Surrogate Sires

RE: Surrogate Sires

Andreas Ege — Wed, 23 Sep 2020 12:00:26 GMT

Sorry not answered sooner, been a bit manic last week.

[quote userid="9239" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29359/surrogate-sires/225433#225433"]The same technology is hoped to be used at some point in people, especially survivors of childhood cancers/chemo/sterility combo. [/quote]

And that is fair enough. But it is not the arguments brought forward in this paper...

[quote userid="9239" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29359/surrogate-sires/225433#225433"]What's the difference between this and producing fertile animals only to be sterilised surgically? [/quote]

That is actually a very good question and I did spent quite a bit of time thinking about it.

To me, it's a world of difference, though I concede it might mainly be emotional.

It starts with that sterilised (I assume you use that term purposefully and not as a replacement for neutering) animals are not genetically manipulated. Complications and long term effects of sterilisation and neutering is still not fully understood even though it's a much less complex intervention than genetic manipulation. How much that kind of "treatment" will have long term effects we'll only know quite a bit down the line and personally I think if there's better established alternatives genetic manipulation should not be done. In this study they had problems with some of the animals (can't fully remember, think it was severe arthritis but could have been something else) and the authors can't tell whether it was because they cloned the animals or due to the genetic manipulation.

Second, with some of these things I don't agree, at least not fully, to what gets done either. I'm not convinced that every bitch needs neutering, even less so with dogs. I keep thinking that ferrets are not meant to be pets unless they can be kept in a way they can live without getting complications because they are not allowed to reproduce or because they are neutered. Sterilising hobs is just a clutch though better than messing with the gill, imo. And don't get me started on the farming side, certain dog, cat, bird breeds, colour morphs in reptiles, and....

Third, it is much easier to have an ethical discussion before a technology/ method like this one gets established. Changing established ones, like sterilising or neutering, if ethical ideas shift, takes a long breath usually and even if the majority of people favours a different approach usually takes a long time to change, if at all.

Above is obviously all just my personal opinion and absolutely biased. ;-)

RE: Surrogate Sires

Dinu Catilina — Tue, 15 Sep 2020 13:55:15 GMT

[quote userid="13609" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29359/surrogate-sires"]A new technology that we will "need" to safeguard world nutrition, safe endangered species and combat male infertility[/quote]

The same technology is hoped to be used at some point in people, especially survivors of childhood cancers/chemo/sterility combo.

[quote userid="13609" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29359/surrogate-sires"]Frankly, I personally find the idea of producing sterile animals by gene editing to then jab them with spermatogenic stem cells to produce some other animals sperm perverse.[/quote]

What's the difference between this and producing fertile animals only to be sterilised surgically?

[quote userid="13609" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29359/surrogate-sires"] Second, and more importantly, I'm quite sure it's going to be cost prohibitiv for most countries that need more food security for a long time.[/quote]

Most likely true, it is cheaper to go slow and improve the existing stock rather than replacing it completely. Not to mention that the new stock may not adapt very well straight away so worth keeping some of the old genes.

RE: Surrogate Sires

Iain Richards — Tue, 15 Sep 2020 11:15:23 GMT

INteresting, but odd. It's aimed at getting the benfits of AI (rapid dissemination of a germ line) into extensive systems. I'd have thought it easier to CRISPR Cas-9 the relevant genes