this post was submitted on 23 May 2024

124 points (96.3% liked)

News

23311 readers

3338 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

124

Scientists made mice with Y chromosomes female by deleting just 6 tiny molecules | Live Science (www.livescience.com)

submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Scientists discovered that removing specific molecules from developing mice can completely reverse their sex from male to female.

all 34 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 27 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

While the study has only been done in mice, the six key microRNAs are found in all vertebrates and date back to the first vertebrates, about 500 million years ago. Therefore, it is very likely that this cluster of microRNAs works similarly in other mammals, as well — including humans.

So, we probably now have the technical ability to genetically engineer the sex of a mammal.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

So, we probably now have the technical ability to genetically engineer the sex of a mammal.

That's probably stretching it a bit far- more like, we're on the way to maybe be able to do that.

The best the researchers were able to do was revert the development of a male fetus back into a female fetus, but the mice still kept their XY chromosomes. What happens if they try to bond these micro-RNAs to XX-chromosome mice fetuses? How do you control which X chromosome the RNA attaches to, and what happens if some RNA attaches to one X chromosome in one cell, but to the other X chromosome in another cell? Maybe this process is only unidirectional - you can always choose to have a girl, but still have to rely on random chance to have a boy.

Also the article doesn't make it sound like they let the fetuses actually develop- what happens if an organism- let's call it an XY female, for clarity's sake- goes through puberty? Would that organism have genitals of a phenotypical female but grow the secondary sex characteristics of a male? Could an XY female be fertile? If so, would she have fertility issues if half her gametes have Y chromosomes? What would even happen if a Y chromosome egg was attempted to be fertilized by a sperm?

This is absolutely fascinating work, but we're probably not at the "designer baby" stage quite yet.

edit: A quick look at Quora seems to indicate that a YY fertilized egg would not be viable.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

No we actually do. Eliminating the sry expression caused a sex organ reversal in pigs and mice.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Former researcher here: It’s trivial to select for sex in embryos.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

So you can take an embryo that is in a uterus and change that embryos sex?

I feel like that’s what they are talking about, not picking out of a cluster of them.

I’m genuinely interested

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

There has been gender selection for ivf for over a decade now. The sperm can be separated by X or Y and only one can be used to fertilize the eggs.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

hmmm, i'll sign up

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

I don't know enough about the state of genetic engineering to speak with much authority on the topic, but I don't think that we today have a mechanism to modify the genes in all the cells of a many-celled organism.

Like, I don't think that this has practical applications as an alternative to hormone replacement therapy or something, if that's what you're saying; it'd be used at the single-cell stage, so that the changes propagate as the cells replicate and the organism grows.

You could maybe create a younger, female clone of yourself, but I assume that that's not what you're after.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Also, these changes wouldn’t necessarily change an adult body to a different sex even if you did reprogram every cell. It’s merely the step that determines the way the rest of development unfolds. But once that development happens, much of it is irreversible (at least within the human genome and its available tools).

It might someday be possible to build a whole new package of genetic machinery to change a person’s sex completely but this is far beyond current technology since nothing like this exists in the human body or any animal remotely similar to humans. It would have to be created from scratch, while most genetic engineering today is more or less cutting and pasting from other organisms or breaking shit to see what happens (as in this research).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How similar to humans would you say frogs are?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

A little but not as much was we would want. I was thinking about mentioning that but it’s in tadpoles as well so it’s not even clear a similar process could work for adults. Still, it’s a place to start the research.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I don't think that we today have a mechanism to modify the genes in all the cells of a many-celled organism.

Isn't that gene therapy?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What about taking my cells, and making ovaries that would be put in?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Like, growing a female clone of parts of your body, and then implanting organs from it into your body? That's creative. I dunno, good question.

I don't know whether immune rejection of cloned organs is an issue or not. I guess it'd be comparable to implanting an organ from an identical twin.

kagis

Sounds like that's possible, at least in terms of immune response.

https://www.verywellhealth.com/understanding-and-preventing-organ-transplant-rejection-4147557

Isograft: This type of transplant is done between a genetically identical donor and a recipient, such as an identical twin. There is virtually no risk of rejection in this case, as the body does not recognize an identical twin’s organ as foreign.

thinks

I think that a problem you'd have with anything that has a lot of sensory input and output is that you'd have to regrow nerves. My understanding is that in cases of something like spinal cord damage, an issue is that scarring prevents nerves from reconnecting correctly -- suppressing scar formation is something that had to happen when trying to deal with spinal cord issues. I've also got no idea what the constraints are on wiring things up correctly, but I imagine that there are some.

kagis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_injury

Recovery of a nerve after surgical repair depends mainly on the age of patients. Younger the patients, better the prognosis, because of better healing capacity of young tissues. Young children can recover almost normal nerve function.[29] In contrast, a patient over 60 years old with a cut nerve in the hand would expect to recover only protective sensory function, that is, the ability to distinguish hot/cold or sharp/dull; recovery of motor function would be likely incomplete.

So even with one's own body parts, nerve regeneration apparently isn't going to be perfect, but we can have some degree of it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

I was thinking about this as a basis. https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/01/health/ghost-heart-life-itself-wellness/index.html I know from my bottom surgery nerve reconnection was not guaranteed but I felt them reconnect over the weeks after.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

I'm not against transhumanism, but if there isn't an attainable goal you're just getting stuck in the trans part. I'll let you be the test pilot.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Anti-trans bigots don't want to hear it. Y-chromosome equals man, remember?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

This study was done in the womb before society could get their grubby paws (pun intended) all over the mice and assign a gender.

Anti-trans people would see a naturally formed penis or vagina on somebody and say that’s the gender. I don’t think they care about chromosomes.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No that's fine, they just switch to the SRY gene.

Or they just I ignore it like all those intersex XY (and other chromosomal abnormalities) people born with female genitals.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

But intersex people are super rare! We definitely aren’t a wide spectrum and more common than trans people

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Not sure if this is a sarcastic or genuine comment. Regardless a quick google came up with these estimates.

intersex 0.018% or 1.7% depending on what you include in the definition of intersex. transgender: 0.5%

So depending on your definition of intersex it can be 3 times as many intersected people compared to transgender or 28 times as many transgender compared to intersex.

Imo it's very likely a big intersection in these two subpopulations.

transgender 1 in 250 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5227946/

intersex: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476264/

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Is it possible to learn this power?

[–] [email protected] 23 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yes it is. Many universities now offer degrees in genetics.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

I thought you were going to say Women's Studies.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Only the tiny molecules though- don't mess with the big ones.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I was wondering why they referred to the deletions as “tiny molecules” instead of “genes”, but I guess it’s to emphasize that they code for microRNAs instead of proteins.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This just in: scientists successfully delete molecules

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

"Woopsie, where is the ctrl+z ?" - Scientist Trainee.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They made it physically female but does it still think it's male?

Partially /s but I do wonder if I was being super unethical what the results in humans would be with a large sample size. Nobody put me in vault 4.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No worries China has probably already 10 impregnated women carrying MTF female babies.

On the one side, I feel like it would be unnecessary unless it was like the end of days and there were no women. On the other hand, like if you end up male in the head but beautiful female on the outside, I would be pissed and annoyed. But I would probably still have sex and marry. But it would be annoying having to be at the receiving end of the penis and pretend I like it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Which is through struggle some people deal with. I don't see the reason to cause it intentionally. I feel like it's super unethical. If woman were in that much demand we should focus on artificial wombs.

Lol "No straight man in the head is taken dick" you probably just be a lesbian which would defeat the whole point of artificially producing women. Unless... it's for harvesting more eggs for the birthing pods. Oh man really don't put me in charge of vault 4 I'm unhinged with power.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I suppose you can just make artificial eggs and put them in artificial wombs. So there's probably no reason to really try and change people's genitals via DNA.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Where is the unethical fun part of that! /s

Never heard of artificial eggs. Is that real or sci-fi talk?