https://www.march-against-monsanto.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/mamweb-2.png

Scientists Genetically Modify Monkeys For Autism Research

By On January 26, 2018

If aliens unfamiliar with planet Earth hypothetically paid us a visit, they might consider China the capital of the world. It is the most populous country in one of the most populous regions of the world.

China is also in many ways a template for how controlled a population “should” be in the eyes of the people who run the world.

From the “smart city” of Hangzhou where police are called to the scene of anything unlawful survielled in the city with its grid of cameras and microphones linked up to robo-snitch artificial intelligence, to China’s cold, fluorescent lit rooms where their scientists chip away at life’s mystery to convert it into profit, you could say China represents everything we don’t want humanity to become.

Hardcore, widespread adult mandatory vaccination is in place in China, but they still have “measles” outbreaks with a 99% vaccinated population. In the past, carelessly contaminated vaccines have killed many people in China (as if vaccines aren’t inherently “contaminated” with Thiomersal and aluminum and worse).

Then, protests ensued about the contaminated vaccines and people being forced to get them, so the government just cracked down on the protests: who’s going to stop them, the civilian population is disarmed. It’s no exaggeration to say in many ways China is hell, no disrespect to the good people of China who have to deal with their government.

Now, Chinese scientists are making headlines with the announcement that they have successfully cloned a monkey: because “populations of genetically identical monkeys would be a valuable asset to research,” as Science Alert suggests.

We’re obviously not going to be told the more sinister or heartbreaking details of what it would entail to create “populations of genetically identical monkeys,” or what experiments would be conducted upon them in China where it is still legal to experiment on primates, but mainstream articles about the announcement are taking the approach of focusing more on the scientists’ techniques.

They say that the same cloning technique that brought the world the first cloned mammal, Dolly the sheep in 1996, was used: somatic cell nucleus transfer (SCNT).

At the Chinese Academy of Sciences Institute of Neuroscience in Shanghai, 2 genetically identical long-tailed macaques now reside. Born six and eight weeks ago, they are named Hua Hua and Zhong Zhong. The research was published in the journal Cell Press.

“We tried several different methods, but only one worked,” senior author of the study Qiang Sun said. “There was much failure before we found a way to successfully clone a monkey.”

“There are a lot of questions about primate biology that can be studied by having this additional model,” Sun continued.

“You can produce cloned monkeys with the same genetic background except the gene you manipulated. This will generate real models not just for genetically based brain diseases, but also cancer, immune, or metabolic disorders and allow us to test the efficacy of the drugs for these conditions before clinical use.”

In 1999 the first primate ever to be cloned is said to be Tetra, a rhesus monkey cloned in Oregon using an embryo splitting method.

According to Science Alert:

“But even though SCNT can produce a larger population of genetically identical animals than embryo-splitting, previous attempts to clone rhesus monkeys using the technique have found that the embryos tend not to progress on to the blastocyst stage.

The Chinese team turned to previous studies that found preventing epigenetic changes to DNA – chemical modifications affecting how certain sequences are expressed – boosted the chances other cloned embryos would survive.

This was progress, but something was still amiss. While the researchers were able to bring foetuses to term using adult donor cells in the eggs, the baby monkeys only survived for a short time after being born.”

Then the official narrative goes, the researchers improved on their methods by taking fetal tissue cells and using those. The two monkeys were cloned using fetal fibroblasts, cells stolen from the connective tissue of a macaque fetus.

Doesn’t taking the fetal fibroblasts from a macaque fetus mean they killed a fetus to perfect this method of cloning? Perhaps they grew the fetus in a lab.. and still ended up killing it?

In the past, headlines have been made about genetically modified monkeys being used to study autism. According to one article published a couple years ago in the Guardian titled “Genetically modified monkeys created to help scientists study autism”:

“Genetically modified (GM) monkeys that develop symptoms of autism have been created to help scientists discover treatments for the condition.

The macaques carry a genetic fault that causes a rare disorder in humans called MeCP2 duplication syndrome. This produces a wide range of medical conditions, some of which mirror those seen in autism, such as difficulties with social interactions.

Researchers say groups of the GM monkeys could be used to identify brain circuits involved in common autistic behaviours and to test new treatments designed to alleviate the symptoms.

Because the monkeys pass the genetic defects on to their offspring, scientists can breed large populations of the animals for medical research. A group of 200 monkeys has been established at the scientists’ lab in China.

The research, described in the journal Nature, paves the way for more varieties of GM monkeys that develop different mental and psychiatric problems which are almost impossible to study in other animals.”

What are they doing? Oh, just genetically modifying monkeys to have horrible medical conditions, autism, ect. probably to try and push the narrative that autism is strictly a result of genetic factors. Nothing to see here.

The usual bad taste in your mouth from reading about experiments on animals and scientific research will certainly appear from looking into this.

If you’re reading this, you probably have the same (righteous) bias that we do. Is this really worth it? When will people stop and say, “okay, that’s enough technology and f*cking with nature now, we don’t need any more?” If you’re not a regular reader, much respect for caring to read this. There might not be anything that could convince you this is immoral if you don’t see it now.

People don’t stop, because we are all forced to make a paycheck, and if some institution is handed money from people they can’t even see to pursue some research, there will always be some people willing to do the work.

 

(Image credit: Science Alert, PI, Virginia.Edu)