• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Should non-human DNA be introduced in humans?

«Chuckles»

Sharky
1,549
Posts
10
Years
  • Age 24
  • Seen Apr 29, 2023
Eff yes we should! Jellyfish can revert back to earlier stages in their lives I want to as well!
Also, we could have gills as well. Imagine the possibilities it's incredible.
I'd much prefer to become a cyborg but hey that's just me.

Also on topic: That would make a sweet movie, Cyborgs vs Synthetic mutants.

His avatar is the aperture science icon I think he knows more than we do...

Anyway I volenteer to be part of these testings as long as they let me go even if the experiement fails.

I would like wolf DNA because of speed strength and agility not to mention the perks of a pack mentality so i don't need to worry about anything unless the pack leader does and he is the one who makes everything happen
 

darkpokeball

Beware the Chainsaw Meowth 0.o
762
Posts
14
Years
Ah okay, I must have misread. So you mean gene splicing?



How? Do you mean using those already on death row that are going to die from injection or electric chair in use to further research? I think someone would much rather opt to be used to further medicine than to die by being injected by poisons. Or do you mean comparing brains that are otherwise "normal" to one that is considered "abnormal," finding the differences and searching for ways to unlock or repair where neurons may not be able to transmit and causing chemicals of the brain to be disrupted? Between stem cell research, examination of those few people with genetic immortality, and the comparison of neurons from one brain to another there may be ways to uncover the mysteries of Alzheimer's and memory loss, and the only way to understand a human brain, is by studying the human brain.
...As good as that sounds on paper, do you know how many humane groups would protest and cry out at this?
In fact, the same applies to everything regarding this topic. I'm all for it, it'd be interesting to see where non-human DNA in humans leads us, especially if it means longetivity and health. But then you start to think...what determines if you qualify for one of these or not? If Carol and Steve are blind, what would qualify them to get non-human DNA? What if they don't have money? Then you end up with one superior breed of humans who don't have to worry about disease or anything just because they were born rich and you get the inferior race..which escalates until you get to some sort of dystopian-reality.
 

KittenKoder

I Am No One Else
311
Posts
10
Years
...As good as that sounds on paper, do you know how many humane groups would protest and cry out at this?
In fact, the same applies to everything regarding this topic. I'm all for it, it'd be interesting to see where non-human DNA in humans leads us, especially if it means longetivity and health. But then you start to think...what determines if you qualify for one of these or not? If Carol and Steve are blind, what would qualify them to get non-human DNA? What if they don't have money? Then you end up with one superior breed of humans who don't have to worry about disease or anything just because they were born rich and you get the inferior race..which escalates until you get to some sort of dystopian-reality.

Well, the glaring problem of the topic is a lack of definition. "Inserting animal DNA" could introduction of viruses adapted as part of the cell colony of the human body as a new cell. Or transplants, which all inherently add a new DNA to the mixture already present in the body. It could mean designed ERVs, to insert DNA into the reproduction cells of the host organism, thus altering the potential offspring. However, physical changes to an already established organism, such as a teenage human or older, would prove too much shock for the physiology, and almost always result in cancer or death. The few things we could change in the human after development would be immunity and basic physiological traits, which we do both quite often, though we use chemicals for the latter without any permanent changes to the genetic structure.

As for "humane" groups, most of those are insane anyway, a bunch of know-nothing naysayers with too much time on their hands thanks to the medical and technological advances they are so against. Best to just laugh at them and move on.
 
Back
Top