Monday, November 15, 2010

Genetic breakthrough could produce ‘babies with three parents’

Reserachers at Newcastle University have transferred material from a healthy fertilized human egg into an unhealthy one, repairing the egg's genetic flaws. This method has been developed in the hope to cure a class of genetic disorders by transplanting parts of one embryonic cell form one mother to another, thus causing the possibility of  biological parents for the child. This procedure is meant to fix flawed mitochondira thus turning a faulty egg into a healthy embryo.

Mitochondria contains DNA and therefore the child could inherit genes from not two but three biological parents. The Times of London says ""The mother and father would supply 99.8 per cent of its DNA, but a small amount would come from a second woman, the mitochondrial donor."

This method naturally brought up several ethical and social issues and raised numerous questions. Is this new third parent or donor classified as a parent? Would the child have two biological mothers? The third parent was downplayed by Doug Turnbull who was a neurologist from Newcastle. He stated that this other "parent" was merely a donor and provided the means for the child to be born healthy and should not play a vital role in the child's life.

One child in every 6500 births is affected with mitochondrial disease for which there is no cure and this can cause heart failure, liver failure, blindness, muscle weakness and learning disabilities. The scientists hope that this could be a solution for parents to have when they are faced with the decision to have a child with the possibility of the child being born with severe disabilities. The method has not left the lab as British law prohibits artificially created embryos being placed in a  woman's womb.

Transferring DNA from one fertilized egg to another could help prevent the transmission of some inherited diseases.

10 comments:

  1. [...] Punnett's Square » Genetic breakthrough could produce 'babies with … [...]

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have heard of this and thought about blogging about it myself. They idea of having a third parent is so intriguing, but I do not believe that reveiving .02% of DNA from someone makes that person a parent. The purpose of grabbing some mitochondrial DNA from a woman and including it in the developement of a fetus is not to ultimately affect the developement of the child, rather just to save its life. I would compare this to donating a kidney to someone with kidney failure in order to save their life. It might save that recipient's life, but it does not change their gene sequence. The mitochondrial DNA is not part of a person's genome.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is a really, really interesting idea. 1 out of every 6500 is a huge percentage a births to be affected by one specific defect. If this idea could be successfully used to prevent or fix mitochondrial flaws, it would be an amazing achievement. All of those parents who could not or chose not to have children would be able to, and it would significantly lower the number of children born with developmental problems due to mitochondrial defects. If 98.8% of the genetic material is from the child's biological parents, I do not think that the third "parent" has any right to the child whatsoever. Like Stephanie said, it can be equated to donating an organ. Hopefully, rules regulating this would be established before this becomes a common procedure, because it has the potential to create a plethora of legal issues, like many of the recent biological innovations.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I did not even consider the third party trying to gain rights over their child. I mean it is a stretch, but allenk1 brought up a good point. There are plenty of crazies out there who might think they have these rights, and it would be vital to make a clear contract establishing the rules and regulations for participating in these procedures.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree, I do not think that 3rd "parent" should have any say in the child's upbrining. It can be compared to an organ donor, the reaosn people seem to be gettin a little uptight about this is merely the fact that the baby will inherit a tiny percentage of the donor's DNA.

    ReplyDelete

  6. Stephanie :
    I did not even consider the third party trying to gain rights over their child. I mean it is a stretch, but allenk1 brought up a good point. There are plenty of crazies out there who might think they have these rights, and it would be vital to make a clear contract establishing the rules and regulations for participating in these procedures.


    You are right there , i can imagine there would people who tried to do it for the wrong reasons,
    I do think to try and have a claim over the child would be a wrong reason to donate. As you said Stephanie 0.2 percent is hardly enough to have a claim any rights let alone parental rights. I think there would have to be some strict laws on who the third party doner was and what there intention was. I do think this is excellent though and it is amazing how new technology and science keeps getting more and more advanced.

    electronic muscle stimulator

    ReplyDelete
  7. Im glad you enjoy the blog!! :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Websites You Should Visit...

    [...]very few websites that happen to be detailed below, from our point of view are undoubtedly well worth checking out[...]...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Website Trackback Link...

    [...]the time to read or visit the content or sites we have linked to below the[...]...

    ReplyDelete