Toggle light / dark theme

Researchers have used the gene-editing technique CRISPR to delete a segment of DNA associated with autism and schizophrenia from mouse brain cells.

The technique has only proven effective in mice so far but may eventually be suitable for treating brain conditions in people, says Xiao-hong Lu, assistant professor of pharmacology and neuroscience at Louisiana State University Health in Shreveport.

Unlike techniques used to manipulate DNA in the mouse brain, CRISPR can be applied to people. He says, “We need a tool to help us to carry the genetic elements into the [human] brain.”

Circa 2017


Insulin-producing cells have been restored in mouse models of type 1 diabetes using a new genetic engineering technique.

American scientists adapted the gene editing technology known as CRISPR (clustered, regularly interspaced, short palindromic repeat) to successfully treat mouse models of type 1 diabetes, kidney disease and muscular dystrophy.

CRISPR enables scientists to edit the genetic material of an organism allowing for DNA sequences to be easily altered and gene function to be modified.

The Harvard University offshoot i20 Therapeutics is setting the goal of one day having those who suffer from diabetes to be able to treat it with pills rather than injections with a syringe when they need to take their medications.

Bioengineering researchers began to publish their methods in 2018 for turning liquid medications into encapsulated easy to swallow forms, which has demonstrated some early success with insulin in animal models.

Starting out with $4 million in seed money from Sanofi Ventures and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation’s T1D Fund, i20 Therapeutics plans to take that technology to GLP1 analogs, these are the glucagon like peptides that help to maintain blood sugar levels; i20 is focused on creating the next generation of oral peptide and protein based therapies.

If you’ve been interested in nanotech, but have been too afraid to ask, here is an introductory and interesting article that I’d like to recommend.

My interest in nanotech is based on my hope that nanotech can lead to methods of constructing substrates that are suitable for mind uploading. It may lead to a technique to create duplicate minds.

“These ‘biological engineering’ technologies have made real one of the dreams of the nanotechnology pioneers: the deployment of molecular assemblers able to construct any shape with atomic precision, following a rational design.”

“…hybrid bioinorganic devices that mimic biological processes will soon be used in new computers and electronic devices.”


In the mid-1980s, evidence started to emerge from labs across the world confirming that scientists were finally able to reach the nano level in experimental conditions and not just with their theories. Working at scales defined in millionths of a millimetre, Richard Smalley, Robert Curl and Harold Kroto reported the discovery of ‘buckminsterfullerene’ – a nanosized polyhedron, with 32 faces fused into a cage-like, soccer-ball structure, and with carbon atoms sitting in each of its 60 vertices.

These miniature ‘Bucky’ balls (named for their similarity to the geodesic dome structures made by the architect R Buckminster Fuller in the 1950s), are found in tiny quantities in soot, in interstellar space and in the atmospheres of carbon-rich red giant stars, but Kroto was able to recreate them in chemical reactions in the lab while visiting Rice University in Texas. Then, in 1991, Nadrian Seeman’s lab at New York University used 10 artificial strands of DNA to create the first human-made nanostructure, connecting up the DNA strands to resemble the edges of a cube, so marking the beginning of the field now known as ‘DNA nanotechnology’. Clever scientists with broad visions started to realise that a new kind of technology, prophesied by Richard Feynman in the 1950s, was finally materialising, as researchers achieved the capacity to visualise, fabricate and manipulate matter at the nanometre scale.

The term nanotechnology was coined in 1974 by the Japanese scientist Norio Taniguchi to describe semiconductor processes involving engineering at the nanoscale, but it entered public debate only with the publication of K Eric Drexler’s influential Engines of Creation (1986), a hyperbolic book of futuristic scientific imaginings of what might be achieved on the scale of the unimaginably small. Drexler’s book sparked longlasting controversies, notably focused on the weak scientific grounding of some of his ideas; but nothing stuck more to the public consciousness than his prediction of a hypothetical ‘grey goo’, scourge of a global dystopia involving out-of-control self-replicating machines devouring all life on Earth.

Scientists can identify pathogenic genes through genetic engineering. This involves adding human-made DNA into a bacterial cell. However, the problem is that bacteria have evolved complex defense systems to protect against foreign intruders — especially foreign DNA. Current genetic engineering approaches often disguise the human-made DNA as bacterial DNA to thwart these defenses, but the process requires highly specific modifications and is expensive and time-consuming.

In a paper published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal, Dr. Christopher Johnston and his colleagues at the Forsyth Institute describe a new technique to genetically engineer bacteria by making human-made DNA invisible to a bacterium’s defenses. In theory, the method can be applied to almost any type of bacteria.

Johnston is a researcher in the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and lead author of the paper. He said that when a bacterial cell detects it has been penetrated by foreign DNA, it quickly destroys the trespasser. Bacteria live under constant threat of attack by a virus, so they have developed incredibly effective defenses against those threats.

Christian views tend to be more prohibitive compared with other religions.


It is difficult to examine society’s acceptance or rejection of key biotech developments without considering the role played by the world’s major religions and their belief structures.

Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam react to new technologies and concepts in their own way – though there is rarely universal consensus on every issue within those religions. Not surprisingly, the basis for modern day beliefs is often found in scripture and related lore.

To better understand, for example, how religions view the use of human embryonic tissue for research and treatment, consider the ancient Jewish tales of golemim — super beings created by humans for protection and tasks.

A team of scientists, led by the University of Bristol, has developed a new photosynthetic protein system enabling an enhanced and more sustainable approach to solar-powered technological devices.

The initiative is part of a broader effort in the field of to use proteins in place of man-made materials which are often scarce, expensive and can be harmful to the environment when the device becomes obsolete.

The aim of the study, published today in Nature Communications, was the development of “chimera” complexes that display poly-chromatic solar energy harvesting.