Full Version: Gengineering
I know there are some cannon sources for Genetic Engineering out there, but I can't seem to find any other than Sota 2063. Can anyone name some more?
There are but none are 3rd Ed other than SOTA 2063.
Yep, that's all she wrote. 
there is some IC information in SOTA:64, about gengineered designer pets. no game info, though.
This is something I wish would get revisited more frequently; given the current (RL SOTA in genetic alteration, and the massive advances that are hitting uss every day, I'd think it ought to be much more widespread and powerful than it is in SR.
Personally I'd be surprisedd if we're more than about 10 years from the beginning of the "designer babies" movement - and some Olympic officials have postulated that, by the next Games, we'll be seeing "gene-doped" athletes...
Personally I'd be surprisedd if we're more than about 10 years from the beginning of the "designer babies" movement - and some Olympic officials have postulated that, by the next Games, we'll be seeing "gene-doped" athletes...
| QUOTE (Req) |
| This is something I wish would get revisited more frequently; given the current (RL SOTA in genetic alteration, and the massive advances that are hitting uss every day, I'd think it ought to be much more widespread and powerful than it is in SR. |
I imagine that the crash of '29 would actually have hit genetics a good deal harder than most other fields, given how much geneticists around the world rely on gene sequencing data stored in online databases. All of the advances in bioinformatics that those researchers rely on extensively these days would be wiped out. Even though hard copies of most of that data would still exist, I could easily see it taking a couple of decades just to compile all that data and reassemble those online databases.
All that aside, I do agree that genetics in SR should be more advanced and widespread than it is, but given the game history it is something about which I dont find it difficult to suspend my disbelief.
Hey folks,
I'm a RL Geneticist. I read through SOTA:2063, and was very impressed by the caliber of the work there. It's pretty accurate. I don't agree with everything, but I didn't end up pissed off at the book either, like I expected to.
As far as tech' advances go, I was reasonably satisfied with what it contained. I think the essence rules are a little excessive, but they are balanced. And, for game purposes, that's the bottom line. As far as why things haven't advanced further, I'd agree completely with the crash being the reason for that. Yes, I'm confident that all of the data would be backed up, but between VITAS and the crash of '29, it's not totally goofy for there not to have been more advances.
As far as designer babies go, though -- that's already happened. It's not at the level of gene manipulation, but in cases of IVF, it's very possible to look at a number of embryos, perform gene testing, and then only implant the ones with the genes you want. It's been done since at least the mid-90's.
I'm a RL Geneticist. I read through SOTA:2063, and was very impressed by the caliber of the work there. It's pretty accurate. I don't agree with everything, but I didn't end up pissed off at the book either, like I expected to.
As far as tech' advances go, I was reasonably satisfied with what it contained. I think the essence rules are a little excessive, but they are balanced. And, for game purposes, that's the bottom line. As far as why things haven't advanced further, I'd agree completely with the crash being the reason for that. Yes, I'm confident that all of the data would be backed up, but between VITAS and the crash of '29, it's not totally goofy for there not to have been more advances.
As far as designer babies go, though -- that's already happened. It's not at the level of gene manipulation, but in cases of IVF, it's very possible to look at a number of embryos, perform gene testing, and then only implant the ones with the genes you want. It's been done since at least the mid-90's.
| QUOTE (the_dunner) |
| As far as designer babies go, though -- that's already happened. It's not at the level of gene manipulation, but in cases of IVF, it's very possible to look at a number of embryos, perform gene testing, and then only implant the ones with the genes you want. It's been done since at least the mid-90's. |
Isn't this what we see in Gattaca, a whole society built around genetic testing and IVF? There's a hint of genetic manipulation in the Eighth Day scene, but the film is practically all about genetic testing influencing soceity.
| QUOTE (the_dunner) |
| As far as designer babies go, though -- that's already happened. It's not at the level of gene manipulation, but in cases of IVF, it's very possible to look at a number of embryos, perform gene testing, and then only implant the ones with the genes you want. It's been done since at least the mid-90's. |
Well, yeah, that's old news, but given how far we are from actually *understanding* the precise function and sequence of each gene, we're not really able to select an IVF embryo for "tall, brown hair, IQ of 194, green eyes" yet. That's more what I'm talking about.
Incidentally, I do human gene therapy research in real life, mostly for cancer treatment.
What flavor of gene work do you do, the_dunner?
We have 2 people hear that work with gene tech.
I will ask a question that has been bothering me for some time.
In science fiction you often see references to genetic manipulation of adults. I have herd people claming that genetically engendered foods would alter human genetics.
I thought these two things would be imposable.
Altering the code in every sell would be all but imposable. Perhaps with something based on a retrovirus but could you prevent multiple copies and control the positioning. Would these points even matter.
As to the engendered food point I did not believe there was a mechanism for genes to pass to a creature from its food and even if there is how would genetically engendered foods make this worse.
Edward
I will ask a question that has been bothering me for some time.
In science fiction you often see references to genetic manipulation of adults. I have herd people claming that genetically engendered foods would alter human genetics.
I thought these two things would be imposable.
Altering the code in every sell would be all but imposable. Perhaps with something based on a retrovirus but could you prevent multiple copies and control the positioning. Would these points even matter.
As to the engendered food point I did not believe there was a mechanism for genes to pass to a creature from its food and even if there is how would genetically engendered foods make this worse.
Edward
Mostly, I do bioinformatics work. My current project is a genotyping project, working on a 1000-patient population of Cystic Fibrosis patients. Basically, we're looking for genes that are associated with CF severity, based on a common CF genotype, but SNP variations at other sites.
In the real world, genetically manipulating the DNA of an adult human is not technologically feasible. In the Shadowrun universe, where magic and nanotech are both available, there's every reason to imagine that this would be possible.
In terms of genetically modified foods, I wouldn't worry about it. It's imaginable that if there were a catastrophic screw up somewhere along the line that the food might be slightly less healthy. But, the odds are a lot better that you'd get hit by lightning and killed than that something like that would make it through FDA testing.
In terms of genetically modified foods, I wouldn't worry about it. It's imaginable that if there were a catastrophic screw up somewhere along the line that the food might be slightly less healthy. But, the odds are a lot better that you'd get hit by lightning and killed than that something like that would make it through FDA testing.
| QUOTE (the_dunner) |
| But, the odds are a lot better that you'd get hit by lightning and killed than that something like that would make it through FDA testing. |
Yeah, well, with somewhere between 500 and 5000 people struck by lightning every year in the US alone, that doesn't comfort me too much. (An average of 73 deaths caused by lightning strikes per year.)
GM food I can't really speak to, though I'm willing to postulate that the fear that's out there now is WAY overstating the risks. The danger of having GM plants out-compete and lead to the extinction of natural plants is a real risk, but it's not like that's much different than the natural out-competition that has been occurring since, well, forever.
Genetic modification of adults is feasible; it's just that finding a vector for the altered DNA that will safely insert into each and every cell in the body is extremely difficult. MOst genetic therapies right now involve genetically modifying some fraction of the patient's cells; for example, the cancer trial I'm working on involves removing a subset of the patient's white blood cells, transfecting them with the DNA for an engineered receptor protein that allows them to target cancerous cells, growing these cells up to high levels, and re-infusing them into the patient. The altered cells are accepted by the patient's immune system (because they're his own cells), and since they can recognize cancerous cells, they then initiate the whole immune cascade to clear the tumor.
Of course, that's the theory.
Being able to perform genetic therapy that targets every cell in an adult human body is kind of the holy grail of gene therapy, but it's a ways off still. There is research going on into the use of many viruses, and it's quite promising, but you won't be seeing in vivo gene therapy for some years now. There is no reason it won't ever be done; in fact, I'm sure it will be and well before the tech level presented in Shadowrun, but we're not quite there yet.
And yes, Edward, there are risks of engineered DNA going into the host's DNA in locations where it screws with the functions of natural genes. This is called insertional mutagenesis, and it's a big problem. People are looking at that right now; in fact, one of my college buddies is working on that problem right now. That's not to say he's going to solve it, or anything...
Genetic modification of adults is feasible; it's just that finding a vector for the altered DNA that will safely insert into each and every cell in the body is extremely difficult. MOst genetic therapies right now involve genetically modifying some fraction of the patient's cells; for example, the cancer trial I'm working on involves removing a subset of the patient's white blood cells, transfecting them with the DNA for an engineered receptor protein that allows them to target cancerous cells, growing these cells up to high levels, and re-infusing them into the patient. The altered cells are accepted by the patient's immune system (because they're his own cells), and since they can recognize cancerous cells, they then initiate the whole immune cascade to clear the tumor.
Of course, that's the theory.
Being able to perform genetic therapy that targets every cell in an adult human body is kind of the holy grail of gene therapy, but it's a ways off still. There is research going on into the use of many viruses, and it's quite promising, but you won't be seeing in vivo gene therapy for some years now. There is no reason it won't ever be done; in fact, I'm sure it will be and well before the tech level presented in Shadowrun, but we're not quite there yet.
And yes, Edward, there are risks of engineered DNA going into the host's DNA in locations where it screws with the functions of natural genes. This is called insertional mutagenesis, and it's a big problem. People are looking at that right now; in fact, one of my college buddies is working on that problem right now. That's not to say he's going to solve it, or anything...
Thanks for the information. Very interesting. I like that cancer killing white blood sell system. Are we talking years decades or centuries on this one
The problem with the GM plant competition is two fold. 1 loss of biodiversity including plants that may contain useful compounds (herd it al before with every other cause of extinction) and the fact that many of these crops can only be grown under licence. If many farmers in a district take up a GM crop then it will be all but imposable for those that don’t to avoid cross pollination leading to legal problems with licence to grow crops (which the corps that make the seed really want to have) and making it almost imposable to grow for the “organic” market. (my step dad is a farmer)
Edward
The problem with the GM plant competition is two fold. 1 loss of biodiversity including plants that may contain useful compounds (herd it al before with every other cause of extinction) and the fact that many of these crops can only be grown under licence. If many farmers in a district take up a GM crop then it will be all but imposable for those that don’t to avoid cross pollination leading to legal problems with licence to grow crops (which the corps that make the seed really want to have) and making it almost imposable to grow for the “organic” market. (my step dad is a farmer)
Edward
| QUOTE (Req) |
| And yes, Edward, there are risks of engineered DNA going into the host's DNA in locations where it screws with the functions of natural genes. This is called insertional mutagenesis, and it's a big problem. People are looking at that right now; in fact, one of my college buddies is working on that problem right now. That's not to say he's going to solve it, or anything... |
Like that whole scid genetherapy/leukemia thing that happend a bit ago. Not that I think this is an example of such research being somehow morally wrong or unethical, but there are still plenty of problems to iron out.
| QUOTE (Jason Farlander @ Oct 11 2004, 02:14 PM) | ||
Like that whole scid genetherapy/leukemia thing that happend a bit ago. Not that I think this is an example of such research being somehow morally wrong or unethical, but there are still plenty of problems to iron out. |
Yeah, there are. Apparently there are some replicative structures (I *think* retrotransposons, but don't quote me on that) that just don't integrate within actively replicating genes, and those show some promise for whole-body gene therapy...but it's still pretty much science fiction.
There are some middle grounds that might be possible - treating some fraction of the host body's cells with a traditional viral vector. One use that was proposed was using an aerosol viral vector to target the lung cells of cystic fibrosis patients. But (ethics aside) it would be much, much easier to genetically modify an embryo and then grow it to term, than it would be to try to do gene modification after the fact.
@kyuhan - Aside from SOTA, I haven't read any 3rd ed sources. However, Shadowtech from 2nd Ed had some quite nice background stuff you could read up on.
| QUOTE (Req) |
| But (ethics aside) it would be much, much easier to genetically modify an embryo and then grow it to term, than it would be to try to do gene modification after the fact. |
Exactly. That's one reason why it always seemed to me that Shadowrun's model for genetic enhancements (grown on disposable host bodies, implanted as bioware) was actually quite realistic. The way I've tried to explain the apparently low level of genetic engineering in SR goes like this:
- One, the crash effectively killed all genetics and proteomics research. The aforementioned loss of all those carefully assembled databases and all.
- Two, scientists in shadowrun don't even understand the most basic things about magic and its effects on the genome of a species, so most research done in that direction is almost 90% trial and error.
2 cents from another molecular biologist (virologist by trade, but I am currently working in gene expression, proteomics and bioinformatics).
I agree that the gene tech in SR is a little behind where it could be by 2063-4. The loss of online databases (which we use on a daily basis) would be catastrophic. Another possible explination could be the current shift in stem cell research away from western industrialized countrys like the US and the UK to places like China and Eastern Europe. Many of the places currently taking the lead in RL (due to restrictive laws in the US and Western Europe) were the sites of great turmoil in the SR timeline.
An engineered virus has always been the standard model for gene therepy in humans because its one of the very few ways we know of to alter the genetic content of a mammalian cell. This is because a mammalian cell just doesn't go about taking up loose DNA and using it (like simpler organisms such as bacteria and yeast).
Thats why I personally don't by the whole GM food thing. If it were that easy we could just eat a dose of recombinant DNA and call it a day.
In reality it requires a vector- something that gets the DNA into the cell in an intact form and allows for proper integration into the cell. As Req said insertional mutigenesis is alway a concern, so in RL "safe" gene therepy will probably require targeted recombination- that is the sequence up and down stream of the new gene will be complimentary to the the sequences up and down stream of the old gene... the cell will just criss-cross its DNA with the new stuff, spit out the old gene and stick the new gene in just the right place... its a neat trick.
The thing that bothers me about SR gene tech rules is that they don't make a distinction between systemic gene therepy (which would be geared more towards the removal of genetic defects present in every cell) and tissue specific genetic augmentation (which would be much more handy for a shadowrunner). To effect the later you wouldn't need a virus that can infect every cell. If your goal was to enhance the person's ability to see in low-light conditions, for example, you only need a virus that can infect the retina. It doesn't really matter if the cells in your big toe get the "up-regulate rod production" gene. This kind of gene therepy could be a lot quicker, easier and less expensive.
Along the same lines I think RL gene engeneering will lead to treatments more like "cultured bioware" wherein a certain cell population is removed, altered in vitro, and reimplanted. Thats the reason why stem cell research is so important- its not about finding an ever-renewable source of tissue. Its about understanding how we can take one type of cell from a sick person and change it into another type of cell that will cure them.
I agree that the gene tech in SR is a little behind where it could be by 2063-4. The loss of online databases (which we use on a daily basis) would be catastrophic. Another possible explination could be the current shift in stem cell research away from western industrialized countrys like the US and the UK to places like China and Eastern Europe. Many of the places currently taking the lead in RL (due to restrictive laws in the US and Western Europe) were the sites of great turmoil in the SR timeline.
An engineered virus has always been the standard model for gene therepy in humans because its one of the very few ways we know of to alter the genetic content of a mammalian cell. This is because a mammalian cell just doesn't go about taking up loose DNA and using it (like simpler organisms such as bacteria and yeast).
Thats why I personally don't by the whole GM food thing. If it were that easy we could just eat a dose of recombinant DNA and call it a day.
In reality it requires a vector- something that gets the DNA into the cell in an intact form and allows for proper integration into the cell. As Req said insertional mutigenesis is alway a concern, so in RL "safe" gene therepy will probably require targeted recombination- that is the sequence up and down stream of the new gene will be complimentary to the the sequences up and down stream of the old gene... the cell will just criss-cross its DNA with the new stuff, spit out the old gene and stick the new gene in just the right place... its a neat trick.
The thing that bothers me about SR gene tech rules is that they don't make a distinction between systemic gene therepy (which would be geared more towards the removal of genetic defects present in every cell) and tissue specific genetic augmentation (which would be much more handy for a shadowrunner). To effect the later you wouldn't need a virus that can infect every cell. If your goal was to enhance the person's ability to see in low-light conditions, for example, you only need a virus that can infect the retina. It doesn't really matter if the cells in your big toe get the "up-regulate rod production" gene. This kind of gene therepy could be a lot quicker, easier and less expensive.
Along the same lines I think RL gene engeneering will lead to treatments more like "cultured bioware" wherein a certain cell population is removed, altered in vitro, and reimplanted. Thats the reason why stem cell research is so important- its not about finding an ever-renewable source of tissue. Its about understanding how we can take one type of cell from a sick person and change it into another type of cell that will cure them.
Back to SR for a moment did anybody ever think to feed the leftover bodies from biowear culture to ghouls?
It might work but it sounds a bit to easy.
Edward
It might work but it sounds a bit to easy.
Edward
| QUOTE (Edward) |
| Back to SR for a moment did anybody ever think to feed the leftover bodies from biowear culture to ghouls? It might work but it sounds a bit to easy. Edward |
could be an interesting plot device- ghouls augmented with bioware abilities....
somewhat reminiscent of WH40K Kroot- absorb genetic traits of their prey....
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.