In real life, Dire Wolves, resurrected from the dead

Yeah, there is no business model for this. This is a play for VC money and, ultimately, getting bought out by a more serious biomedical company that will do something that people will shell out money for, like medical cures or curing baldness, etc.

As much as I am opposed to the flashy pseudoscience part, I think there's lots of legitimate business models that could be built around this. Reintroducing critically endangered or recently extinct species by breeding them though close relatives. Breeding clones for testing purposes. The side of pharmaceutical manufacturing people don't like to think about.

But, yeah, this is just a VC stunt. There's lots of folks using CRISPR in interesting ways without doing this part.

Ever single scientific advancement in a nutshell

Every single one? Really? There's a lot of space between getting annoyed at pseudoscience and throwing your shoes in the loom.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

As much as I am opposed to the flashy pseudoscience part, I think there's lots of legitimate business models that could be built around this. Reintroducing critically endangered or recently extinct species by breeding them though close relatives.
Who pays for that? The World Wildlife Federation is struggling to keep existing species alive.
Breeding clones for testing purposes. The side of pharmaceutical manufacturing people don't like to think about.
Grow your own replacement organs with little to no chance of rejection. CRISPR unlocks a lot of amazing possibilities.
But, yeah, this is just a VC stunt. There's lots of folks using CRISPR in interesting ways without doing this part.
The fact that their first step on their press tour was Joe Rogan suggests that these aren't serious folks.
 

Who pays for that? The World Wildlife Federation is struggling to keep existing species alive.

If I'm being optimistic, zoos and other wildlife reserves. They love to do breeding programs when they can. Getting unique-ish animals would make them happy and attract visitors.

If we're being more realistic - did you watch Tiger King? The independent market for rare animals is problematically large. Imagine the number of big cat lovers that would shell out extra for a super rare variant. I think the pet fish and lizard markets would also jump on that train pretty fast.

And that's before we start thinking about the insanity that exists in the world of "pure bred" dog genetics.
 

Every single one? Really? There's a lot of space between getting annoyed at pseudoscience and throwing your shoes in the loom.
Would it have been better if i put "in general" outside of vaccines/medical, did any one stop to think "should we be doing this?"
 
Last edited:

If we're being more realistic - did you watch Tiger King? The independent market for rare animals is problematically large. Imagine the number of big cat lovers that would shell out extra for a super rare variant. I think the pet fish and lizard markets would also jump on that train pretty fast.

You did see Jurassic Park, right?
That there is a market for it does not imply that market should be served.
 


You did see Jurassic Park, right?
That there is a market for it does not imply that market should be served.
Jurassic Park was more of a PSA about badly designed zoos. The core of the actual plot is really no different from that incident in 2007 in San Francisco where the tiger got out of the zoo and ate that guy. The dinosaur angle is just set dressing.
 


As far as the article, evolution is best looked as a glacier melting on a mountain, with a thousand streams running into a lake. In the lake are the genetics, it is dynamic. One thing to remember about the mass extinctions of the recent past, is that the arrival of our ancestors into an ecosystem upset the balance. While we might have hastened the end, it was coming anyways. This is the biological destiny of all organisms.
 

Would it have been better if i put "in general" outside of vaccines/medical, did any one stop to think "should we be doing this?"

In general, "should we be doing this" doesn't even scratch the surface of what ethical and moral issues are asked about in accredited scientific institutions. There are literally entire departments and careers based around people asking those type of questions, such as the National Center for Principled Leadership & Research Ethics ( Home ). Scientists are made to "stop and think" at countless levels, from introductory undergrad courses (example from James Madison University: Research Guides: PHYS 105: Foundations of Physics: Ethics in Physics ) to NIH research ( Responsible Conduct of Research Training | NIH Office of Intramural Research ) to independently funded post-doctoral research ( HHMI guidelines: The Conduct of Science | HHMI ).

I would caution folks to not let their enjoyment of 30 year old movie quips evovle into anti-intellectualism. Also, don't confuse capitalism with scientific advancement.
 

Remove ads

Top