From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sat May 25 2002 - 12:20:56 MDT
On Sat, 25 May 2002, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> No offense, but I think you over-estimate our current abilities. We are
> just mapping the genome now. We do not have the ability to turn genes
> on and off, much less totally re-engineer the entire genome to control
> what results from a DNA strand. I would be greatly interested in any
> references that describe such an ability.
Rafal's comments on this made me go back and look at it (I haven't been
reading the thread).
Actually Harvey our ability to turn genes on and off is much more robust
than you think -- Sangamo BioSciences (www.sangamo.com) is developing a
number of tools that allow for the specific regulation of genes based
on designer zinc-finger-proteins.
Regarding re-engineering the genome, if you had *read* my business plan
you would know that the primary barrier to whole genome engineering at
this time is cost, not capabilities. And there are ways to address
that problem.
Why I don't bother reading the cloning debate discussions much anymore
is because:
(a) designer genomes is the way to go and can be achieved in this decade;
(b) natural eukaryotic genomes have the problem of *very* long cell cycle
time (~24 hours). If you want to grow *affordable* replacement organs
you don't want to grow a whole body from which to harvest them. You
want to grow an organ from a genome specifically designed to grow
a specific organ in the shortest amount of time possible in a GMP
manufacturing facility.
I think technological progress will rapidly take us out of the whole
messy debate (and thrust us into a different one). The only use I
see for studying stem cells at this time is to identify those growth
factors that are essential for the development of various tissues.
That knowledge will prove useful for the development of designer
organ stem-cells.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:22 MST