Manufacturing a New Human Species

http://www.coe.int/en/web/bioethics/-/manufacturing-a-new-human-species?redirect=http://www.coe.int/en/web/bioethics/home?p_p_id=101_INSTANCE_ZkNHfMdMuHNO&p_p_lifecycle=0&p_p_state=normal&p_p_mode=view&p_p_col_id=column-1&p_p_col_pos=1&p_p_col_count=3

Dear @Krishnan, I can not watch the video at the link provided, so I am bringing new links to the followers. 

https://innovativegenomics.org/debate-%EF%BF%BCmanufacturing-a-new-human-species/

http://clients.dbee.com/coe/webcast/index.php?id=20150930-2&lang=en

Once people start having a shortage of potable water and food, then the answer to your question is definitely NO. And we are over the limit of since many years now. There are enough people on the Globe

Hence, of course people can be produced in large numbers, but ever thought about the limits we are passing now concenrning food and potable water supply for world population? and Climate Change? there is not enough to feed global population any more and to give them a an equal oportunity future for personal and social development. Only the rich and the crooked can deplete the Earyh's resources as they likedo as they like. And that's what they do since centuries.

First of al there is only ONE human species now Homo Sapiens, nothing else! There are many human varieties, but only one human species. But as understand it, on huaman species is not enough! You want to engineer other Human species as well right? What kind of human species people do you want to engineer as a new human species? And what should your new human species look like? And especially, why and how should it or they be different from Homo sapiens? I sHome sapiens not good enough?

Cheers

Frank

Experiences have told that, with a little work, we humans can clone just about anything we want, from frogs to sheep—and probably even ourselves.

http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/cloning/whyclone/

I would like consider various points of view.

First of all, ethics, beliefs, moral and values; it is very import for us to understand why doing massive production. If it is right or wrong; this relies on moral. Try to put ourselves in the place of a human being that perhaps may survive successfully out of the cloning process; this relies on ethics. About values, if it is worth it to do it, while noticing so many other problems around the globe that are not going to be solved from the mass production of human beings. Moreover so many other problems, that for sure will arise from this situation of human massive production. Finally, beliefs, and on a very personal and subjective point of view, God for me, is very respectful with his creation and specially us, we have to be therefore far more respectful from what we are up today with creation, but, if we do not respect ourselves and nor even our bodies, what can we expect to happen for the rest of the creation?.

Misery appears when we put ourselves into necessities that are not required.

Through the scope of science, there are emergent properties into any living system where self-organizing behaviors are at work. Cells are a good example of such behaviors. Since we do not have enough control or information to forecast what may happen, trial-and-error is what we do, but we are dealing not with a piece of wood anymore, but with living matter; a human being. If there is sensitive dependence to initial conditions, or chaotic behaviors, we should remain skeptical since, things are not going to be as planned. Self –organizing behaviors are related with fractals and chaos. We have to accept pour limitations. That’s humbleness. Nature knows its own processes, we cannot create life; we can manipulate it on our corresponding human proportions. We just allow the circumstances to happen by increasing the probabilities so life may emerge by itself.         

From an industrial point of view there are control limits, they appear in between the median as an upper and lower limits. If we talk about massive production and us as a product (which is a very inhuman and obscene way) we have to note that to control just few variables of a product, there is a method called six sigma and It means at its best, that we are going to have 1 failure out of a one million of products. If we relate that concept of industrial engineering to a mass production of humans; where, each human being it is composed of thousands of millions of cells, I think it is going to be a massive failure.        

From the fur to the meat or bones, some animals are being produced massively. Black market is also involved on this and we are not animals.

Bottom line for me, mankind is unique, is special. We are not going to accomplish a better, massive and balanced method, compared to what nature has done efficiently, from millions of years of patience and progress.  

No

Cloning will be the required and emerging choice.

Request RG members not to discourage the contributions, if they have anything to counter, please post your views.

Sir

Why not infinitely multiplicate Madame Tussaud's (or Madame Tusad's) museum? Because the wax/paraffin bodies are better clones, available at lesser costs. They can also be factory made, in very large numbers.

Regards

There are more implications of morality and spirituality connected with it, however,  there is another group (of people) who affect the poor, good and innocent by disturbing and exploiting their core of life. If some real support is to be given to the vulnerable ones, then an alternative needs to be done. Further this idea has more consequences for genetic and bio engineering, testing, replacement organ market etc., This may be fictitious, but one day a race variant which may be Superior or Equal or subordinate would become manufactured .

Let's first face the adverse consequences of the environmental, climate, and artificial intelligence related externalities, before claiming to become the creator...

regards

In biology it is well known that while asexual reproduction only involves one organism (a cell actually, dividing in two genetically identical cells by mitosis (or cloning if you want), sexual reproduction requires both a male and a female. Some  unicellular organisms reproduce asexually, but in a certain phase of their reproductive cycle, sexual reproduction is needed. It actually happens to avoid cellular and hence species degeneration.

Most mammals and fish sexually reproduce. Some organisms like corals and komodo dragons reproduce sexually or asexually as do many other species.  Even prokaryotes perform sexual reproduction over a certain number of asexual produced generations, to avoid cellular degeneration and to build adaptation mechanisms in the genome to be able to cope with a changing bio-geochemical or climatic environment. Examples enough of extinct species during the millions of years of Darwinian evolution. Be genetically diverse (within species level) or become extinct.

In the long term (several generations), a lack of sexual reproduction causes a cell to lose its ability to adapt to the environment because it does not benefit from the genetic variation introduced by sexual reproduction. Hence, Krishnan, do you want to introduce the degeneration of the human species (one of your cloned humans species!) over several generations by cloning? Or did you solve the degeneration issue? Actually  does humanity need several generations of asexual Homo nutheads? Do we need that?

Even prokaryotic bacteria need sexual reproduction at regular time intervals during the different cellular generations they produce, to avoid the degeneration of their species. I lot of literature references on this phenomenon are available forthe intersted reader.

The difference beteen biology and molecular biology (and genetic engineering if you want). is the difference between meiosis and mitosis and hence the exchange of genetic information and the safekeeping of genetic diversity (within a species) over each gneration, versus the production of identical genomes, but with degeneration popping up after a number of genetically identical generations.

Again here, there is quite a difference between prokaryotes, plants, animals and Homo sapiens for that matter and the way they sexually reproduce. But at a certain point in time, even for prokaryotes, all organisms need sexual  reproduction to avoid degeneration and to keep intra-species genetical flexibility in shape.

I hope Krishnan, that you understand now, why sexual reproduction is needed in the reproduction of living organisms.

Dear @Frank, am I right? Sexual reproduction in order to avoid degeneration is known as transhumanism!

Hi Ljubomir,

I think, Transhumanism is something quite different. Have a look at Wikipedia and Transhumanism. According to me it has nothing to do with Genetics or Biology, unless there are different definitions of the concept. But I tend to think that Wikipedia has the right definition. I am not even sure that degeneration due to the absence of sexual reproduction has a specific name. But, The Y chromosome in the human genome is a special case. It does not have the ability to recombine during sexual reproduction

Without the ability to recombine during meiosis, the Y chromosome is unable to expose individual alleles (chromosome pairs or 2n chromosomes) to Darwinian natural selection. Deleterious alleles are allowed to "hitchhike" with beneficial neighbors, thus propagating maladapted alleles in to the next generation. Conversely, advantageous alleles may be selected against if they are surrounded by harmful alleles (background selection). Due to this inability to sort through its gene content, the Y chromosome is particularly prone to the accumulation of "junk" DNA. Massive accumulations of retrotransposable elements are scattered throughout the Y xhromosome. The random insertion of DNA segments often disrupts encoded gene sequences and renders them nonfunctional. However, the Y chromosome has no way of weeding out these "jumping genes". Without the ability to isolate alleles, ehnce, selection cannot effectively act upon them.

A clear, quantitative indication of this inefficiency is the entropy rate of the Y chromosome. Whereas all other chromosomes in the human genome have entropy rates of 1.5–1.9 bits per nucleotide (compared to the theoretical maximum of exactly 2 when ther eis no redundancy), the Y chromosome's entropy rate is only 0.84. This means the Y chromosome has a much lower information content relative to its overall length, hence it is more redundant.

The Y chromosome is unable to recombine during meiosis unlike the other human chromosomes; however, in 2003, researchers from MIT discovered a process which slows down the process of degradation. They found that the human Y chromosome is able to "recombine" with itself, using palindrome base pair sequences. Such a "recombination" is called gene conversion.

In the case of the Y chromosomes, the palindromes are coding DNA strings. These strings of bases contain functional genes important for male fertility. Most of the sequence pairs are more than 99.97% identical. The extensive use of gene conversion may play a role in the ability of the Y chromosome to edit out genetic mistakes and maintain the integrity of the relatively few genes it carries. In other words, since the Y chromosome is single, it has duplicates of its genes on itself instead of having a second, homologous, chromosome. When errors occur, it can use other parts of itself as a template to correct them.

Findings were confirmed by comparing similar regions of the Y chromosome in humans to the Y chromosomes of chimpanzees, bonobos and gorillas. The comparison demonstrated that the same phenomenon of gene conversion appeared to be at work more than 5 million years ago, when humans and the non-human primates diverged from each other.

Hence the Y chromosome is a special case in human sexual reproduction. Though be sure, it is only one of the many human chromosomes. Sexual reproduction remains a must. And let's not forget that women have X sex chromosomes, which have properties like all the other (non sex chromosomes)  in our human genome.

Dear @Frank, I have read it here : "The school of thought of avoiding death/degeneration is known as transhumanism. Many transhumanists focus on science and technology as their saviors - gene therapy, cryogenenics, etc.. " Link follows! They are using Wikipedia as a source in text. 

Thanks for your answer.

http://research.similarminds.com/gene-slavery-why-humans-are-so-stupid-and-likely-doomed/861

Ho,....., My question is producing more numbers without emotions and feelings, so that the newer species is separate and completely classified as a different being or may be even as an animal family with human related organs and do human directed activities (but not robots)

Yes indeed, like fighting wars, That's what we really lack these days.

Frank

Dear Krishnan

It seems from the tone of your latest post that man should not only assume godhood but also have its own serving army of slaves. 

Forgive me in advance for asking why do we need the manless flesh, at all? Perhaps, Frank Sir may answer better than me.

Regards

Let me be clear, i am not taking instances such extreme cases of war or slavery (Even though I close my eyes now, from such)

In normal, peaceful countries, the poor, innocent, illiterate and unaware are kidnapped, and their organs are stolen; in some other cases, they are lured and cheated for money and then exploited; even cases of cheating on surrogation. There are extreme cases where people against their wishes are made to do certain jobs for livelihood and on coercive environments. Where ever physical or continuous activities are arduous, and .....................etc.,

A demand over there is for manufacturing (again not Robots) through laboratory processes.

Krishnan Sir

I did not mean hurting your sentiments. But, sir, exploitation is in the nature of man. You cannot have an ideal world till the time the terms like the physical, political, and economic power are effaced from the human minds and society.

Regards

Human beings can be produced in large numbers and arguably are, but should not be for moral and ethical as well as environmental reasons that arise as a result of our  "mass production". 

 I beg your pardon but the question is the same as "can human being be terminated in large numbers" Re-produce is essentially re-making without any moral liability. No? Of course, we humans allow animal farming. So the moral line is not being stretched too far off our understanding of how to make and destroy biosphere habitats. 

We are human beings. We believe that we can think more creatively than other animals. Although, we don't really know about all the other animals, but it seems we have a talent for making things and changing our environments  - although not always in a good way.

 We are not objects to be produced in factories for the use of tyrants and slave drivers.  We should believe in placing positive values on human life and community that goes beyond the greed of owning things or valuing a person for what they own. We ought to value someone for the good things that they do. Not the riches in their purses.  The point of life is to create something better for those who come after us.  And to learn to live together with some kind respect for each other.  Life is not a business.

Dear @Anne, would you like to point out that humans have gone too far on the wrong path!?

The question came to me by recalling my memory of Malthus theory of population- Arithmetical & Geometrical proportion . where subsequent changes ,new methods,new technique have seen the day light where chances of abuse cannot be overlook .

Whatever the technique & methods be adopted & implemented by keeping in the mind the large number but we as human being are forgetting the fact that large number can minimize & reduce under the nature calamities where the nature is to remain more powerful .

Besides political disturbances & the war , terrorism, epidemic  day to day traffic accident are enough power to reduce the number .

This is my personal opinion 

what ever happened to human love, care, kindness,  fairness, justice, merit, talent  concern for the lives of other people??  

@ Anne

This question arose based on various real life incidents which had happened and also reported in developing countries.  What should not happen to human beings is happening for gain, hence this alternative thinking. 

The human dignity does not allow to treate men as numerical objective.

I recently saw this youtube clip, titled

Hard to believe

https://youtu.be/hpUXrH6M5UE

...........Your comments please

Human rights we barely remember what is this mean in my country (TURKEY).

Thousands person have detained, dismissed, jailed, cancelled the passports ... without evidence. Many people disappeared. It is hard to believe but it is true.

@Hatice you are right, in earlier days Human ruled the beings and now on to human beings themselves.... economic super powers suppress the less opportuned. Human beings are turning towards becoming animalistic loosening humanistic value.

We should try to be good human being in place of trying to produce human being. As for as creation or invention is concerned something that helps or facilitates the human life should be welcomed

@ Krishnan Umachandran, thanks for opening a discussion about human rights. We have to discuss this. We have only one world to live. If some parts of it broke, all human being will suffer a lot in future. Nobody have right make his/her children, grandchildren life miserable.

Putin Reveals What Future Technology Will Be 'More Terrible Than a Nuclear Bomb'

According to the president, genetic programming of human beings according to specific characteristics may prove a mortal danger for humanity. In his view, while genetic engineering provides immense opportunities, including in the field of pharmacology, it also carries with it tremendous risks.

"One can almost imagine that people will be able to create human beings with specific characteristics. This can be a brilliant mathematician, or a brilliant musician, but it can also be a soldier – a human being capable of fighting without fear, without compassion, without regret, or even pain," Putin said...

Putin emphasized that new technologies should be used effectively and implemented broadly. But humanity must never forget its morality and ethics, because their absence can lead to the destruction of mankind...

https://sputniknews.com/world/201710211058434736-putin-future-technology-danger/

Sharing link:

https://books.google.es/books?id=uac_DAAAQBAJ&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=Can+Human+Beings+be+produced+in+large+numbers?&source=bl&ots=8KCBUTRHgz&sig=cT09Rw9mRCNp89lbPzNsEkbzz78&hl=ca&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj59d3xhcfZAhVLtRQKHcFcBRwQ6AEwAXoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=Can%20Human%20Beings%20be%20produced%20in%20large%20numbers%3F&f=false

Regards!

Agree with@Frank Veroustraete.

Best regards

Full body transplant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0WV_bYGdFw

Human head-to-body transplant: revolutionary surgery - 36 Hrs and huge money for operation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhjqXOzJr_E

Adventrous happenings in our time. I envisioned it happening though. But what will be the aftermath of all this? The rich would definitely reign the world because they would be able to afford this wholly body transplant. I fear many innocent bodies, not accident victims would be used for such transplant. The unbridled power and it's selfish use may make this innovation a curse. Ethical concerns are always important issues in this regard.

Scientifically it can be done but ethically it is not acceptable.

By genetics and cloning technology it is possible I think so, But the way to meet population explosion early!

Regards

Dr. Kamath Madhusudhana

I thought there is only ONE Creator. Am I missing somebody else ?

This is all new to me.

• Ethical is the main say in this scientific progression. In specific organ transplant, the donor may be alive and would have given consent to donate a part of the organ to help a patient to revive. However in case of FBT the donor is the dead one, whose organs are authorized as donation by their family. Science per se doesn't know right or wrong, its the people who practice should follows ethics during application.
• Ethics of Organ Donation and Transplantation: An International Perspective - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIvAHO1XyPE