Loss of Bee

There’s been some significant news coming out about the decline in the numbers of Apis mellifera, also known as the European honey bee, the world’s most widely distributed semi-domesticated insect. This news doesn’t just mean a shortage of honey for toast and tea. In fact, the economic value of honey, wax and other bee products is trivial in comparison with the honeybee’s services as a pollinator. However, more than 90 crops in North America rely on honeybees to transport pollen from flower to flower, effecting fertilization and allowing production of fruit and seed. Let’s say that again. 9 of 10 crops rely on the bee to pollinate and grow to harvest. The amazing versatility of the species is worth an estimated $14 billion a year to the United States economy.

There’s still no concrete evidence about what is killing the millions and billions of bees around the country, but there are a lot of guesses. One of those is called Colony Collapse Disorder phenomenon:

The phenomenon is recent, dating back to autumn, when beekeepers along the east coast of the US started to notice the die-offs. It was given the name of fall dwindle disease, but now it has been renamed to reflect better its dramatic nature, and is known as colony collapse disorder.

It is swift in its effect. Over the course of a week the majority of the bees in an affected colony will flee the hive and disappear, going off to die elsewhere. The few remaining insects are then found to be enormously diseased – they have a “tremendous pathogen load”, the scientists say. But why? No one yet knows. (from Celsias)

The latest body of evidence has brought under scrutiny the huge risks of using Genetically Engineered crops and in this case, in particular insect resistant crops producing the Bt-toxin have caused parasite infected bees die at a higher rate (Organic Consumers Association).

Other notes: NY Times opinion

The Island of Dr. Moreau Exists!

If you don’t know the H.G. Wells science fiction classic The Island of Dr. Moreau, its a fantastic story “demented” scientist who performs gene-splicing research on animals in order to create a superior race of humans. This classic nightmare is coming closer to fruition as modern scientists rearange animal genes to discover new vaccinations, learn how species evolved and to simply create “new and improved” companion animals.

Through Moreau’s experiments, the doctor has transformed various beasts into strange looking man-creatures, “human in shape, and yet human beings with the strangest air about them of some familiar animal.”

A more modern instance today is Transgenic Pets, LLC, of Syracuse, N.Y., plans to sell cats who have been genetically engineered so that they won’t trigger allergies in people… sounds good for my father and sister who are allergic, but hey they are dog people now because of the allergy and that’s just how nature works.

Here’s a current article on Animal-Human splicing that’s taking place and moving us closer to that Dr. Moreau imagery. Animal-Human Hybrids Spark Controversy
Maryann Mott
National Geographic News – January 25, 2005

Scientists have begun blurring the line between human and animal by producing chimeras a hybrid creature that’s part human, part animal.

Chinese scientists at the Shanghai Second Medical University in 2003 successfully fused human cells with rabbit eggs. The embryos were reportedly the first human-animal chimeras successfully created. They were allowed to develop for several days in a laboratory dish before the scientists destroyed the embryos to harvest their stem cells.

In Minnesota last year researchers at the Mayo Clinic created pigs with human blood flowing through their bodies.

And at Stanford University in California an experiment might be done later this year to create mice with human brains.

Scientists feel that, the more human like the animal, the better research model it makes for testing drugs or possibly growing “spare parts,” such as livers, to transplant into humans.

Watching how human cells mature and interact in a living creature may also lead to the discoveries of new medical treatments.

But creating human-animal chimeras named after a monster in Greek mythology that had a lion’s head, goat’s body, and serpent’s tail has raised troubling questions: What new subhuman combination should be produced and for what purpose? At what point would it be considered human? And what rights, if any, should it have?

There are currently no U.S. federal laws that address these issues.

Ethical Guidelines

The National Academy of Sciences, which advises the U.S. government, has been studying the issue. In March it plans to present voluntary ethical guidelines for researchers.

A chimera is a mixture of two or more species in one body. Not all are considered troubling, though.

For example, faulty human heart valves are routinely replaced with ones taken from cows and pigs. The surgery “which makes the recipient a human-animal chimera” is widely accepted. And for years scientists have added human genes to bacteria and farm animals.

What’s caused the uproar is the mixing of human stem cells with embryonic animals to create new species.

Biotechnology activist Jeremy Rifkin is opposed to crossing species boundaries, because he believes animals have the right to exist without being tampered with or crossed with another species.

He concedes that these studies would lead to some medical breakthroughs. Still, they should not be done.

“There are other ways to advance medicine and human health besides going out into the strange, brave new world of chimeric animals,” Rifkin said, adding that sophisticated computer models can substitute for experimentation on live animals.

“One doesn’t have to be religious or into animal rights to think this doesn’t make sense,” he continued. “It’s the scientists who want to do this. They’ve now gone over the edge into the pathological domain.”

David Magnus, director of the Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics at Stanford University, believes the real worry is whether or not chimeras will be put to uses that are problematic, risky, or dangerous.

Human Born to Mice Parents?

For example, an experiment that would raise concerns, he said, is genetically engineering mice to produce human sperm and eggs, then doing in vitro fertilization to produce a child whose parents are a pair of mice.

“Most people would find that problematic,” Magnus said, “but those uses are bizarre and not, to the best of my knowledge, anything that anybody is remotely contemplating. Most uses of chimeras are actually much more relevant to practical concerns.”

Last year Canada passed the Assisted Human Reproduction Act, which bans chimeras. Specifically, it prohibits transferring a nonhuman cell into a human embryo and putting human cells into a nonhuman embryo.

Cynthia Cohen is a member of Canada’s Stem Cell Oversight Committee, which oversees research protocols to ensure they are in accordance with the new guidelines.

She believes a ban should also be put into place in the U.S.

Creating chimeras, she said, by mixing human and animal gametes (sperms and eggs) or transferring reproductive cells, diminishes human dignity.

“It would deny that there is something distinctive and valuable about human beings that ought to be honored and protected,” said Cohen, who is also the senior research fellow at Georgetown University’s Kennedy Institute of Ethics in Washington, D.C.

But, she noted, the wording on such a ban needs to be developed carefully. It shouldn’t outlaw ethical and legitimate experiments, such as transferring a limited number of adult human stem cells into animal embryos in order to learn how they proliferate and grow during the prenatal period.

Irv Weissman, director of Stanford University’s Institute of Cancer/Stem Cell Biology and Medicine in California, is against a ban in the United States.

“Anybody who puts their own moral guidance in the way of this biomedical science, where they want to impose their will” not just be part of an argument “if that leads to a ban or moratorium. “they are stopping research that would save human lives,” he said.

Mice With Human Brains

Weissman has already created mice with brains that are about one percent human.

Later this year he may conduct another experiment where the mice have 100 percent human brains. This would be done, he said, by injecting human neurons into the brains of embryonic mice.

Before being born, the mice would be killed and dissected to see if the architecture of a human brain had formed. If it did, he’d look for traces of human cognitive behavior.

Weissman said he’s not a mad scientist trying to create a human in an animal body. He hopes the experiment leads to a better understanding of how the brain works, which would be useful in treating diseases like Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease.

The test has not yet begun. Weissman is waiting to read the National Academy’s report, due out in March.

William Cheshire, associate professor of neurology at the Mayo Clinic’s Jacksonville, Florida, branch, feels that combining human and animal neurons is problematic.

“This is unexplored biologic territory,” he said. “Whatever moral threshold of human neural development we might choose to set as the limit for such an experiment, there would be a considerable risk of exceeding that limit before it could be recognized.”

Cheshire supports research that combines human and animal cells to study cellular function. As an undergraduate he participated in research that fused human and mouse cells.

But where he draws the ethical line is on research that would destroy a human embryo to obtain cells, or research that would create an organism that is partly human and partly animal.

“We must be cautious not to violate the integrity of humanity or of animal life over which we have a stewardship responsibility,” said Cheshire, a member of Christian Medical and Dental Associations. “Research projects that create human-animal chimeras risk disturbing fragile ecosystems, endanger health, and affront species integrity.”

Human Cloning: The next step in evolution?

Over the past several years researchers have gained the ability to clone human embryos, screen individuals for genetic abnormalities, and use transgenic techniques to transfer genes from one species to another. Before science proceeds to much further, humanity must analyze the moral and genetic implications of such research. I came across this site today: CloneAid. This is the first “publicly” established Human Coning company founded in 1997 by Ral – “Ral is the leader of the Raelian Movement, an international religious organization which claims that life on Earth was created scientifically through DNA and genetic engineering by a human extraterrestrial race whose name, ELOHIM, is found in the Hebrew Bible and was mistranslated by the word “God”. ” The words of Ral:

Cloning will enable mankind to reach eternal life. The next step, like the ELOHIM do with their 25,000 years of scientific advance, will be to directly clone an adult person without having to go through the growth process and to transfer memory and personality in this person. Then, we wake up after death in a brand new body just like after a good night sleep!

Now I find the population of our planet by Aliens a little too X-Files for me but I’ve come to find that anything is possible. However, for only $200,000 USD you can be cloned by the CloneAid research group and life can continue a new for you. It’s like I just laid down, counted a few Dollys and woke up in the morning…a new human. That simple huh! WTF? Does this set of any alarms here? Apparently the primary push for this technology is to treat infertility. But how many more companies or governments are going to spring up with the intentions CloneAid has…or worse? Also, the big questions that pop up with me are: Who’s going to control this? Who’s going to regulate this? Even if you regulate this would you trust anyone to do it ethically and safely? Certainly not our government.

If you can’t find the fountain of youth, why not create it genetically right? If this is perfected, this could be the end of the human cycle of life. Think about it. This site talks about recloning everything from your pets, to making babies, to avoiding the inevitable end of life: If you didn’t want to die you could just reclone your body and transfer all your memories into the new one. But there can be some good from the creation of this technology right? Yeah, I think that’s what they said about nuclear weapons too. I deeply urge anyone that reads this to protest and ban human cloning. Besides narrowing the gene pool, risking genetic deformation, retardation, and any unknown genetic repercussions, you are also avoiding a key component of life – death. Accept it. It’s part of living. It’s inevitable and the soon you come to terms with accepting this the better off you are discovering how precious life really is. The advocates would say, exactly…which is why you should support cloning to promote healthier life and to give life to those that can not make it themselves. I believe more in life is sacred and natural. Don’t fuck with it and it won’t fuck with you. If you can’t have kids, then maybe you were not supposed to. If fact there are too many people out there having kids when they shouldn’t be…why not take one of there’s?

Rather than going off further on this here are some links to sites on this – both pro and open ended…
* The Reproductive Cloning Network
* The Human Cloning Foundation
* The Ethical Question

“And in the end it’s not the years in your life that count. It’s the life in your years.”
Abraham Lincoln