“The end of men”
posted at 8:40 am on July 8, 2009 by Pundette
[ Culture ] regular view
Once we would have called them mad scientists:
Scientists have created human sperm in the laboratory for the first time. The extraordinary development, which until a few years ago belonged in the realms of science fiction, raises hopes that infertile men may one day be able to father their own biological children.
The sperm were created in a test tube, from stem cells derived from a five-day-old male embryo. The advance raises ethical questions over the safety of the procedure and the threat it poses to the future role of men. It was also challenged by experts who claimed the sperm-like cells produced in the experiment were not genuine sperm.
If the finding is confirmed, a single male embryo could, in theory, yield a stem-cell line which when stored could provide an unlimited supply of sperm. Once the stem-cell line was established, there would be no further reproductive need for men. In a briefing on the research, the scientists at Newcastle University and the NorthEast England Stem Cell Institute, led by Professor Karim Nayernia, raise the question of whether their discovery means “the end of men”.
Men! Can’t live with them, can’t live without them.
They point out that the stem cells from which the sperm were made could only be derived from a male embryo – one containing a Y (male) chromosome – so at least one male would be required.
At least one male would be required. Take comfort in that, fellas.
“However, researchers believe that the issue does need to be debated and legislated for,” they said. “As work progresses and results improve at Newcastle and elsewhere it may, in theory, be possible to develop sperm from embryonic stem cell lines which have been stored.”
The mad scientists would prefer that we don’t interfere with their delvings into the bizarre and unnatural.
Professor Nayernia said: “In theory it would be possible [to dispense with men], but only if you want to produce a population all the same size and shape [because they have the same male genetic origin]. Personally I cannot see human reproduction as purely a biological process. It has human, emotional, psychological, social and ethical aspects, too. We are doing this research to help infertile men, not to replace a reproductive procedure.”
I think he’s saying that, speaking as just one mad scientist, mad science probably won’t entirely do away with making babies the old-fashioned way.
Call me crazy, but who’s to say our society won’t want to produce matching people? We’re very comfortable with mass-produced, slickly-packaged, identical products. Applying this to humans wouldn’t be that much of a stretch, especially in the case of a perceived ’superior’ product. It’s not difficult to imagine elites opting for the Lexus of manufactured sperm. Eventually, perhaps, the mad scientists could find a way to slightly alter the sperm, just to give it the cache of customization. A special birthmark or something. Yes, a female egg, with its own genetic material, is still necessary for human production, but the mad scientists are working on that problem, too.
Read the rest. Not all mad scientists agree that test-tube sperm are real sperm. And note that the claim at the top, about “rais[ing] hopes that infertile men may one day be able to father their own biological children,” appears to be unfounded. Unless I’m missing something, the sperm made in the lab wouldn’t come from the male seeking fertility treatment.
Q: How long before we hear about breakthroughs in human/animal reproduction? Science has been entirely stripped of morality.
H/t: Andy McCarthy
Cross-posted here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Greenroom Feed
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
It’s been the end of real men in this country for a long time. Fatherhood is not valued in the sense of a strong family unit, and heaven forbid we should ever have anyone remotely resembling a cowboy in public office.
Liberty Card
Liberty Card on July 8, 2009 at 10:28 AM
Interesting… thanks for posting!
On the upside, if nobody needs men anymore to make babies, we’ll have even more time to watch football and drink beer.
Seriously though, I’m fascinated at some in the science community who view life as nothing but an “accident,” but who nonetheless are in awe and pat themselves on the back when they can come even close to re-creating it in a Petrie dish.
When God does it, it’s an accident, when the Beekerheads create a cheap and dangerously flawed copy, it’s a miracle.
dougpowers on July 8, 2009 at 2:20 PM
Dr. Nayernia also claims to have made progress creating sperm from skin cells. Studying the simpler case of creating sperm from embryonic stem cells aids this research.
Nobody’s trying to create Dr. Moreau’s island. The explicitly stated purpose of this research (which is fulfilled, pretty much by definition, by its success), is to create fertility treatments for men who can’t produce viable sperm.
Economics, for starters. The old-fashioned method of making babies is a lot cheaper than any artificial alternatives (and a lot more fun).
Our nature drives us to want to have children who look like ourselves and our partners. As I said before, that’s why they’re doing this research in the first place.
Take a deep breath, put down the pitchfork, and get the hell out of the way of legitimate medical research.
RightOFLeft on July 8, 2009 at 3:38 PM
I’ve never heard a scientist say, “life is nothing but an accident.” An accident is spilling your coffee on the keyboard. Life is the natural consequence of all the laws in the universe working together for 13 billion years. So, yeah, it’s pretty impressive to see an experiment that reproduces some of that work.
RightOFLeft on July 8, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Attempting to create the essential materials of reproduction goes beyond medical research. And using human embryos to do so crosses the line into illegitimate territory.
The natural way doesn’t always win out. Canada, Japan, Europe are committing a very unnatural suicide by declining to reproduce by natural or other means. What could be less ‘natural’ than a mother destroying her own child? But this is a routine occurrence.
Pundette on July 9, 2009 at 7:06 AM
In other words, an accident.
BlameAmericaLast on July 9, 2009 at 2:58 PM
Not to the men who can’t create those materials naturally. To them it’s therapy, no different than making insulin for diabetics.
They’re using discarded human embryos. It’s no different than research on cadavers. It might be uncomfortable to think about, but it’s within accepted medical ethics.
Even in those countries where the birth rate has declined, the preferred, nearly universal modes of reproduction is the birds-and-the-bees model. A powerful instinct compels us to prefer passing our own genes down over somebody else’s.
And you’re still ignoring the economic reality that makes this all a moot point.
RightOFLeft on July 10, 2009 at 7:22 AM
Whatever. Take it up with God. That’s how he did the job. If you don’t like it, that’s between you and him.
RightOFLeft on July 10, 2009 at 7:34 AM
It’s only an economic issue until we get Obamacare.
Really? Nobody? Now and forever? You’re absolutely, positively sure?
Refusing to entertain even the potential validity of an opponent’s viewpoint, unreasoning faith in one method of enquiry over all others . . . yep, you’re a religious fanatic, all right! Unfortunately, nothing can stop this march to madness — it’s the curse of humanity that it will do anything that it can do, whether or not it should. Maybe you for one welcome our new posthuman nightmare, but don’t flatter yourself by thinking that provides you with intellectual, still less moral, superiority. Science is silent on morality, but those who fanatically embrace science as a religion have brought us some of our greatest moral atrocities, and I think that we ain’t seen nothin’ yet.
loneloc on July 10, 2009 at 8:01 PM