BS: A gene weapon for peace

Subject: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 09:41 AM

Today I speculated the most powerful weapon on Earth.

I can't say I invented this weapon because it has been imagined by dozens of people through the ages. Even Agatha Christie created a plot involving this weapon in the 1970 'A passage to Frankfort'.


But today with the brand new discovery of RNAi (basicly a RNA security function that removes suspicious DNA copies and any DNA copy that resembles the suspicious DNA) we can turn off genes at will.

Finding the genes or the matrix of genes respondsible for revenge, hatred and violence would enable people to deliver copies of those genes via a virus "delivery service" and thus cause the RNAi "security system" to turn off those genes.

The list of diseases in which this method is being tested is : Macular degeneration, Aids, Alzheimers, Arthritis, Cancer ... over 30 in all. Test macular degeneration subjects have regained vision with RNAi treatments but a child with a single cell gene abnormality that had RNAi treatments died as a result of gene treatments despite the belief this treatment was low risk.

The human genome was once beieved to have vast stretches of non functional DNA that was compared to a desert. I believe these areas are gene codes that are in our library but turned off until conditions might render them again useful.

While the department of Defense might want gene research to create the most ruthless blood thirsty soldier on earth, I believe that making ones enemies more peaceful, compliant and forgiving to be far more effective.

Afterall, it might spread ...

Peace, the final solution and most powerful weapon on Earth.


Should it be pursued?

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: mooman
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 09:48 AM

And making oneself peaceful is even more positive!

Peace

moo

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 09:56 AM

Eugenics rises from the grave... Anyone got a stake handy?

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 09:59 AM

I know people who have such an even temperment they are boring to be around. On the other hand I know people who are such nervous paranoid wrecks they are uncomfortable to be around.

Perhaps a homogenized even temperment could backfire and leave the human race in the dust of ambivilence.

Still I wonder where the result of such a "peace treatment" could lead.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:01 AM

There is a less than subtle difference between breeding/eugenics and gene therapy that I am sure you recognize.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: ejsant
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:01 AM

I can not envision humans ever having the wisdom necessary to redesign themselves in this way. Nor can I envision science ever reaching the understanding necessary to do so with-out devastating unforeseen consequences.

Peace,
Ed

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: mooman
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:07 AM

I can see science reaching that understanding ejsant but I agree with you about the wisdom...

Peace

moo

"The two most abundant things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity... but not necessarily in that order"

Frank Zappa

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:10 AM

"Eugenics rises from the grave"

Let's hear it for Annie Lennox

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:11 AM

Why don't we work on ourselves instead of hare-brained genetical schemes?Getting angry is a choice, as is hatred.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:16 AM

The notion that your emotional make up is genetically defined strikes me as wrong, and tragic even if it were true.

It needs to also be mentioned that regardless of origins, hatred, anger, and the capacity for violence are old survival traits. If your scheme were to prove possible, it would be still unwise, because the ramifications of messing with such a Darwinian legacy of selection going back eons is not to be easily understood, if at all.
Our own survival and that of many forebears included these traits as a response to evolutionary pressures we do not fully ken. While nothing is unknowable, I am pretty sure evebn within the strictly Darwinian model that we would want to be very sure of what we are about before turning various genes on and off.

A

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:24 AM

We essentially entered the Nuclear age without "wisdom". As Burke in his book Coonections points out, no invention is derived in a linear fashion nor wisdom a common factor in the use of technology.

Hypothetically lets imagine we are going to end up with a genetic weapon of one sort or another be it a peace behavior weapon or an ultra violence behavior weapon. Lets also (correctly) assume this research is going on right now.

Will violence always be triumphant over peace?
What would be a happy ending for a novel dealing with this good over evil gene war?

I have outoned some plot devices for such a novel but I do not yet see where it could or should lead.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:27 AM

outoned = outlined

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:30 AM

making ones enemies more peaceful, compliant and forgiving to be far more effective

I like the idea of a chemical "weapon" that makes people peaceful and forgiving. Jolly fine. Much better than mustard gas or viruses which result in painful death by the thousands.

BUT ya gotta wonder what the long-term effects of such a switcheropo in the genebank of an individual would be.

A

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Paul Burke
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:37 AM

What if the other lot (whoever they may be) win the research race, and make US peaceful and compliant, leaving THEM a free hand? HG Wells and time machines, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:56 AM

Great twist Paul, then those with the "free hand" could end up in self destructive civil war and America becomes more of the country it set out to be.

Seeing various religious and war lord characters in the US like Rumsfeld , Sanctorum and Delay become instruments for peace and understanding would be fun.

Catching the "peace disease" could be protrayed with much fear and loathing among right wing proponents. The flu vaccine to prevent the peace bug epidemic could be corrupted by a group of "enlightened" scientists.

Yes Paul your idea will help this book write itself.
the original book Time Machine where the future surface people were peaceful to the point of being subvervient to the underground monsters? We might already be there.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: GUEST,JTT
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:04 AM

What chromosome does the gene for hatred live on? And how do you define hatred? Heavens! What nonsense!

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:04 AM

" the brand new discovery of RNAi (basicly a RNA security function that removes suspicious DNA copies and any DNA copy that resembles the suspicious DNA) we can turn off genes at will."

I must add that RNAi will also remove the original DNA code that the "suspicious code resembles".

Ahh there's the rub. Over time (seven generations) the offspring will begin to show the effects of the experimental gene removal in ever more bizarre manifestations.

This is getting spooky ;)

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Wolfgang
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:15 AM

If they find it it will have a side effect like being unable to enjoy sports or orgasms any more and to get fat with close to no food (grin).

For the serious part: In order to be effective independent of environmental influences on the emotional make-up it has to be a pretty strong intervention that would change us more than I'd like to see.
If it's a small intervention it is unlikely to 'overrule' the influence of our experiences on our emotion.

The approach to change the environment (experiences etc.) is here the much better one in my eyes.

Wolfgang (who in other contexts may say yes to genetic engineering)

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:15 AM

What seperates a man of conscience from a psychopath with no conscience?

Protein producing Genes.

Yes this is reductionist but it is true.

Finding which gene is respondsible for what, involves turning each one off seperately one by one and looking for what happens.

This "nonsense" research is happening as we speak.

We are not using human genes for much of this study but we use some. When certain genes are obviously the same as human genes we sometimes assume they will do the same thing in humans but they do not always do the same things. Genes producing certain proteins are modified by other gene producing proteins.

The process of protein creation is so much more complex than discovering the sequence of the human genome that they can not be equated.

What is nonsense is assuming we will ever definitively know what our actions will create.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: pdq
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:18 AM

Gene Hakman?

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:22 AM

He is actually my great aunt's son from Danville Illinois. That makes him my second cousin.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: mooman
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:23 AM

Naturally genes produce peptides and proteins and hence enzymes and hormones and the rest but to rule out all the other contributory factors to psychopatic behaviour is being a bit too reductionist IMHO. I tend to be with Wolfgang on this one.

Peace

moo

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:29 AM

Amos, Good point. The old traits of emotional response is probably a 3 billion year old process. As some call it the central brain stem functions of fight or flight are like a reptillian brain.

These reptillian functions are modified by our frontal lobe.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: mooman
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:36 AM

"Fight or flight" is a function of the hormone and neurotransmitter adrenaline produced in the adrenal medullae.

Peace

moo

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:38 AM

Yes mooman, one should never forget nature and nurture are both parents of the individual.
That we can overcome OR benefit from nurture does imply that it is superior to nature. Or visa versa.

Still...

Nature will forever be our roots.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: ejsant
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:00 PM

I truly believe that the contention of ultimately understanding the intricate interdependent structure of our world is purely based upon the part of we humans called ego. To me it is easy for science to be proven correct by our species as it functions with-in the boundaries that have been defined by our species. In a most sophomoric example that is like always wining a game in which only you are entitled to change the rules each and every time you play.

To my way of thinking science will become valid when and only when it can stop a volcano from erupting, change the direction and intensity of a hurricane, tornado, tsunami, or any other natural disaster, predict and stop an earthquake, and so on.

Peace,
Ed

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:06 PM

Your test of validity isn't valid.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:07 PM

The suggestion that we could/should modify behavior via genetic treatments is less like a revival of eugenics than like a revival of "treatments" such as sterilization and electroshock or insulin shock "therapies" that were very frequently mandated for "deviant persons" - in the not too distant past. Those who were not of "an age of understanding" by about 1945 or so likely have never heard of them, but beginning ca. 1920 or so they were the "holy grail" of psychiatric treatment.

Functionally, the way these wonderful new treatments work is:

"Nobody understands them so they must be magic."
"Since they're magic, they'll do whatever we want them to when we use them."
"Since we believe in them, we can use them on anyone who disagrees with us."

Court ordered sterilization/castration of a broad range of "deviants" was fairly common in the US and in most parts of Western Europe in the 1920s through about 1935 or so. It was (and in some places is) firmly believed that "all deviancy is of sexual origin (because sex is filthy) so sterilization will cure it all." In some illiterate or semi-literate areas, the practice persisted well into the 1950s. (Kansas has the record for most involuntary sterilizations - absolute or per capita - of any state in the US. 'nuff said there.)

Of course anyone who's read one of the several "pissy cat" threads here will know immediately that this is fallacious reasoning, but few people had their pets "fixed" way back then. Even now, proposals appear fairly regularly in some state legislatures to mandate sterilization for "certain classes of criminals" in the belief that this is some sort of "magic cure."

Electric shock and the later insulin shock therapies have a similar history, and "persons of deviant personality" were subjected to legislative and court sanctioned involuntary "treatment." The time frame is about the same as for involuntary sterilizations.

Involuntary therapy is in some disrepute in more recent times. In one recent case (that I don't believe has been decided in court) an accused is incompetent to stand trial if he doesn't take his meds. If he takes his medication, his handlers haved decided he would be competent for trial. Can the court order administering of his meds if he refuses to take them? If he's not competent for trial, he's likely not competent to make the decision whether to take his meds for the expected therapeutic benefit to the patient; but if medication is for the purpose of making him competent for trial it could violate his right not to testify against himself?

With existing societal limitations on involuntary treatments, it is unlikely that the proposed genetic therapy could be required for the persons Donuel would want treated without there consent.

It thus becomes a question of whether those who hate would choose to not hate. I'd propose that Donuel voluneer to approach Fred and Family - our leading Kansas "haters" - to suggest the treatment to them. Many of us would like to see them get better, although there are several other candidates who could be suggested.

[The link is to a book of about 120 pages. This is one of several sites where it's posted. If you really want to understand hate, reading the whole thing will contribute to your understanding. There are explanatory notes that give some of the flavor, quick looks may work too.]

John

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:20 PM

Interesting John.

imho
The shortest distance between two points is a discovery and its application to a weapon for war.


If anything you have to say is valid to this speculative discussion, it might be:
"war is the involuntary treatment to kill".

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:29 PM

on the other hand

:G: edited quote

"Functionally, the way these religions work is:

"Nobody understands them so they must be magic."
"Since they're magic, they'll do whatever we want them to when we use them."
"Since we believe in them, we can use them on anyone who disagrees with us."


PS
please refrain from stating what I want, particularly when I have not said what I want.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:44 PM

Donuel -

It doesn't matter what you want, and I made no assumptions about that.

It's the presumption that a new "magic" has been found, coupled with the belief that "since it's magic it will work the way I want it to," that has frequently led to premature and involuntary application of (untested?) "treatments" for those who may not want them.

Note also, that I said nothing about whether gene therapy will or will not work in the ways suggested by you and by others - only that it will be very difficult to apply any therapy to people who don't choose to take it voluntarily.

You may quote my opinion that those who most need a proven therapy for the purposes described are least likely to accept it voluntarily.

Your substitution of "religion" for "therapy" stretches what I said, but perhaps isn't inappropriate. No objection, although it does change the flavor a bit.

John

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:04 PM

"With existing societal limitations on involuntary treatments, it is unlikely that the proposed genetic therapy could be required for the persons Donuel would want treated without there consent."   
JohnKansas


"Donuel - It doesn't matter what you want, and I made no assumptions about that."
John Kansas


......................


Sorry, it sounded like you did make make assumptions.

At any rate...
My premise for this novel based on current scientific inquiry involves projects that the DOD would like to have at its disposal.

Weapons are seldom used on people with their permission, but your concern for individual rights is of course noted and appreciated.

My sister was killed by the DOD under a project being carried out of the DOE. While in military service the doctors said she had an over active thyroid so whe was ordered/asked to drink a large quantity of radioactive Iodine that was in a lead vile once everyone else left the room.
She did so. It took here 31 years to die only after her; stomach, intestines, colon, rectum and other tumors and organs had been removed in no less than 8 surguries.

She was fed ATP intravenously for the last years of her life and constanly threw up fluid to keep her throat from drying despite having no stomach. She did not have the strength to keep her baby grandson from falling off her bed. She had control over her a morphine delivery system as well as Federal medical mariquana but it was a horrible death none the less.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:09 PM

vile = vial

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:19 PM

I felt the gravity of the last post required a edit for grammer:
__________________________________________________________________

My half sister Carol Siddens was killed by the DOD under a project being carried out of the DOE. While she was in military service the doctors said she had an over active thyroid so she was ordered/asked to drink a large quantity of radioactive Iodine that was in a lead vial, once everyone else left the room.
She did so.
It took her 31 years to die only after her; stomach, intestines, colon, rectum and other tumors and organs had been removed in no less than eight surgeries.

She was fed ATP intravenously for the last years of her life and constantly threw up fluid she drank to keep her throat from drying up despite the fact she had no stomach. She did not have the strength to keep her baby grandson from falling off her bed. She had control over her a morphine delivery system as well as Federal medical marijuana but it was a horrible death none the less.

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: ejsant
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:24 PM

"Your test of validity isn't valid. "

There is that ego thing again. By the way it is certainly a valid test in my mind and frankly that is the only place in which it need be.

Peace,
Ed

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 03:05 PM

Ed lol that was funny.

For even more comedic relief I would like Rick Santorum and Jerry Falwell catch the peace bug gene virus. What outrageously funny yet loving things should we have them do?

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Peace
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 03:27 PM

"A gene weapon for peace"

Gene Autrey? Gene Vincent? Gene Pitney?

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: Donuel
Date: 29 Jul 05 - 08:29 AM

How about Dr. Frisk coming out in favor of embrionic stem cell research?

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 29 Jul 05 - 08:41 AM

So in what way are the ethics for such a treatment different from the ethics for lobotomy, electric shock etc?

Historically, humans have always tried to apply the latest scientific discovery to all sorts of (often inappropriate) circumstances. It felt like "progress" at the time, only to be laughed at and condemned later. Think electricity, DDT, anaesthesia, hallucinogenics, nuclear power etc etc. What tells us that this discovery, or rather our applications of such a discovery, are any wiser now?

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 29 Jul 05 - 09:02 AM

But the world already has Peace!

Viva Pax Americana!

Subject: RE: BS: A gene weapon for peace
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 29 Jul 05 - 02:22 PM

Careful Robin, your tongue might pierce your cheek ;-)