I find this a little concerning. Something about inventing new building blocks of DNA, and effectively creating living organisms with DNA patterns completely alien to anything that could've naturally occurred on earth just doesn't sit right with me.

But maybe I'm overreacting. What does everyone else think about this?

Progress is progress. I mean I've read enough Michael Chrichton to understand why 'The guys in the lab say it's totally safe' is a dangerous answer, I get it, zombie plagues are bad. We can't have that reaction to *every* new technique. If it kills off the human race then it was a stupid idea, until then, I say knock yourselves out, science. Maybe they can use these new proteins to create better bovine growth steroids.

Kaga said
Something about inventing new building blocks of DNA, and effectively creating living organisms with DNA patterns completely alien to anything that could've naturally occurred on earth just doesn't sit right with me.

But maybe I'm overreacting. What does everyone else think about this?

I think the point when the article notes some may be concerned about 'humans playing God' definitely speaks to the core of this as an issue rather than achievement. The idea of creating something new does give some reason to be curious about safety, but should be more inspiring and encouraging of future success. If this were something immediately interpreted as a step toward better weaponry or killing machines, then yeah, I'd be horrified. But they're talking about the potential for life off earth. About medical possibilities. All this could be turned into something dangerous, or perhaps we'll discover something quite poisonous, but I'd think it's worth it. Historically, anyway, when we created plastic, synthetic rubber, and started using nuclear energy we were always driving into the future. Most of these do cause health and environmental issues, serious ones actually, yet somehow the general public accepts it by majority. I don't see how this is really all that different besides the fact that we hold this idea that our bodies are sacred. I agree we are worth protecting, worth caring for, but I see us intertwining technology with our lives for some pseudo-evolution move ahead. Looking into the biological possibilities is actually amazing. What could we unlock as we learn about our own DNA? What if we could achieve those seemingly fantastical abilities in science fiction where our bodies aren't just vehicles we can kind of drive, but instead understand intimately.

That said, yeah, we're probably going to explore all the genetic possibilities that did not lead to successful life. That unlocks whole other issue, but I like the possibility of us understanding ourselves and life in general in new light. I think the notion that this sort of science is playing God suggests, if such a being existed, that we could go against their overarching plan somehow. This could easily be the first step toward discovering our successors. Imagine the beauty of becoming a species that actually brought another to life -- a small gift in light of all the species we have driven to extinction and will before the end of our kind.

Oooh! Neato science!

More methods to fix problems is never an issue in my mind. Maybe they could use artificial genes to cure genetic disorders. Exciting!

As for humanity playing God, we have been already. It's called modern medicine.

I don't think there's any worry, labguys took their work safety seriously since, most of the time, it would be their asses that would be first casualty. So, a Grey Goo won't be starting unless someone that pays them order them to create one.

This is an interesting advance, although at present improvements to our daily lives are a long way off. An immediate benefit is to have a greater understanding of how genetic codes work, which is a worth-while exploration. But alien proteins and whatnot would require not only writing the genetic code for it but also redeveloping the entire protein manufacturing pathway to accommodate for the artificial nucleotides and artificial amino acids. If they do get that working (which would likely require developments even more revolutionary than these nucleotides), though, then we have a potential boon to society.

At present, safety is not a concern. As it says in the article, the organisms can not produce their own artificial nucleotides (because their artificial). This means they will either die off or revert to normal if they can not attain those artificial nucleotides. Even if they were given the ability to synthesise their own nucleotides, I can not see them being any more of a threat than other GMOs with the natural genetic alphabet.

What I'm surprised by is that they couldn't come up with any better letters than X and Y. I mean, DNA is already GATC, why not add in P and V? Or N and E? Just something more creative than X and Y is all I'm asking for.

Captain Jordan said
What I'm surprised by is that they couldn't come up with any better letters than X and Y. I mean, DNA is already GATC, why not add in P and V? Or N and E? Just something more creative than X and Y is all I'm asking for.

Perhaps they chose X and Y because they are obviously artificial. I suppose if they chose some other letters they would have to justify it somehow by coming up with a matching name, such as guanine for G or thymine for T. X and Y, however, are so arbitrary that they can be used to label anything. Of course, that's avoiding creativity.