Genetic Mutation and DNA Manipulation

[Consciouscitizen18]

A little bit of research has me thinking that this could be going on. It seems that research has been done to try and create humans with a 3rd strand of DNA? All people are born with 2, the Watson and Crick Double Helix. Some scientists are saying that they want to add 12 strands of DNA.

Farzad Mostashari Gives Keynote at HIMSS 2012 - YouTube Farzad Mostashari was the National Coordinator for Health IT and at 18:16-18:35 he says "Alongside this massive trend, are two other societal trends that we have to intertwine with to twist Health IT into alignment with if we're going to create a new triple strand of DNA for our nations healthcare system". Not allow Darwin's theories of natural selection and evolution play out but create a triple strand.

Scientists Finally Present Evidence on Expanding DNA Strands
Scientists Without Foresight Are Using Viruses To Alter Human DNA
12 Strand DNA - Changes Evidences and Remedies

In all of these links, DNA Mutation and Manipulation is elaborated on and is said to have been happening. IF this is true, where I can see it happening is through Viruses as a virus is the easiest way to change DNA. Has anybody done research on scientists manipulation of DNA? This is a risky technology if it exists and I wouldn't exactly trust the powers that be to possess it. Read the articles and tell me your guys' thoughts!

 

[indiucky]

Not allow Darwin's theories of natural selection and evolution play out but create a triple strand.

Mary Shelley's lesson from "Frankenstein's Monster"- Don't play God....

Now days....Don't play Darwin....

How far we have come...Or not....

 

[level.eleven]

Dr. Fox is the holistic practitioner of the Avalon Wellness Centre in Mt Shasta, California. The Avalon Clinic represents the re-emergence of the ideal of healing as practiced on the original Isle of Avalon.

... I'm working with FOX Television Network to bring about understanding of extraterrestrials and their role in what is happening with mankind at this time. The most well known are 'Sightings' and 'The X Files'.

... These are children who can move objects across the room just by concentrating on them, or they can fill glasses of water just by looking at them. They're telepathic. You would almost think by knowing these children that they are half angelic or superhuman, but they're not. I think they are what we are growing into during the next few decades.

Sweet Christmas! We have found Professor Xavier!

For the preppers out there, the other site is selling a milkshake that kills cancer cells. Better stock up those. Money in the bank when the SHTF.

 

[88GT]

Considering the outcome of a single extra chromosome, I find the chances of anything but utter failure for this to be extremely low.

Oh, and it's the Rosalind Franklin double helix. :P

 

[Consciouscitizen18]

Mary Shelley's lesson from "Frankenstein's Monster"- Don't play God....

Now days....Don't play Darwin....

How far we have come...Or not....

Darwin's Theories but God's creations. I believe that God's creations are not to be F'd with. He says "I knew you when you were in your mother's womb", and I believe that so because our DNA was his creation and it's being tampered with.

 

[88GT]

Darwin's Theories but God's creations. I believe that God's creations are not to be F'd with. He says "I knew you when you were in your mother's womb", and I believe that so because our DNA was his creation and it's being tampered with.

We can't talk about God here.

 

[Consciouscitizen18]

We can't talk about God here.

Does 3 day member get me out of that one?

 

[eldirector]

Read one of the 3 articles linked. Uh, yeah.

My formal training is "biology". While not an actual scientist, I'd like to think I understand the science pretty well.

My quick response? Not worth my time to read any farther.

 

[88GT]

Nope. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

 

[Consciouscitizen18]

Read one of the 3 articles linked. Uh, yeah.

My formal training is "biology". While not an actual scientist, I'd like to think I understand the science pretty well.

My quick response? Not worth my time to read any farther.

What tips me off is hearing out of the national Health IT Director's mouth that they are wanting to create a 3rd strand of DNA. Apparently 2 isn't good enough, and when it's proclaimed in a keynote speech I don't really think it's considered conspiracy anymore.

 

[eldirector]

Well, here is the transcript of that keynote.
Farzad Mostashari Gives Keynote at HIMSS 2012 - Subtitles (en)

I don't see him actually talking about adding a third strand of DNA to humans. That quote seems to be completely out of context. Maybe I am wrong?

Now, that said, genetics is a HUGE field right now. Plenty of things to be concerned about, for sure.

 

[Baditude]

Zombies woot about time

 

[Consciouscitizen18]

I highlighted it in the transcript, just something that caught me off guard because I have no clue why people in our health care system would need another strand of DNA.

Genetics is definitely at the cutting edge of modern technology and while there's some good stuff they're hiding a lot that we don't know.

And maybe this is just for Real life zombies for The Walking Dead?

 

[HoosierLife]

We can't talk about God here.

I talk about God all the time here








but I keep getting 30 day bans...

 

[CathyInBlue]

Someone's been watching The Fifth Element too long.

Deoxyribonucleic acid is so named because that is the chemical structure that it has. It's not called butane, because it doesn't have the chemical structure of butane. It's not called fructose, because it doesn't have the chemical structure of fructose. Words mean things, and chemicals have structures. Change the meaning, you change the word. Change the structure and you change the chemical. DNA comes composed of four, and only four, neucleotides: Guanine (G), Cytosine (C), Adenine (A), and Thymine (T).

C pairs with G. C does not pair with A, T, or another C.
G pairs with C. G does not pair with A, T, or another G.
A pairs with T. A does not pair with C, G, or another A.
T pairs with A. T does not pair with C, G, or another T.

Where, then, do you propose to shoehorn another neucleotide into that structure? Say you have a GC pair in a double helix chain. To make it a triple helix, you have to force another neuclotide into the already chemicly stable GC bond. Which neucleotide should it be?

A? Neither C, nor G, will bond with A.
T? Neither C, nor G, will bond with T.
G? The C will bond with it, breaking the existing G bond.
C? The G will bond with it, breaking the existing C bond.

So again, I ask, where are you gonna store the third strand of neucleotides?

In principle, if you had a completely novel creature using completely novel chemistry for their genetic code, you could have a creature that needed three parents to procreate, each parent contributing one strand of neucleotides, as all animal life on Earth does. This could convey significant benefits. If genetic inheritance worked for this triple helix, as it does for our double helix, then you would need all three copies of a genetic sequence to be defective for a bad gene to be able to express itself. If you inheritted just one bad copy of a gene from one of your three parents, you're still golden, since your other two parents have your back (assuming such a creature has a back to have) with their good copies of the gene. Even if you inheritted two bad copies of a gene from two of your three parents, you're still golden, since your third parent still has your back with their good copy of the gene. You would have to inherit not one, not two, but three copies of a defective gene in order to wind up succumbing to a genetic disease like sickle-cell, breast cancer, parkinson's, etc.

So, I could see an interesting academic exercise being made for a massive online game to develope such synthetic genetics. What I cannot see is a justification for such diversions as being of benefit to some form of national health care system, since there's absolutely zero basis for using viruses to deliver surplus genes to a third helical strand of neucleotides in our existing DNA structure based on our genetic chemistry.

 

[Consciouscitizen18]

Someone's been watching The Fifth Element too long.

Deoxyribonucleic acid is so named because that is the chemical structure that it has. It's not called butane, because it doesn't have the chemical structure of butane. It's not called fructose, because it doesn't have the chemical structure of fructose. Words mean things, and chemicals have structures. Change the meaning, you change the word. Change the structure and you change the chemical. DNA comes composed of four, and only four, neucleotides: Guanine (G), Cytosine (C), Adenine (A), and Thymine (T).

C pairs with G. C does not pair with A, T, or another C.
G pairs with C. G does not pair with A, T, or another G.
A pairs with T. A does not pair with C, G, or another A.
T pairs with A. T does not pair with C, G, or another T.

Where, then, do you propose to shoehorn another neucleotide into that structure? Say you have a GC pair in a double helix chain. To make it a triple helix, you have to force another neuclotide into the already chemicly stable GC bond. Which neucleotide should it be?

A? Neither C, nor G, will bond with A.
T? Neither C, nor G, will bond with T.
G? The C will bond with it, breaking the existing G bond.
C? The G will bond with it, breaking the existing C bond.

So again, I ask, where are you gonna store the third strand of neucleotides?

In principle, if you had a completely novel creature using completely novel chemistry for their genetic code, you could have a creature that needed three parents to procreate, each parent contributing one strand of neucleotides, as all animal life on Earth does. This could convey significant benefits. If genetic inheritance worked for this triple helix, as it does for our double helix, then you would need all three copies of a genetic sequence to be defective for a bad gene to be able to express itself. If you inheritted just one bad copy of a gene from one of your three parents, you're still golden, since your other two parents have your back (assuming such a creature has a back to have) with their good copies of the gene. Even if you inheritted two bad copies of a gene from two of your three parents, you're still golden, since your third parent still has your back with their good copy of the gene. You would have to inherit not one, not two, but three copies of a defective gene in order to wind up succumbing to a genetic disease like sickle-cell, breast cancer, parkinson's, etc.

So, I could see an interesting academic exercise being made for a massive online game to develope such synthetic genetics. What I cannot see is a justification for such diversions as being of benefit to some form of national health care system, since there's absolutely zero basis for using viruses to deliver surplus genes to a third helical strand of neucleotides in our existing DNA structure based on our genetic chemistry.

X and Y nucleotides have been genetically engineered Two New Letters for the DNA Alphabet - Popular Mechanics

It is very possible and happening from what I've read...just not sure what it's going to be used for.

 

[Dead Duck]

Geez -
You guys are all Blah-Blah-Geek Speek-Blah-Blah....



Just tell me what I have to do to grow some wings.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

View attachment 31066

I highlighted it in the transcript, just something that caught me off guard because I have no clue why people in our health care system would need another strand of DNA.

Genetics is definitely at the cutting edge of modern technology and while there's some good stuff they're hiding a lot that we don't know.

And maybe this is just for Real life zombies for The Walking Dead?

Not only is it impossible to have a triple-helix deoxyribonucleic acid "strand," the speaker in question is clearly calling for strengthening our healthcare system using analogous metaphor. Moreover, each base pair is a base pair, not a base triad: in DNA, only cytosine will bond to guanine, only adenine will bond to thymine. Uracil can substitute for thymine, but only in RNA, not DNA, and this is precisely its function in RNA. I appreciate the fact that you at least appear willing to contribute to the forums after having chased that Aimpoint so doggedly, but let's at least weed out things immersed this deeply in the realm of fantasy. DNA has base pairs, not base triads, and there's simply no way to get them to do so that wouldn't also irreversibly alter DNA into some different substance with different structure. Of all the insane things mankind is doing with genetic research these days, making triple-helixed DNA is not and cannot be among them.
That said, good to have you, I look forward to seeing and perhaps even learning from what you have to contribute. to , Jeff.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[CathyInBlue]

X and Y nucleotides have been genetically engineered Two New Letters for the DNA Alphabet - Popular Mechanics

It is very possible and happening from what I've read...just not sure what it's going to be used for.

Still doesn't result in triple helices.

The X and Y synthetic neucleotide pairs are still pairs and only compatible with one another and not intercompatible with any existing neucleotides.

C pairs with G. C does not pair with A, T, X, Y, or another C.
G pairs with C. G does not pair with A, T, X, Y, or another G.
A pairs with T. A does not pair with C, G, X, Y, or another A.
T pairs with A. T does not pair with C, G, X, Y, or another T.
X pairs with Y. X does not pair with C, G, A, T, or another X.
Y pairs with X. Y does not pair with C, G, A, T, or another Y.

Nice try, though. These synthetic neucleotides are by far more likely to result in novel human biological changes than some farcical triple helix, or indeed any form of DNA other than the established double helix form.