GaySpeak Gay Forums and Chat


Go Back   GaySpeak Gay Forums and Chat > General Fun > Chit Chat

Chit Chat Keep your clothes on in here please... all are welcome!

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 1 Week Ago   #1
kindy64
Godlike
 
kindy64's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015

Bi Man in a Monogamous Gay Relationship
in Pendleton, IN (USA)

Age: 52 (Starsign: Leo)

Posts: 638
My Mood: Amused
Default Babies From Skin Cells

So, I think I read about this research with mice a few months/years back...

Good news for gay couples that want biologically related off-spring.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/h...logy.html?_r=0

Quote:
Within a decade or two, researchers say, scientists will likely be able to create a baby from human skin cells that have been coaxed to grow into eggs and sperm and used to create embryos to implant in a womb.

The process, in vitro gametogenesis, or I.V.G., so far has been used only in mice. But stem cell biologists say it is only a matter of time before it could be used in human reproduction — opening up mind-boggling possibilities.

With I.V.G., two men could have a baby that was biologically related to both of them, by using skin cells from one to make an egg that would be fertilized by sperm from the other. Women with fertility problems could have eggs made from their skin cells, rather than go through the lengthy and expensive process of stimulating their ovaries to retrieve their eggs.
__________________
live and let live, do no harm, but take no shit
life isn't a destination, it's a journey
don't let fear decide your fate - AWOLNATION
kindy64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 1 Week Ago   #2
MHJG
Insane Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2017

Single Gay Man
in Hong Kong (Hong Kong)

Age: 22 (Starsign: Taurus)

Posts: 105
My Mood: Inspired
Default

Great news. Wish I can have a biologically related baby one day.
__________________
Hallo. Ich heiße Manho.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
MHJG is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 1 Week Ago   #3
meridannight
John Wick
 
meridannight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014

Single Gay Man
in Age: 33 (Italy)

Posts: 2,740
My Mood: Sneaky
Default

I see women becoming obsolete.
__________________
''Do I look civilized to you?''
meridannight is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanking meridannight for his/her post...
Cuddly (1 Week Ago)
Unread 1 Week Ago   #4
Cuddly
 
Cuddly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014

Gay Man in a Monogamous Gay Relationship
in Private (Denmark)

Age: 28 (Starsign: Aries)

Posts: 1,595
My Mood: Angelic
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by meridannight View Post
I see women becoming obsolete.
Oh my. Imagine if we became a monosex species! Our dating pool would double. Sexism would be extinct. Gender fluidity would be as understandable as shoesizes.
__________________
Gay by nature. Proud by choice.
Cuddly is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 1 Week Ago   #5
Emiliano
 
Emiliano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014

Single Gay Man
in New York City (USA)

Age: 25 (Starsign: Capricorn)

Posts: 1,859
My Mood: Tired
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by meridannight View Post
I see women becoming obsolete.
It could easily go the opposite way.

Quote:
I.V.G. requires layers of complicated bioengineering. Scientists must first take adult skin cells — other cells would work as well or better, but skin cells are the easiest to get — and reprogram them to become embryonic stem cells capable of growing into different kinds of cells.

Then, the same kind of signaling factors that occur in nature are used to guide those stem cells to become eggs or sperm. (Cells taken from women could be made to produce sperm, the researchers say, but the sperm, lacking a Y chromosome, would produce only female babies.)
Especially since it still would require being implanted in a womb.


But I'm not going to take any of this seriously until I see it reported by a more reliable source than the failing New York Times. Fake news. Sad.
Emiliano is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Days Ago   #6
meridannight
John Wick
 
meridannight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014

Single Gay Man
in Age: 33 (Italy)

Posts: 2,740
My Mood: Sneaky
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emiliano View Post
It could easily go the opposite way.

No, it can't. The fascinating thing is the physiology behind this -- females don't have the genes to make sperm. Females are XX karyotype, and men XY, as we all know.

Men have the X chromosome and the Y chromosome. The genes needed to make sperm (and testicles, for that matter) are located on the Y chromosome. Females simply don't have the genes for making sperm cells. They can make all the eggs they want, but without sperm, babies still won't happen. The reason why they can engineer egg cells from male skin cells is precisely because men possess the X chromosome like women do.

If this skin cell conception ever becomes a reality, then it means men will be capable of producing male and female babies. Females will not have the same capacity. Females are only needed for carrying the term (unless we engineer to bypass that as well).


Women will become obsolete, as a result. Technically speaking. And yeah, I do like the prospect of that.
__________________
''Do I look civilized to you?''
meridannight is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Days Ago   #7
Emiliano
 
Emiliano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014

Single Gay Man
in New York City (USA)

Age: 25 (Starsign: Capricorn)

Posts: 1,859
My Mood: Tired
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by meridannight View Post
No, it can't. The fascinating thing is the physiology behind this -- females don't have the genes to make sperm. Females are XX karyotype, and men XY, as we all know.

Men have the X chromosome and the Y chromosome. The genes needed to make sperm (and testicles, for that matter) are located on the Y chromosome. Females simply don't have the genes for making sperm cells. They can make all the eggs they want, but without sperm, babies still won't happen. The reason why they can engineer egg cells from male skin cells is precisely because men possess the X chromosome like women do.

If this skin cell conception ever becomes a reality, then it means men will be capable of producing male and female babies. Females will not have the same capacity. Females are only needed for carrying the term (unless we engineer to bypass that as well).


Women will become obsolete, as a result. Technically speaking. And yeah, I do like the prospect of that.
According to that article, specifically the part I quoted, using this technology, cells taken from women can be coaxed to create sperm as well, but would only be able to produce female children. But if sex as reproduction becomes obsolete, and the goal is to eradicate the need for different genders, that wouldn't be an issue.

And I don't doubt that you do. Though I would argue that the worth of a human (or a group of people) and their ability to contribute to the world and society are not strictly limited by their ability (or need) to reproduce.
Emiliano is online now   Reply With Quote
Thanking Emiliano for his/her post...
MikeW (5 Days Ago)
Unread 6 Days Ago   #8
meridannight
John Wick
 
meridannight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014

Single Gay Man
in Age: 33 (Italy)

Posts: 2,740
My Mood: Sneaky
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emiliano
According to that article, specifically the part I quoted, using this technology, cells taken from women can be coaxed to create sperm as well, but would only be able to produce female children. But if sex as reproduction becomes obsolete, and the goal is to eradicate the need for different genders, that wouldn't be an issue.

And I don't doubt that you do. Though I would argue that the worth of a human (or a group of people) and their ability to contribute to the world and society are not strictly limited by their ability (or need) to reproduce.

From what I understand how that process could work still needs a man. I'm gonna quote from wikipedia, since it's most accessible:


Quote:
Creating female sperm was first raised as a possibility in a patent filed in 1991[3] by injecting a woman's cells into a man's testicles, though the patent focused mostly on injecting altered male cells into a man's testes (to correct genetic diseases).

In 1997, Japanese scientists partially confirmed such techniques by creating chicken female sperm in a similar manner.

And even more clearly:

Quote:
Biologists have well established that male sperm production relies on certain genes on the Y chromosome, which, when missing or defective, lead to such men producing little to no sperm in their testicles. An analogy, then, is that a cell from a woman has complete Y chromosome deficiency. While many genes on the Y chromosome have backups (homologues) on other chromosomes, a few genes such as RBMY on the Y chromosome do not have such backups, and their effects are needed to be compensated for to convert cells from a woman into sperm.

Yes. You can make sperm created from female cells, but in order to do that you need male testicles. So, my argument stands. Men can make either male or female babies. Women can't make anything without men, as it turns out. Our ancient ancestors weren't that far off, women are just carriers for fetuses, that's all.
__________________
''Do I look civilized to you?''
meridannight is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Days Ago   #9
TwisttheLeaf
Big Stick Ideology
 
TwisttheLeaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014

Pansexual Man in a Monogamous Gay Relationship
in Seattle (USA)

Age: 29 (Starsign: Taurus)

Posts: 2,082
My Mood: Tired
Default

I personally find these kind of advancements disturbing, more often than not. Too much of the scientific community is so focused on the "can we", and completely omit considering the "should we" part of the equation.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
TwisttheLeaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanking TwisttheLeaf for his/her post...
Emiliano (6 Days Ago), meridannight (6 Days Ago)
Unread 6 Days Ago   #10
meridannight
John Wick
 
meridannight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014

Single Gay Man
in Age: 33 (Italy)

Posts: 2,740
My Mood: Sneaky
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwisttheLeaf View Post
I personally find these kind of advancements disturbing, more often than not. Too much of the scientific community is so focused on the "can we", and completely omit considering the "should we" part of the equation.

I have to agree with you on that one. I've felt that way with some of the scientific developments as well. Nuclear weapons is a case in point. Human genetic engineering another. That's just a couple of examples.
__________________
''Do I look civilized to you?''
meridannight is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanking meridannight for his/her post...
TwisttheLeaf (6 Days Ago)
Unread 6 Days Ago   #11
Emiliano
 
Emiliano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014

Single Gay Man
in New York City (USA)

Age: 25 (Starsign: Capricorn)

Posts: 1,859
My Mood: Tired
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by meridannight View Post
From what I understand how that process could work still needs a man. I'm gonna quote from wikipedia, since it's most accessible:





And even more clearly:




Yes. You can make sperm created from female cells, but in order to do that you need male testicles. So, my argument stands. Men can make either male or female babies. Women can't make anything without men, as it turns out. Our ancient ancestors weren't that far off, women are just carriers for fetuses, that's all.


I honestly can't tell if you're fucking with me or not.

Did you read the article posted? This is a new, as of yet never preformed on humans technique. IVG. So your Wikipedia articles about other previous techniques doesn't mean anything in relation to this one.

I'm not saying I know more about how human cells or whatever than you. I'm just pointing out what is said in the article about how it works. If you disagree with the science then bring it up with the scientists who are testing it on mice or the reporter who wrote the article. Because as far as I can tell from reading what is described in that article, it's them -not me - that's killing your freaky deaky boner for a world without women.
Emiliano is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Days Ago   #12
Emiliano
 
Emiliano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014

Single Gay Man
in New York City (USA)

Age: 25 (Starsign: Capricorn)

Posts: 1,859
My Mood: Tired
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by meridannight View Post
From what I understand how that process could work still needs a man. I'm gonna quote from wikipedia, since it's most accessible:





And even more clearly:




Yes. You can make sperm created from female cells, but in order to do that you need male testicles. So, my argument stands. Men can make either male or female babies. Women can't make anything without men, as it turns out. Our ancient ancestors weren't that far off, women are just carriers for fetuses, that's all.

Quote:
One significant technical hurdle that researchers were able to overcome was the difficulty of obtaining both eggs and sperm from female and male mice.14 Given that females lack a Y chromosome,15 and that germ cells go down the route of producing ova unless signals from the testes direct the cells to become sperm,16 the process of producing sperm from females is more complicated than deriving oocytes from males.17Yet scientists have been able to derive primitive sperm cells from female human ESCs.
https://academic.oup.com/jlb/article...-way-to-have-a (what seems to be a legit scientific article that is actually about this specific technology)





I'll also add that you and I do not share the same ancient ancestors or culture, unless we are talking some early human stuff here. So just because your ancestors treated their women like shit, does not mean it is a shared universal history.
Emiliano is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 5 Days Ago   #13
meridannight
John Wick
 
meridannight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014

Single Gay Man
in Age: 33 (Italy)

Posts: 2,740
My Mood: Sneaky
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emiliano
Did you read the article posted? This is a new, as of yet never preformed on humans technique. IVG. So your Wikipedia articles about other previous techniques doesn't mean anything in relation to this one.
I don't see anything in the original link or the link you posted that says female cells can be made to differentiate into sperm without some male-derived intermediary (testicles is just one option, male bone marrow is another that has been used for such purposes) for the whole process.

I'd like to see the process how female cells can be made into male cells without possessing the genetic information for making them. If that's possible then point me to the source that explains this.

All I see in your quoted sources is this:

Quote:
Given that females lack a Y chromosome,15 and that germ cells go down the route of producing ova unless signals from the testes direct the cells to become sperm,16 the process of producing sperm from females is more complicated than deriving oocytes from males.17Yet scientists have been able to derive primitive sperm cells from female human ESCs.18
Then they contradict themselves in the same paragraph:

Quote:
Finally, scientists have been able to produce viable offspring using in vitro gametes from either female or male mice.19 Thus far, however, this has not been achieved using only in vitro gametes, as opposed to one in vitro gamete fertilized with a ‘naturally’ produced gamete.20

I went and pulled the sources for that article you linked. One of the sources (Karim Nayernia et al) was retracted for plagiarism:


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19583494

http://www.nature.com/news/2009/0907....2009.753.html

Which explains this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nature.com
The article reported that sperm precursor cells could be derived from human embryonic stem cells in vitro. These derived cells were able to divide and generate cells with just one set of chromosomes, characteristic of sperm. Although the text of the article modestly refers to these as "sperm-like cells" with "tail-like structures", its title, and the press release which accompanied its publication, refer baldly to human sperm.

"That raised hackles," says Moore. "With that claim the authors opened themselves to criticism, some of it unfair, because the paper did not in fact show that sperm had been derived."
And another source for your article (Debra J. H. Matthews) says this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5226919/

Quote:
Finally, critical to the policy discussion is what is not likely in the future of the science. That is, there has been discussion, in the press and in public and government deliberations, of the possibility of using PSC-derived gametes in same-sex reproduction. For example, if a gay female couple wanted to have a child that was genetically related to both partners, it has been said that this technology would enable sperm to be derived from one partner, which would then be used to fertilize the egg of the other partner using in vitro fertilization techniques. This scenario and its parallel in gay males, though headline grabbing, faces significant if not insurmountable scientific barriers.
Quote:
In brief, due to the complexity of the human egg and because it must contain all of the resources necessary to develop into an embryo, it will be very difficult to derive eggs that could be used for reproduction from XY (chromosomally male) cells, especially eggs able to give chromosomally normal offspring.
Quote:
The converse, deriving competent sperm from XX (chromosomally female) cells, faces so many scientific challenges—in particular, the fact that at least some of the genes critical for sperm formation are located on the Y chromosome—that it is difficult to envision how it would be possible given the current state of knowledge.

Additionally, technology that has achieved this (i.e. making sperm from female cells) has always used a medium from the male body to induce spermatogenesis of female cells*:

Quote:
Originally Posted by wikipedia
Scientists from the University of Newcastle upon Tyne led by biologist Karim Nayernia discovered a method of creating partly developed sperm cells, otherwise known as "spermatogonial" stem cells, from the bone marrow of male volunteers, entirely in-vitro (outside the human body), and is seeking funding to see whether such techniques can be used to make female sperm.[7]
''Partly developed sperm cells''. What is that? Almost a sperm cell? As the article from Nature explained above, it looks like we are talking about sperm precursor cells here, not actual sperm.

This is the same Karim Nayernia whose research was used to write the article you linked. And his research uses male bone marrow to induce female cells to develop into sperm precursor cells!!



What part of this is not understood to you that you cannot make sperm out of female cells alone. It is not biologically possible, since female genes do not possess the information to make sperm. You can induce embryonic stem cells acquired from female cells to differentiate into sperm, but only -- and only IF those cells are exposed to a medium from the male body capable of initiating such a cell differentiation.

I don't mean to be harsh to you, but you have not understood this science correctly. To be fair, the article you quoted didn't offer any actual explanation either.


You need men to create sperm, whether you create that sperm in vivo or in vitro. If you have actual proof to the contrary I am all interested in seeing it. But I know that's not gonna surface anywhere.




*The wikipedia quote is pulled from here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female...ell_conversion
__________________
''Do I look civilized to you?''
meridannight is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 5 Days Ago   #14
meridannight
John Wick
 
meridannight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014

Single Gay Man
in Age: 33 (Italy)

Posts: 2,740
My Mood: Sneaky
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emiliano
I'll also add that you and I do not share the same ancient ancestors or culture, unless we are talking some early human stuff here. So just because your ancestors treated their women like shit, does not mean it is a shared universal history.
I was referring to early primitive ancestors and cultures.
__________________
''Do I look civilized to you?''
meridannight is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 5 Days Ago   #15
kindy64
Godlike
 
kindy64's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015

Bi Man in a Monogamous Gay Relationship
in Pendleton, IN (USA)

Age: 52 (Starsign: Leo)

Posts: 638
My Mood: Amused
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by meridannight View Post
I was referring to early primitive ancestors and cultures.
Oh, you mean, pre-internet!
__________________
live and let live, do no harm, but take no shit
life isn't a destination, it's a journey
don't let fear decide your fate - AWOLNATION
kindy64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

GaySpeak Gay Forums and Chat > General Fun > Chit Chat


Tags
babies, cells, skin

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Skin care advice Ibex Health and Fitness 19 22nd November 2016 11:54 am
Need Help on Getting Smooth Skin alex1001 Health and Sex - Guys 25 2nd August 2015 04:35 am
How HIV virus gains access to carrier immune cells to spread infection azulai Biology 2 4th January 2013 03:08 am
Shaving (the face) BeautifulBlue Health and Sex - Guys 19 17th July 2012 12:37 pm
I need a good skin product. PuppyErr Chit Chat 6 13th September 2011 01:45 pm



©2017 GaySpeak.com