[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 509 KB, 1600x900, 1345333135584.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4987044 No.4987044 [Reply] [Original]

just wondering

>> No.4987102 [DELETED] 

No, we cannot keep genetic conditions out of the DNA.

First, we don't have a map of where all those things are located in DNA (or alternatives).
But we also don't understand the body nearly well enough to start 'fixing' it, we barely can make some conditional statements about what some DNA areas 'do,' and we know for sure that most DNA sequences do more than one thing.

So, you're asking essentially if we can re-write the instructions, when we cannot yet read the instructions, don't know how to edit them, don't have any words to put in their place, and can't tell what it would say if we tried.

>> No.4987223 [DELETED] 

>>4987102
wat

>> No.4987226 [DELETED] 

Look, DNA is not like a set of written instructions.
It doesn't make discrete arguments about specific things; it doesn't even have an alphabet we can use, let alone a codebook of structures.

So we cannot just 'rewrite' a set of new instructions in DNA-language.
Period.

We can expect to, (AFTER we master cloning perfectly, and genetic recoding PERFECTLY!) remove KNOWN problematic sequences that do not affect desirable sequences -- but having that kind of knowledge about what all the DNA tells us is not something you should expect to see in a lifetime.

>> No.4987230 [DELETED] 

>>4987223
he means no. no we cant do the thing you said yet

>> No.4987231 [DELETED] 

>like in starwars?

In the Star Wars movie they cloned (perfectly) but they had a near-perfect specimen on hand.
They didn't have to recode the genetics; they just had to find a suitable subject original.

>> No.4987235 [DELETED] 

What was that original guy's name?
Char Siu?
Manapua Ho?
Pork with Lobster Sauce?