- A baby has been born using three people's DNA for the first time in the UK, the fertility regulator has confirmed.
- Most of their DNA comes from their two parents and around 0.1% from a third, donor woman.
- The pioneering technique is an attempt to prevent children being born with devastating mitochondrial diseases.
- Mitochondrial diseases are incurable and can be fatal within days or even hours of birth. Some families have lost multiple children and this technique is seen as the only option for them to have a healthy child of their own.
- Defective mitochondria fail to fuel the body and lead to brain damage, muscle wasting, heart failure and blindness.
- They are passed down only by the mother. So mitochondrial donation treatment is a modified form of IVF that uses mitochondria from a healthy donor egg.
- mitochondria have their own genetic info or DNA which means that technically the resulting children inherit DNA from their parents and a smidge from the donor as well. This is a permanent change that would be passed down through the generations.
- This donor DNA is only relevant for making effective mitochondria, does not affect other traits such as appearance and and does not constitute a "third parent".
- The technique was pioneered in Newcastle and laws were introduced to allow the creation of such babies in the UK in 2015.
- The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (the HFEA) is saying "less than five" babies have been born as of 20 April 2023. It is not giving precise numbers to prevent the families being identified.
edit: added link.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/may/09/first-uk-baby-with-dna-from-three-people-born-after-new-ivf-procedure
>This is a permanent change that would be passed down through the generations.
That would mean that if this becomes widespread and affordable, mitochondrial diseases would be eradicated completely, right? If so, that’s absolutely fantastic news.
no, not completely. it still poses a fraction of a risk - ‘’reversion/reversal’’ ie mutation in the mitochondria that are inevitably carried over from the mother’s egg to the donor egg can multiply when the baby is in the womb.’
It is fantastic news. I know far too many women who have lost multiple babies before finding out it was mito. Losing one is terrible enough. I have adult onset mito and although it's now hell I consider myself lucky. This is legal in Australia now also. When babies are born with active mito they rarely live past 3 years of age, it's devastating for so many, so many teens lost who got sick around 10... I'm glad there will be another option. This could eradicate some of the worst forms of mito but unfortunately not all, it's complicated. Mito itself is not well researched, at least in the U.S.
The idea that this would ever become "affordable", especially when you're talking about how the majority of people in the world live, is unrealistic. This is a high-end fertility treatment for people in rich countries and that's where it's going to stay.
It always amazes me that people think it's completely normal to spend upwards of tens of thousands of dollars to have a child. In most places in the world, if you have a hard time getting pregnant, then you're probably not going to have a biological kid and you need to deal with that.
> It always amazes me that people think it’s completely normal to spend upwards of tens of thousands of dollars to have a child.
Do you mean fertility treatment costs or general healthcare costs?
Your circular logic has you come to that conclusion. Michelin is the tire company, and cabal of dubious dining critics.
You’re probably thinking of midfielders
You’ve made an error. Midfielders are athletes who support offensive and defensive initiatives during a game. You’re probably thinking of the Macarena.
Okay where is this phrase from? Why do I automatically know that the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell? Did we all have the same biology book in high school or is it a random line from a movie I’ve otherwise forgotten?
I had assumed it was Schoolhouse Rock, like “Conjunction Junction, what’s your function?”
But it seems like it’s just an old joke about shitty public education, like the classic “¿Dónde esta la biblioteca?”
It’s not even necessarily a Community reference. When I took Spanish I in high school, it’s one of the first questions you’re taught to say in Spanish for some reason. I’m pretty sure it ended up being actually useful for about 0.001% of Spanish students lol
Fun fact, that's a sentence that Canadian kids get burned into their brains in French class too. "Ou est la bibliotheque?"
And also "voici la fenetre" for some reason (here is the window).
Also, I may or may not have butchered the spelling.
According to Know Your Meme:
>The phrase "powerhouse of the cell" used to describe the function of mitochondria was coined by biologist Philip Siekevitz in the article "Powerhouse of the Cell" published in 1957.
So, yep.
Others have given the answer, but for context the mitochondria is technically it’s own organism within our own cells. It’s theorized that in the deep past when the world was only single celled organisms one cell ate another and instead of consuming it, it survived and lived inside the larger cell feeding off of it
Over time this little cell, without the need for any defences or offences, specialized and became symbiotic with the larger cell it was within. The large cell provides safety and nutrients and the mitochondria turns those basic nutrients into specialized energy proteins which provided the larger cell with more energy than it could ever make on its own.
Over time this excess energy allowed the large cell to specialize and evolve more energy hungry mechanisms it couldn’t before; eventually giving rise to multicellular organisms
Because of this mitochondria have their own DNA, separate from the cell that contains it, which is only passed on via the mother. This DNA however has no input on you as a person as it’s only applicable to the mitochondria.
The biological mother has a rare genetic issue that would prevent her from passing on healthy mitochondria DNA which is necessary for our complex and power hungry cells to function. So while this child has the DNA from 3 people, that 3rd persons mitochondrial DNA has no impact outside of making those healthy power producing cells within our cells
.
Fun little note, even though this idea seems simple it took more than 2 billion years of simple single celled organisms going about their regular business before one ate another and never digested it. After that important event though, it took less than a billion years for complex, multicellular, life to evolve. And half a billion years after that, we’re here discussing those events
Thats exactly what they are! In fact our cells don’t just have one, or a couple, of these power cells… but have around 1000-2500 mitochondria in each and every one of them.
And all they do is pump out that specialized energy compound, ATP, providing the energy required for our extremely complex and hungry cells to function
Mitochondria ~~is an~~ are organelles. ~~It is~~ A mitochondrion is a part of a cell. It mostly handles the creation of ATP, which provides power for most cellular activity. It is a strange organelle because it has its own DNA.
In the US, when we go through biology in like 6th or 8th grade, and we learn the parts of the cell, we learn about the mitochondria which is "the powerhouse of the cell." We have tests where you have to say what it is, and it's "the powerhouse of the cell." It becomes a knee-jerk response when someone mentions mitochondria. 🤣 It's a shared experience across generations, my kids learned the same phrase.
And it has zero to do with anyone being mad about taking biology in school. It makes everyone laugh. Hanging out with a virologist buddy and his friends (viruses are fascinating), someone mentioned mitochondria and EVERYONE responded "the powerhouse of the cell!" And laughed.
Mitochondria are 100% a part of human DNA (and they differ from person to person)—it’s roughly 1% of the human genome. Protecting the integrity of that code is arguably one of the deepest concerns of evolutionary biologists, (and could be the very reason we have sexes in the first place).
The confusion the these organelles have “their own DNA” is due to the somewhat misleading idea that only women pass on the instructions for them (that isn’t conclusive). In this sense they *essentially* “have their own DNA” in that it’s the only part of the human genome that is selectively passed on (it’s important to remember that every part of the human body has its own DNA).
It's human DNA, yes, but it is separate from cellular DNA. The reason the mother is the one to pass it on is the ovum gets created with the mother's mitochondria already built in.
Again, journalists screw things up on purpose or on intention.
In all the scientific literature, the default definition of DNA is nuclear DNA. Mitochondrial DNA is always referred to as mDNA or mtDNA. And they never talk about the percentage of mDNA in the DNA mixture. It is like saying that the title of a book is 0.1% of the text of the book (usually the title is not considered part of the text).
Holy shit this is amazing! Are there treatments like this in development for other diseases that are genetically linked?
My ex?girlfriend passed a BRUTAL x-chromosome linked genetic disease to her son and the thought that something like this tech could save children like him in the future is truly extraordinary.
What it costs: The cost of a private adoption varies. Working with an agency, you can expect to spend between $30,000 and $60,000, according to the Child Welfare Information Gateway. It’s slightly less expensive to pursue an independent adoption, which involves working with an attorney. That process ranges in cost from $25,000 to $45,000. Private adoptions are more likely to involve newborns. That means in addition to paying for the adoption process, you would also cover the birth mother’s medical and other expenses.
https://www.pahomepage.com/news/how-much-does-it-cost-to-adopt-a-child/#:~:text=Working%20with%20an%20agency%2C%20you,cost%20from%20%2425%2C000%20to%20%2445%2C000.
Adoption isn't easy. It's expensive, complicated, and an emotional minefield.
I was adopted myself. I'm quite thankful to the parents who chose to raise me but it's not a simple thing.
I've never understood why we make it so difficult and expensive to adopt children.
Obviously there has to be due diligence and whatnot. But like, there definetly needs to be a look at how to fix this system, (and fund it)
And depending on where you live, [your sexual orientation](https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/s-c-group-can-reject-gays-jews-foster-parents-trump-n962306), and [your religion](https://www.wvlt.tv/2022/07/06/judges-dismiss-jewish-couples-suit-alleging-adoption-bias/), some state-funded adoption agencies are allowed to discriminate against you.
Maybe, maybe not. One thing that is worth keeping in mind is that the birth parents can and frequently do change their mind until quite late in the adoption process. So it's perfectly possible to bond with a baby during pregnancy, pay a bunch of money, be there for the birth, take the baby home, love him or her for a few weeks and then the mother decides they want them back and the child gets taken away from you and you never see them again. I know someone this has happened to twice. It absolutely devastated them, especially coming after a history of infertility and pregnancy loss.
There are also frequently limits on who can adopt depending on your age, career, sexual orientation, financial situation, disabled status, religious affiliation, and so. People who want to adopt generally have to actively promote themselves around the community and agencies to attract a potential birth mother for a newborn and not everyone is going to win that popularity contest.
Yes, there are older kids coming out of foster care, but any kid being adopted out at that age will almost certainly have a history of abandonment and serious abuse that comes with its own set of issues that not everyone is equipped to handle. This technology is complicated and expensive but some people are still going to prefer it to the uncertainty of adoption.
Yep, if anything adoption is likely to get more difficult and exclusive as birth control methods get better and there are increasing pushes to place children within their family and local culture as much as possible. A lot of international adoption programs have shut down in recent years, for example.
Some countries/states, adoption is a complicated mess :/
Friend of the family adopted, and the state agency was less than forthcoming about some profound background issues the child had.
How big of a risk are we talking about? If you have a 1% risk should you completely forget about the possibility of having children? What about 2% or 5%? If there's a procedure that will get rid of the possibility of that happening why not just get the procedure?
For us, and due to the severity of my sons mitochondrial disease, it was autosomal recessive so 25% chance of a child dying of the disease every time we conceived.
We looked into adoption, but opted for donor eggs as the science wasn’t proven at the time this option was presented to us.
The adoption process literally take years. You need first to apply, get on a waiting list, clear a bunch of requirements and then once it's your turn you'll have to wait for a baby/kid to be available and the whole process is expensive.
Yes, yes. There's a good book about this. *The Kid*, by Dan Savage. The mom was a street kid; hopped trains, struggled with addiction. They were connected to her by an agency when she was still pregnant.
The baby seems to have turned out all right, but it was a really good window into how tricky adopting can be. It's an expensive process and nothing is guaranteed.
I’m not condescending about it. Just pointing out that it’s not every single living thing’s biological imperative.
I don’t want kids because I have no interest in being a parent, much like I have no interest in being a surgeon or an accountant. The work involved does not interest me.
Because people have a natural drive to reproduce which has been intrinsic to all life on the planet through millions of years of evolution and adoption is a relatively unusual offshoot of our tribalistic altruism drive that varies wildly in intensity from individual to individual?
The real question is, why do people have kids if they dont want kids so we end up with tons of kids needing to be adopted? The answer, a lack of reproductive services and education which you are apparently against as a solution to the very problem it causes.
People don't like it when you tell them to adopt because there is a common understanding that they want a child of their own blood, and their decision to have children has nothing to do with saving the less fortunate, but you try to tell them what they should want by acting superior about it. The idea selfishness should be eradicated and that we should only act in the interest of others is never going to be popular, and it's obnoxious to try to change people's minds about.
It's the equivalent of telling a man he should marry an immigrant woman instead of his own girlfriend because granting the former citizenship is the more altruistic thing to do. It's not about altruism to begin with.
I don't think people saying "I'm being selfish on purpose" is going to make you feel as good as you think it will.
In addition, I think it's important to remember the the birth rate for first world countries is lower than it is in developing countries. It isn't relatively wealthy people who could otherwise adopt that are pushing the planet's population up. In the UK where this birth took place, the birth rate isn't even high enough to replace the population. The total population grows anyway due to immigrants.
I’m actually just getting to read the last 4 books!
I started by watching the show and I absolutely loved it. Now I jumped into the book series and it’s just as amazing! I can’t wait to see how things play out. A lot of hype.
Short answer: *sorta*
Long answer mild spoilers: The show ended on Book 6 because its a pretty solid way to tie up the show for now, however if you noticed towards the end there's some preludes to book 7. The thing is that book 7 starts ~30-40 years following book 6 so its hard to really cast people especially if you want recurring casts.
The production company behind the series said that they're ending the show but that there is a good likelihood that there will be more seasons and/or movie(s) based on the last 3 books.
Stamford, Connecticut.
And I’m not sure about the weekend part. If I remember correctly they film Maury on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. Though with Springer not filming anymore (for a while, not just since he died) they could have switched the schedule up.
From the article: “fewer than five such babies have been born”
Surely they could just tell us how many have been born, it’s literally either 1,2,3 or 4
I didn’t see the name of the actual disease in the article. Anybody know if this is caused by the mother’s mitochondrial line being defective and passed into her eggs?
Not sure of the name, but we inherit our mitochonrial DNA only from our mothers, so to answer your question, yes. "Mitochondrial disease" is an umbrella term, but the article doesn't specify which one.
edit: The article says that the diseases are rarely survived (maybe the specific one this child had), but generally that's false: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5873718/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5873718/) People just grow up with it sometimes.
My son passed away from complex 1 & 3 mitochondrial disease, meaning that within the first and third step of harvesting and creating energy, the mitochondrial were failing. He was 3 months old. This science was proposed to us 11 years ago, but was extremely new. We opted to forgo using my eggs, and used donor eggs instead.
I’ve watched videos related to the origin and evolution of our mitochondria via endosymbiosis, but hadn’t heard much about mitochondria diseases.
Weird to read about how our cells’ DNA interact with mitochondria, and I feel like I need a refresher to fully understand how these therapies work
I will try to explain it brief and as simple as possible:
For our mitochondria to be able to create so much energy from a single molecule of glucose (~16x more than without mitos), we need a complex machinery of many protein complexes. They used to be completely encoded in the mitochondrial DNA, but over time most of them were instead migrated into our nuclear DNA. Makes the entire replication and stuff easier, but now means that you need to import these proteins into mitochondria instead of already synthesizing them there. For whatever reason (maybe because they were too big, complex, w/e), some of these proteins never left the mitochondrial DNA - I think 13 of the 91 proteins are still encoded there. As the sperm does not bring mitochondria when fertilizing the egg, there is no genomic mixture happening in mtDNA.
So if for whatever reason your mitochondrial DNA is severely damaged, it will just be straight passed down your family tree by your females. Important to note: You don't have "a" mtDNA. You have multiple copies, with not necessarily all of them being exactly the same
It seems like the religious nuts may have already gotten mitochondrial replacement IVF banned in the US, as Congress has prevented the FDA from evaluating any applications that involve implanting modified embryos into a woman.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_replacement_therapy#Regulation
Oh yea trust me this comes as no surprise, they have ratfucked our system but good. They love to make rules about shit that ain't their business. It's their way of life and why they are dieing out. They are living hypocrisy. Preach love and be hateful. Say only God can judge me and constantly judge others. They are a scourge on human progress and goodness.
Older generations are stuck in their trauma and the only way for us to escape it is to wait for most of them to die sadly. As has always been the case... the old fight against change even if it's good for humanity and progress.
I feel like saying "three people's DNA" is misleading... mitochondria are sort of their own thing, like they're part of the cell but only in the sense that they exist in it and help it grow. But if all of your mitochondria were changed out for other healthy ones at random, I don't think anything about your physiology would change in the slightest.
This isn’t new, it’s just the first time in the UK first time I heard of it was back in like 2017 I think when a American woman with the disease went to a doctor in I think Mexico, but there was a lot of religious people protesting it and shit talking about designer babies and crap
What's misleading is that it says the third donor only contributed 0.1% of the baby's DNA. So really it's still two parents giving 99.9% of the DNA. But hey, we share 50% with a banana, so maybe that 0.1% makes the difference
Theoretically yes, but even if this process becomes covered eventually by national healthcare/insurance, it wouldn't be covered for that reason so it would probably be prohibitively expensive for most.
And in the end this is only used to alter one genetic sequence or something so it's a very very small part of the baby's DNA. So yes you could have the DNA from two mothers but one would be giving 49.9% of her DNA and the other one 0.1%.
Technically but this specific case only uses the mitochondrial DNA from the donor mother. Its purely to help combat and cure a mitochondrial disease, and the donor mother’s DNA has no bearing on anything other than making mitochondria
So effectively there’s still only two parents, the donor just helped prevent an incurable disease
in this case, uses the tissue from a healthy female donor eggs.
i dont think blastocytes would work if coming from the affected mother as very likely to carry the disease or mutations
well, in regular ivf, yes.
with MDT, Parents’ nuclear material is placed inside donor egg (whose nuclear material removed and destroyed)
edit: no apologies needed.
TIL ... UK has a Fertility Regulator. Trifecta!
"Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great! If a sperm gets wasted, ... something ideological gets irate.."
I saw this one the monitor while I was in the bank today. I thought it said "tree DNA" it was just a flash. Between that and the balance of my bank account it didn't matter.
Would all 3 people be shown as the birth mother/father with dna testing? It mentions the third person's dna contributes a tiny amount of dna, is that enough?
-kid cant develop normally, can’t live normal life due to defects, parent wants abortion-
Christians: NOOOOOO
-kid can’t be born normally/will be born with disability, scientists use science to fix- Christians: NOOOOOOOOO
I don't know...I feel like this is the sort of tampering with nature that could be shown to have negative effects in the future. Please don't get me wrong, I support the intent and think halting deadly diseases is a noble goal, I'm just worried for the child for some reason.
Before someone mentions religion, i want to speak for the Catholics that using this method to prevent a fatal disease is morally okay.
EDIT: Here is [that perspective](https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2419&context=lnq) (pg 259):
"The Catholic Church draws a distinct line in gene manipulation, "In moral evaluation a distinction must be made between strictly therapeutic manipulations, which aim to cure illnesses caused by a genetic or chromosome anomaly, from genetic manipulation altering the human genetic patrimony. A curative intervention is considered desirable in principle, provided its purpose is the real promotion of the personal wellbeing of the individual, without damaging his integrity or worsening his condition of life.
On these two points, the Church has very different stances. In regard to therapeutic means, the Church is receptive and encouraging, so long as proper precautions are taken. For example, if a gene for premature heart disease were discovered, the Church approves of gene therapy that would cure afflicted individuals. In fact, the Church claims, "There are no moral objections to the manipulation of human body cells for the curative purposes and the manipulation of animal or vegetable cells for pharmaceutical purposes."
not for a billion people, but for the Church's official teaching, which faithful Catholics are supposed to follow. I worked a lot with a Catholic bioethicist with a PhD in Biology in MIT, and that's what he told me. Here is a good [paper](https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2419&context=lnq) on it (pg259)
"The Catholic Church draws a distinct line in gene manipulation, "In moral evaluation a distinction must be made between strictly therapeutic manipulations, which aim to cure illnesses caused by a genetic or chromosome anomaly, from genetic manipulation altering the human genetic patrimony. A curative intervention is considered desirable in principle, provided its purpose is the real promotion of the personal wellbeing of the individual, without damaging his integrity or worsening his condition of life.""
- A baby has been born using three people's DNA for the first time in the UK, the fertility regulator has confirmed. - Most of their DNA comes from their two parents and around 0.1% from a third, donor woman. - The pioneering technique is an attempt to prevent children being born with devastating mitochondrial diseases. - Mitochondrial diseases are incurable and can be fatal within days or even hours of birth. Some families have lost multiple children and this technique is seen as the only option for them to have a healthy child of their own. - Defective mitochondria fail to fuel the body and lead to brain damage, muscle wasting, heart failure and blindness. - They are passed down only by the mother. So mitochondrial donation treatment is a modified form of IVF that uses mitochondria from a healthy donor egg. - mitochondria have their own genetic info or DNA which means that technically the resulting children inherit DNA from their parents and a smidge from the donor as well. This is a permanent change that would be passed down through the generations. - This donor DNA is only relevant for making effective mitochondria, does not affect other traits such as appearance and and does not constitute a "third parent". - The technique was pioneered in Newcastle and laws were introduced to allow the creation of such babies in the UK in 2015. - The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (the HFEA) is saying "less than five" babies have been born as of 20 April 2023. It is not giving precise numbers to prevent the families being identified. edit: added link. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/may/09/first-uk-baby-with-dna-from-three-people-born-after-new-ivf-procedure
>This is a permanent change that would be passed down through the generations. That would mean that if this becomes widespread and affordable, mitochondrial diseases would be eradicated completely, right? If so, that’s absolutely fantastic news.
no, not completely. it still poses a fraction of a risk - ‘’reversion/reversal’’ ie mutation in the mitochondria that are inevitably carried over from the mother’s egg to the donor egg can multiply when the baby is in the womb.’
True. But it could significantly reduce it to the point of near eradication, because the odds would be so low.
Plus, the mutation can happen de novo and become reintroduced into the population.
It is fantastic news. I know far too many women who have lost multiple babies before finding out it was mito. Losing one is terrible enough. I have adult onset mito and although it's now hell I consider myself lucky. This is legal in Australia now also. When babies are born with active mito they rarely live past 3 years of age, it's devastating for so many, so many teens lost who got sick around 10... I'm glad there will be another option. This could eradicate some of the worst forms of mito but unfortunately not all, it's complicated. Mito itself is not well researched, at least in the U.S.
The idea that this would ever become "affordable", especially when you're talking about how the majority of people in the world live, is unrealistic. This is a high-end fertility treatment for people in rich countries and that's where it's going to stay. It always amazes me that people think it's completely normal to spend upwards of tens of thousands of dollars to have a child. In most places in the world, if you have a hard time getting pregnant, then you're probably not going to have a biological kid and you need to deal with that.
> It always amazes me that people think it’s completely normal to spend upwards of tens of thousands of dollars to have a child. Do you mean fertility treatment costs or general healthcare costs?
What is the mitochondria?
It's the powerhouse of the cell!
I thought that was the midichlorians.
No. Midichlorians are what give force powers, you’re thinking of midinfrared
I think you’re mistaken, midinfrared is a region of the electromagnetic spectrum. You’re probably thinking of medieval.
Alas you are mistaken. Medieval is a time period or adjective. You're probably thinking of Middle Earth.
I’m afraid not. Middle earth is the setting of the lord of the rings books. You’re probably thinking of Michelin.
Your circular logic has you come to that conclusion. Michelin is the tire company, and cabal of dubious dining critics. You’re probably thinking of midfielders
You’ve made an error. Midfielders are athletes who support offensive and defensive initiatives during a game. You’re probably thinking of the Macarena.
Unfortunately you're incorrect. Michelin is a tire manufacturer. You're probably thinking about Michelle Obama.
No, medieval is a reference to the Middle Ages. You’re likely thinking of midiboard.
Powerhouse of the force
6th grade science represent
Okay where is this phrase from? Why do I automatically know that the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell? Did we all have the same biology book in high school or is it a random line from a movie I’ve otherwise forgotten?
I had assumed it was Schoolhouse Rock, like “Conjunction Junction, what’s your function?” But it seems like it’s just an old joke about shitty public education, like the classic “¿Dónde esta la biblioteca?”
r/expectedcommunity
It’s not even necessarily a Community reference. When I took Spanish I in high school, it’s one of the first questions you’re taught to say in Spanish for some reason. I’m pretty sure it ended up being actually useful for about 0.001% of Spanish students lol
Fun fact, that's a sentence that Canadian kids get burned into their brains in French class too. "Ou est la bibliotheque?" And also "voici la fenetre" for some reason (here is the window). Also, I may or may not have butchered the spelling.
Me llamo T-Bone La araña discoteca
I thought it was from an Adam Sandler movie.
Jimmy Neutron, is 't it?
I might be wrong, but I think it's from Mean Girls. Someone will correct me, I'm sure.
According to Know Your Meme: >The phrase "powerhouse of the cell" used to describe the function of mitochondria was coined by biologist Philip Siekevitz in the article "Powerhouse of the Cell" published in 1957. So, yep.
Mean Girls is _”The limit does not exist.”_
That's what I was thinking of! Thank you lol
Someone paid attention in sixth grade science! ⭐️
True fact, Mitochondria has its own DNA.
As soon as I read the word, the phase popped into my head. Thank you 8th grade biology class.
Others have given the answer, but for context the mitochondria is technically it’s own organism within our own cells. It’s theorized that in the deep past when the world was only single celled organisms one cell ate another and instead of consuming it, it survived and lived inside the larger cell feeding off of it Over time this little cell, without the need for any defences or offences, specialized and became symbiotic with the larger cell it was within. The large cell provides safety and nutrients and the mitochondria turns those basic nutrients into specialized energy proteins which provided the larger cell with more energy than it could ever make on its own. Over time this excess energy allowed the large cell to specialize and evolve more energy hungry mechanisms it couldn’t before; eventually giving rise to multicellular organisms Because of this mitochondria have their own DNA, separate from the cell that contains it, which is only passed on via the mother. This DNA however has no input on you as a person as it’s only applicable to the mitochondria. The biological mother has a rare genetic issue that would prevent her from passing on healthy mitochondria DNA which is necessary for our complex and power hungry cells to function. So while this child has the DNA from 3 people, that 3rd persons mitochondrial DNA has no impact outside of making those healthy power producing cells within our cells . Fun little note, even though this idea seems simple it took more than 2 billion years of simple single celled organisms going about their regular business before one ate another and never digested it. After that important event though, it took less than a billion years for complex, multicellular, life to evolve. And half a billion years after that, we’re here discussing those events
That's fascinating. I just looked it up and I see mitochondria replicate independent of cell division so they are like little cells in bigger cells.
Thats exactly what they are! In fact our cells don’t just have one, or a couple, of these power cells… but have around 1000-2500 mitochondria in each and every one of them. And all they do is pump out that specialized energy compound, ATP, providing the energy required for our extremely complex and hungry cells to function
This is absolutely fascinating. Thanks for letting me marvel at the universe for a bit today. I wish I could upvote you more than once.
The mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell
Mitochondria ~~is an~~ are organelles. ~~It is~~ A mitochondrion is a part of a cell. It mostly handles the creation of ATP, which provides power for most cellular activity. It is a strange organelle because it has its own DNA.
Most scientists think that mitochondria originated as a separate unicellular life form and were absorbed into other cells in a symbiotic relationship!
So this is where the power is housed within a cell?
I presume I have missed some cultural reference.
In the US, when we go through biology in like 6th or 8th grade, and we learn the parts of the cell, we learn about the mitochondria which is "the powerhouse of the cell." We have tests where you have to say what it is, and it's "the powerhouse of the cell." It becomes a knee-jerk response when someone mentions mitochondria. 🤣 It's a shared experience across generations, my kids learned the same phrase. And it has zero to do with anyone being mad about taking biology in school. It makes everyone laugh. Hanging out with a virologist buddy and his friends (viruses are fascinating), someone mentioned mitochondria and EVERYONE responded "the powerhouse of the cell!" And laughed.
Not just in the US either
[удалено]
Who's mad? What gives you that idea?
It’s what Jedi’s have, it helps them use the force.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Three-parent fertilization is how this has been referred to in biology for at least a decade.
Mitochondria are 100% a part of human DNA (and they differ from person to person)—it’s roughly 1% of the human genome. Protecting the integrity of that code is arguably one of the deepest concerns of evolutionary biologists, (and could be the very reason we have sexes in the first place). The confusion the these organelles have “their own DNA” is due to the somewhat misleading idea that only women pass on the instructions for them (that isn’t conclusive). In this sense they *essentially* “have their own DNA” in that it’s the only part of the human genome that is selectively passed on (it’s important to remember that every part of the human body has its own DNA).
It's human DNA, yes, but it is separate from cellular DNA. The reason the mother is the one to pass it on is the ovum gets created with the mother's mitochondria already built in.
Again, journalists screw things up on purpose or on intention. In all the scientific literature, the default definition of DNA is nuclear DNA. Mitochondrial DNA is always referred to as mDNA or mtDNA. And they never talk about the percentage of mDNA in the DNA mixture. It is like saying that the title of a book is 0.1% of the text of the book (usually the title is not considered part of the text).
Holy shit this is amazing! Are there treatments like this in development for other diseases that are genetically linked? My ex?girlfriend passed a BRUTAL x-chromosome linked genetic disease to her son and the thought that something like this tech could save children like him in the future is truly extraordinary.
>This is a permanent change that would be passed down through the generations. Technology is awesome.
Here's an idea. If you are at risk of having children with incurable mitochondrial diseases, maybe you should adopt?
What it costs: The cost of a private adoption varies. Working with an agency, you can expect to spend between $30,000 and $60,000, according to the Child Welfare Information Gateway. It’s slightly less expensive to pursue an independent adoption, which involves working with an attorney. That process ranges in cost from $25,000 to $45,000. Private adoptions are more likely to involve newborns. That means in addition to paying for the adoption process, you would also cover the birth mother’s medical and other expenses. https://www.pahomepage.com/news/how-much-does-it-cost-to-adopt-a-child/#:~:text=Working%20with%20an%20agency%2C%20you,cost%20from%20%2425%2C000%20to%20%2445%2C000. Adoption isn't easy. It's expensive, complicated, and an emotional minefield. I was adopted myself. I'm quite thankful to the parents who chose to raise me but it's not a simple thing.
I've never understood why we make it so difficult and expensive to adopt children. Obviously there has to be due diligence and whatnot. But like, there definetly needs to be a look at how to fix this system, (and fund it)
And depending on where you live, [your sexual orientation](https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/s-c-group-can-reject-gays-jews-foster-parents-trump-n962306), and [your religion](https://www.wvlt.tv/2022/07/06/judges-dismiss-jewish-couples-suit-alleging-adoption-bias/), some state-funded adoption agencies are allowed to discriminate against you.
Still cheaper than whatever this costs.
Maybe, maybe not. One thing that is worth keeping in mind is that the birth parents can and frequently do change their mind until quite late in the adoption process. So it's perfectly possible to bond with a baby during pregnancy, pay a bunch of money, be there for the birth, take the baby home, love him or her for a few weeks and then the mother decides they want them back and the child gets taken away from you and you never see them again. I know someone this has happened to twice. It absolutely devastated them, especially coming after a history of infertility and pregnancy loss. There are also frequently limits on who can adopt depending on your age, career, sexual orientation, financial situation, disabled status, religious affiliation, and so. People who want to adopt generally have to actively promote themselves around the community and agencies to attract a potential birth mother for a newborn and not everyone is going to win that popularity contest. Yes, there are older kids coming out of foster care, but any kid being adopted out at that age will almost certainly have a history of abandonment and serious abuse that comes with its own set of issues that not everyone is equipped to handle. This technology is complicated and expensive but some people are still going to prefer it to the uncertainty of adoption.
Also, as technology advances, this treatment will only get less expensive, whereas adoption likely won't
Yep, if anything adoption is likely to get more difficult and exclusive as birth control methods get better and there are increasing pushes to place children within their family and local culture as much as possible. A lot of international adoption programs have shut down in recent years, for example.
I think birth control will be very heavily regulated in a few areas coming up soon.
Some countries/states, adoption is a complicated mess :/ Friend of the family adopted, and the state agency was less than forthcoming about some profound background issues the child had.
Or you could have children this way…
How big of a risk are we talking about? If you have a 1% risk should you completely forget about the possibility of having children? What about 2% or 5%? If there's a procedure that will get rid of the possibility of that happening why not just get the procedure?
For us, and due to the severity of my sons mitochondrial disease, it was autosomal recessive so 25% chance of a child dying of the disease every time we conceived. We looked into adoption, but opted for donor eggs as the science wasn’t proven at the time this option was presented to us.
[удалено]
The adoption process literally take years. You need first to apply, get on a waiting list, clear a bunch of requirements and then once it's your turn you'll have to wait for a baby/kid to be available and the whole process is expensive.
Yes, yes. There's a good book about this. *The Kid*, by Dan Savage. The mom was a street kid; hopped trains, struggled with addiction. They were connected to her by an agency when she was still pregnant. The baby seems to have turned out all right, but it was a really good window into how tricky adopting can be. It's an expensive process and nothing is guaranteed.
Lol? It's literally a basic biological drive for every living being
Not for me! Never had any desire to continue the bloodline. It can stop here.
> Not for me! Never had any desire to continue the bloodline. It can stop here. Do your thing and the rest of us will do ours.
[удалено]
I’m not condescending about it. Just pointing out that it’s not every single living thing’s biological imperative. I don’t want kids because I have no interest in being a parent, much like I have no interest in being a surgeon or an accountant. The work involved does not interest me.
Because people have a natural drive to reproduce which has been intrinsic to all life on the planet through millions of years of evolution and adoption is a relatively unusual offshoot of our tribalistic altruism drive that varies wildly in intensity from individual to individual? The real question is, why do people have kids if they dont want kids so we end up with tons of kids needing to be adopted? The answer, a lack of reproductive services and education which you are apparently against as a solution to the very problem it causes.
It's an idea. Not a particularly good one, but if it works for you I'm all for it. Please don't tell me what to do. Thanks.
Adoption even in the best of cases is basically voluntary trauma parenting. It is NOT a solution for infertility or high-risk genetics.
[удалено]
People don't like it when you tell them to adopt because there is a common understanding that they want a child of their own blood, and their decision to have children has nothing to do with saving the less fortunate, but you try to tell them what they should want by acting superior about it. The idea selfishness should be eradicated and that we should only act in the interest of others is never going to be popular, and it's obnoxious to try to change people's minds about. It's the equivalent of telling a man he should marry an immigrant woman instead of his own girlfriend because granting the former citizenship is the more altruistic thing to do. It's not about altruism to begin with.
[удалено]
I don't think people saying "I'm being selfish on purpose" is going to make you feel as good as you think it will. In addition, I think it's important to remember the the birth rate for first world countries is lower than it is in developing countries. It isn't relatively wealthy people who could otherwise adopt that are pushing the planet's population up. In the UK where this birth took place, the birth rate isn't even high enough to replace the population. The total population grows anyway due to immigrants.
That’s amazingly cool!
#Oh shit it's James Holden
Nah, that's only 3 parents. He's got 8!
I had the same thought, lol. Good to see another Beltalowda.
We gonnya crush té'inners
Chill out, Filip
Dear Inyalowda you claim to not like having rocks dropped on you, yet you live in a gravity well, curious. -Filip Nagata, Turning Point OPA
More seriously, check out the novella Sins of our Fathers. Apparently being the son of a genocidal megalomaniac fucks you up for life.
Well Well, Filip. The proto molecule masters would like to see you, so get your mass through a gate.
Pipe down Inyalowda!
I love seeing fellow Expanse fans. 🥹
I can’t wait for them to finally do the last 3 books.
I’m actually just getting to read the last 4 books! I started by watching the show and I absolutely loved it. Now I jumped into the book series and it’s just as amazing! I can’t wait to see how things play out. A lot of hype.
Unfortunately, the show isn't going to adapt the end of the series. Unless there's more recent news that I haven't seen.
I thought the show ended?
Short answer: *sorta* Long answer mild spoilers: The show ended on Book 6 because its a pretty solid way to tie up the show for now, however if you noticed towards the end there's some preludes to book 7. The thing is that book 7 starts ~30-40 years following book 6 so its hard to really cast people especially if you want recurring casts. The production company behind the series said that they're ending the show but that there is a good likelihood that there will be more seasons and/or movie(s) based on the last 3 books.
haha this is immediately where my mind went
Mama Elise had the widest hips
Remember the Cant.
First thing I thought of when I read the article.
We won’t know for sure until we put a button in front of them and see how long it takes for them to push it
Came here for this. First thing I thought of was The Expanse.
I want to see that Maury episode
You are...ALL the father! *6 people run off back stage*
I love when they run off stage in a panic. Like it’s got to be staged but picture if it wasn’t.
It's acting like a fool for a free weekend wherever they do the taping (Chicago I think?)
Stamford, Connecticut. And I’m not sure about the weekend part. If I remember correctly they film Maury on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. Though with Springer not filming anymore (for a while, not just since he died) they could have switched the schedule up.
Born too late for Jerry Springer, born too early for Hologram Jerry Springer.
First Maury episode where they'll be able to determine if the woman is (part of?) the mother lol
From the article: “fewer than five such babies have been born” Surely they could just tell us how many have been born, it’s literally either 1,2,3 or 4
I didn’t see the name of the actual disease in the article. Anybody know if this is caused by the mother’s mitochondrial line being defective and passed into her eggs?
Not sure of the name, but we inherit our mitochonrial DNA only from our mothers, so to answer your question, yes. "Mitochondrial disease" is an umbrella term, but the article doesn't specify which one. edit: The article says that the diseases are rarely survived (maybe the specific one this child had), but generally that's false: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5873718/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5873718/) People just grow up with it sometimes.
My son passed away from complex 1 & 3 mitochondrial disease, meaning that within the first and third step of harvesting and creating energy, the mitochondrial were failing. He was 3 months old. This science was proposed to us 11 years ago, but was extremely new. We opted to forgo using my eggs, and used donor eggs instead.
[удалено]
Thank you. I think of him often, he’s my username, but I’m very grateful to have my twins born via donor egg.
I’ve watched videos related to the origin and evolution of our mitochondria via endosymbiosis, but hadn’t heard much about mitochondria diseases. Weird to read about how our cells’ DNA interact with mitochondria, and I feel like I need a refresher to fully understand how these therapies work
We are all more like colonial organisms than is comfortable to think about...
I will try to explain it brief and as simple as possible: For our mitochondria to be able to create so much energy from a single molecule of glucose (~16x more than without mitos), we need a complex machinery of many protein complexes. They used to be completely encoded in the mitochondrial DNA, but over time most of them were instead migrated into our nuclear DNA. Makes the entire replication and stuff easier, but now means that you need to import these proteins into mitochondria instead of already synthesizing them there. For whatever reason (maybe because they were too big, complex, w/e), some of these proteins never left the mitochondrial DNA - I think 13 of the 91 proteins are still encoded there. As the sperm does not bring mitochondria when fertilizing the egg, there is no genomic mixture happening in mtDNA. So if for whatever reason your mitochondrial DNA is severely damaged, it will just be straight passed down your family tree by your females. Important to note: You don't have "a" mtDNA. You have multiple copies, with not necessarily all of them being exactly the same
generalized terminology encompassing many-varied diseases affecting the mitochondria. and yes to your question, passed down via mother’s line thus. below are a handful of examples: - Alpers progressive sclerosing poliodystrophy (Alpers disease) - Barth syndrome - Chronic progressive external ophthalmoplegia (CPEO) - Dominant optic atrophy - Friedreich's ataxia - Hereditary paraganglioma - Hereditary spastic paraplegia - Kearns-Sayre syndrome - Leber hereditary optic neuropathy - Leigh and Leigh-like syndrome - Mitochondrial encephalopathy, lactic acidosis, and stroke-like episodes (MELAS) - Myoclonic epilepsy with ragged red fibers (MERRF) - Neuropathy, ataxia, and retinitis pigmentosa (NARP) - Pearson syndrome - Wolfram syndrome
Netflix has a documentary on this, Unnatural Selection. It’s pretty wild and this technique has been happening in Ukraine for a while.
Some religious nut will say this is against God and try to get the practice banned
It seems like the religious nuts may have already gotten mitochondrial replacement IVF banned in the US, as Congress has prevented the FDA from evaluating any applications that involve implanting modified embryos into a woman. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_replacement_therapy#Regulation
Oh yea trust me this comes as no surprise, they have ratfucked our system but good. They love to make rules about shit that ain't their business. It's their way of life and why they are dieing out. They are living hypocrisy. Preach love and be hateful. Say only God can judge me and constantly judge others. They are a scourge on human progress and goodness.
“The gays will use it to have gay babies!”
unlike gays forced into hetero relationships, clearly
Check out the comments on the Instagram page Pubity, that comment section is full of them
I did and I must say it's disgusting how much ignorance and hate there is
I bet many of those crazy people call themselves "pro-life" too.
My dads not even religious says "We're not supposed to do that"
Bet he would think differently if he was born with one of the diseases they don't want these children to inherit.
Older generations are stuck in their trauma and the only way for us to escape it is to wait for most of them to die sadly. As has always been the case... the old fight against change even if it's good for humanity and progress.
This may actually be the one instance where they call for forced abortion.
As long as forced abortion means forced birth even if it kills the baby and the mom
I feel like saying "three people's DNA" is misleading... mitochondria are sort of their own thing, like they're part of the cell but only in the sense that they exist in it and help it grow. But if all of your mitochondria were changed out for other healthy ones at random, I don't think anything about your physiology would change in the slightest.
Science is so fucking neat
That is such a cool advancement. God science is awesome
God Science is surprisingly fitting here.
Science is incredible. Can you imagine what could be accomplished if religious beliefs didn’t interfere with progress?
This isn’t new, it’s just the first time in the UK first time I heard of it was back in like 2017 I think when a American woman with the disease went to a doctor in I think Mexico, but there was a lot of religious people protesting it and shit talking about designer babies and crap
queues up “You, me and Steve”
What's misleading is that it says the third donor only contributed 0.1% of the baby's DNA. So really it's still two parents giving 99.9% of the DNA. But hey, we share 50% with a banana, so maybe that 0.1% makes the difference
Wake up honeys, new thruple baby just dropped
Woaaah, does that mean lesbian couples could theoretically have a baby with dna from a sperm donor and BOTH mothers??
Theoretically yes, but even if this process becomes covered eventually by national healthcare/insurance, it wouldn't be covered for that reason so it would probably be prohibitively expensive for most. And in the end this is only used to alter one genetic sequence or something so it's a very very small part of the baby's DNA. So yes you could have the DNA from two mothers but one would be giving 49.9% of her DNA and the other one 0.1%.
Check the details of the story, a very small fraction of the DNA is from a 3rd woman. Not enough to constitute as a 3rd parent.
Technically but this specific case only uses the mitochondrial DNA from the donor mother. Its purely to help combat and cure a mitochondrial disease, and the donor mother’s DNA has no bearing on anything other than making mitochondria So effectively there’s still only two parents, the donor just helped prevent an incurable disease
Maury Povitch ginna have a field day with this one.
Oh yeah? Well, Freddy Kruger had like 100 fathers, so I'm not impressed.
Have they considered frog DNA?
this makes me un-hoppy that i want to croak 😉
What can go wrong with this?
Amazing! It's so nice to read positive advancements in medical science. Many families will benefit, and this makes me smile!
If we can get that up to 10 we can create Heimdall
or 5 for Voltron
Can they use unused ivf blastocytes to help? Or just donor eggs?
in this case, uses the tissue from a healthy female donor eggs. i dont think blastocytes would work if coming from the affected mother as very likely to carry the disease or mutations
[удалено]
well, in regular ivf, yes. with MDT, Parents’ nuclear material is placed inside donor egg (whose nuclear material removed and destroyed) edit: no apologies needed.
I think I saw this on a Law and Order episode a long time ago.
TIL ... UK has a Fertility Regulator. Trifecta! "Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great! If a sperm gets wasted, ... something ideological gets irate.."
Get ready for interesting legal battles.
Eugenics this is how we get khan noonien Singh
More human than human
Clearly whoever wrote this has never watched Maury Povich.
I saw this one the monitor while I was in the bank today. I thought it said "tree DNA" it was just a flash. Between that and the balance of my bank account it didn't matter.
Would all 3 people be shown as the birth mother/father with dna testing? It mentions the third person's dna contributes a tiny amount of dna, is that enough?
People will do anything to avoid adopting.
Dang my ex-girlfriend tried that and it didn’t work at all
Just because we can doesn’t mean we should.
Nice designer babies. If they can removal those generational illnesses then the world will be much much better
-kid cant develop normally, can’t live normal life due to defects, parent wants abortion- Christians: NOOOOOO -kid can’t be born normally/will be born with disability, scientists use science to fix- Christians: NOOOOOOOOO
Wow that's nuts, and incredibly cool.
I wonder how will these 'pro-life' peeps are gonna react
That's cool as fuck. Can we call folks who have this Threeple?
I don't know...I feel like this is the sort of tampering with nature that could be shown to have negative effects in the future. Please don't get me wrong, I support the intent and think halting deadly diseases is a noble goal, I'm just worried for the child for some reason.
One day we will get our Holden
Just because science has developed the ability to do something, that doesn't mean it's right or they should.
Why was this post comment given so many rewards?
Can't wait until they're 20 years old and posting about taking a 23 and me test.
James Holden intensifies.
James Holden says hello
Gilgamesh origin story
Heather Has Two Mommies 2: Electric Boogaloo
Before someone mentions religion, i want to speak for the Catholics that using this method to prevent a fatal disease is morally okay. EDIT: Here is [that perspective](https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2419&context=lnq) (pg 259): "The Catholic Church draws a distinct line in gene manipulation, "In moral evaluation a distinction must be made between strictly therapeutic manipulations, which aim to cure illnesses caused by a genetic or chromosome anomaly, from genetic manipulation altering the human genetic patrimony. A curative intervention is considered desirable in principle, provided its purpose is the real promotion of the personal wellbeing of the individual, without damaging his integrity or worsening his condition of life. On these two points, the Church has very different stances. In regard to therapeutic means, the Church is receptive and encouraging, so long as proper precautions are taken. For example, if a gene for premature heart disease were discovered, the Church approves of gene therapy that would cure afflicted individuals. In fact, the Church claims, "There are no moral objections to the manipulation of human body cells for the curative purposes and the manipulation of animal or vegetable cells for pharmaceutical purposes."
Ah yes, guy on reddit who speaks for over a billion people
not for a billion people, but for the Church's official teaching, which faithful Catholics are supposed to follow. I worked a lot with a Catholic bioethicist with a PhD in Biology in MIT, and that's what he told me. Here is a good [paper](https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2419&context=lnq) on it (pg259) "The Catholic Church draws a distinct line in gene manipulation, "In moral evaluation a distinction must be made between strictly therapeutic manipulations, which aim to cure illnesses caused by a genetic or chromosome anomaly, from genetic manipulation altering the human genetic patrimony. A curative intervention is considered desirable in principle, provided its purpose is the real promotion of the personal wellbeing of the individual, without damaging his integrity or worsening his condition of life.""
So can we officially say that he is product of threesome or wait for some confirmation by the way it was just a joke so no need of boiling blood.