeast genome and genetics in general. Genetically engineered microorganisms will be easier to make and study -- and the resulting synthetic yeast genes can be designed to be better models for the biology of higher organisms, such as humans. [url]
• Genome sequencing creates a LOT of data -- even just for human genomes, not counting all the other species out there. By 2025, predictions estimate that a billion people could have their individual genomes sequenced, and all of this information is going to need to be stored somewhere (other than in our bodies), digitally. [url]

After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Filed Under: biotech, crispr, gene editing, genome, genome sequencing, gmo, telomerator, yeast

DailyDirt: Life As We Know It...

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

All the biology we study today is based on life that relies on DNA (and RNA) to propagate. The ability to control DNA sequences will have a profound effect on our environment and society. We can already create synthetic lifeforms, but are we responsible enough to play with biotechnological fire?

• Editing DNA precisely could change a lot of things. The Crispr-Cas9 technique for editing genes isn't perfect, so it could do a lot of good -- or a lot of damage. It can be applied to people or bacteria or just about any living thing we know about, and we'll have to figure out whether our edits are improvements or bioweapons. [url]
• GMO animals might be cruelty free -- if we can engineer farm animals to not feel pain? We're not quite up to speed with Douglas Adams yet, but hornless Holsteins and other mutants might be ready for the dinner table soon. [url]
• Gene editing is one biotech tool, and gene activation is another -- and they're both related. Steering the epigenome and turning certain genes on or off could create gene therapies that cure disease or increase longevity.... [url]

After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Filed Under: biology, biotech, crispr, dna, douglas adams, epigenome, gene activation, gene editing, gene therapies, gmo, hornless holsteins, rna, synthetic lifeforms

DailyDirt: Waiting For Superman... From A Test Tube

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The concept of creating superhumans using genetic engineering has been around for quite some time in science fiction, but now that it's almost becoming a practical thing to do, there are some scientists calling for a moratorium on experimenting with germline engineering until we can debate the issue and come to some consensus on what should be considered ethical. Treating diseases with drugs/radiation/whatever may let an individual patient live longer, but messing with embryonic DNA could have more lasting effects because whatever genetic edits are made will be passed down to future generations (well, unless genetically modified humans are purposely made sterile...). This kind of medicine is going to be controversial for the foreseeable future, but it's going to be done somewhere as the science and technology behind it gets better.

• Chinese researchers at Sun Yat-Sen University have already experimented with germline engineering, editing the DNA of human fertilized eggs to remove a blood disease called beta-thalassemia. Their method reveals that a lot more work needs to be done for germline engineering to become a reliable process for treating genetic diseases. They used abnormal embryos that could not be grown further for this particular study, but it's entirely conceivable that future experiments could be done with viable embryos. [url]
• Some optimists are not too concerned with the issues of creating superhumans. Perhaps superhumans will be benevolent and create a better world, but there's no guarantee that super intelligence correlates with super empathy or super kindness. There are no guarantees in life, period, but perhaps we can slow down the rate of problems we create...? [url]
• A three-parent IVF procedure can prevent certain mitochondrial disorders. Children born using this technique have DNA from their "traditional" parents PLUS mitochondrial DNA from a donor mother, and there are presumably some 3-parent teenagers walking around the world right now. [url]

After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Filed Under: biotech, crispr, designer babies, dna, eugenics, gattaca, genetic engineering, germline engineering, gmo, ivf, mitochondria, superhuman, three-parent ivf