SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A study by Newcastle University researchers has found that three-person in vitro fertilization is safe (does not adversely affect embryos) and can be routinely performed. Three-person IVF allows the transfer of donor mitochondria into an embryo in order to prevent mitochondrial disease:
Published today in the journal Nature, scientists at the Wellcome Trust Centre for Mitochondrial Disease at Newcastle University report the first in-depth analysis of human embryos created using a new technique designed to reduce the risk of mothers passing on mitochondrial disease to their children, which is debilitating and often life-limiting.
[...] Today researchers, in a study involving over 500 eggs from 64 donor women, publish results that indicate that the new procedure does not adversely affect human development and will greatly reduce the level of faulty mitochondria in the embryo. Their results suggest that the technique will lead to normal pregnancies whilst also reducing the risk of babies having mitochondrial disease. The results of this study will be considered by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's (HFEA) Expert Scientific Panel. The HFEA will ultimately decide whether to issue the first licence to a clinic. A licensed clinic would allow couples affected by mitochondrial disease to have the choice of whether to use pronuclear transfer to try and have healthy children.
Also at the BBC. You can fill out this form to donate eggs or sperm to the Newcastle Fertility Centre at Life.
Towards clinical application of pronuclear transfer to prevent mitochondrial DNA disease (DOI: 10.1038/nature18303)
Previously: UK Approves Three-Person IVF Babies
U.S. Panel Gives Tentative Endorsement to Three-Person IVF
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:03AM
Every girl should have three mothers. Women don't need men to reproduce. Let men die and become extinct. For the good of womankind everywhere.
Now some men might object. That's what prisons are for.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 13 2016, @04:06AM
Aren't men the superior gender since they can theoretically create both boys or girls using their chromosomes?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:13AM
Women have all the chromosomes they need to make more women, without the involvement of men. The Y chromosome is a defective X chromosome. Men are defective by birth.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 13 2016, @04:21AM
Fair enough, but a group of men could also create just males by picking X and Y chromosomes. The only things they are missing are an egg, which would have to be synthesized from scratch or transformed from another cell somehow, and an artificial womb. Those are engineering problems... should be a few men out there willing to tackle those, right?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Monday June 13 2016, @09:13AM
> [...] create just males by picking X and Y chromosomes.
or create female offspring by picking X chromosomes from two different males?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 13 2016, @09:25AM
I already wrote that in another comment.
The point of the post you replied to is to show that men could exclusively produce male offspring with no female involvement. However, it would be considerably harder than women exclusively producing female offspring with no male involvement, so that will happen first.
I'm sure both scenarios have already seen extensive coverage in science fiction.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by butthurt on Monday June 13 2016, @09:39AM
Oh, #359125, of course. Thank you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:22AM
Strindberg, the Swedish realist playwright, beat you to it. [theatrehistory.com]
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Monday June 13 2016, @05:38AM
> [...] three mothers.
One for the egg, one for the mitochondrion, and one for the womb?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @05:58AM
The egg and womb could come from the same woman.
The point is that an X chromosome from each of the two women can create a girl with two biological moms. The donor mitochondria are only needed if a mitochondrial disease is likely, and with two moms to choose from instead of just one that low risk is cut lower.
The first girl to be born from two lesbian mothers will infuriate the religious more than IVF ever did. They will have to live in hiding and lie about the origin of the daughter.
(Score: 5, Informative) by butthurt on Monday June 13 2016, @09:24AM
> with two moms to choose from instead of just one that low risk is cut lower.
As I understand it, ordinarily the child gets an exact copy of the mother's mitochondria, and the father does not pass on his mitochondria. There's no process where mitochondrial DNA from two parents gets mixed. If you combined two eggs including both of their mitochondria, you'd have two distinct kinds of mitochondria. If the result grew into an embryo, I assume that it would wind up chimeric, having cells with each type of mitochondrion, and perhaps cells with both types, each exactly the same as provided by the two mothers. If one mother had defective mitochondria, the offspring would as well.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 13 2016, @03:36PM
I'm pretty sure the mitochondria are going to come from the mother who's egg was used. But the possibility of flushing out those mitochondria and replacing them with some from the second mom or a third woman is completely on the table. Mitochondrial disease is rare enough, but for both mother's mitochondria to be unsuitable would be extremely rare.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]