Geneticists say it may be possible to bring Neanderthal DNA back into the human gene pool if a willing female is found to volunteer to be the surrogate mother in a reverse engineering process, even though Neanderthals in Europe, the Middle East, and Central Asia became extinct about 28,000 years ago, the last one being found in Portugal, dated to about 28,000 years ago.
No one is looking for a surrogate mom to carry a Neanderthal baby, but in the future it may be possible, say some researchers, if society decides it's morally or ethnically allowed by science. The morals and ethics of society still control science. But who knows what's possible in the future? The question is whether science can be contained? Or is science like life, destined never to be contained, but to expand out into the universe in knowledge?
Check out the January 21, 2013 NBC News feature by Alan Boyle, "Help wanted: 'Adventurous' woman to give birth to ... a Neanderthal baby?" The title, obviously, is to attract interest. However, now geneticist, George Church says it may be possible -- in the future -- to bring Neanderthal DNA back into the gene pool, according to the NBC News article, if a volunteer surrogate mother can be found to bear a Neanderthal child--just a possibility in the future. But of course, it's speculation even if it may be a possibility. And no one openly at least is looking for a surrogate to get pregnant with a Neanderthal child, although there has been lots of cartoons on the subject going viral. Ironically, the technology may be in place for it to happen -- somewhere in the world in due time, but should it, the scientists may ask?
The issue is whether creating Neanderthals is a healthy goal, since the original Neanderthals had a lifespan of only about 49 years or less compared to modern super centenarians whose genes may be a healthier goal to put into the population focusing on health and longevity. Also, the inner ear bones of Neanderthal show smaller parts that allowed them to run more slowly than Homo Sapiens. See, Neanderthal DNA.
The ability of Neanderthals to speak is similar to humans but with one exception: They may have had much shorter vocal cords, allowing them to speak in very high pitched voices. But is it a good idea to bring back Neanderthals taking only their advantages and put those particular 'advantage' genes into our own species? After all they survived in freezing temperatures, in Europe, for example for 200,000 years. All the geneticists may need is one female willing to be a surrogate mom to a Neanderthal baby.
During an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel, Church was asked whether a Neanderthal infant would be born in his lifetime. The scientist told reporter Alan Boyle of NBC News, that it depends on many factors, but the geneticist thinks so. Check out the NBC News article for scientist's quote. The geneticist is serious about about the promise of synthetic biology.
Synthetic biology may be used to back-engineer an extinct species
Geneticists can use the chemical components of DNA to add artificial twists to the code of life. Microbes could be modified to produce better biofuels or harness solar power. White blood cells could be altered to fight cancer or other diseases, using an inactive or modified form of the HIV virus. And extinct species could be brought back to life through a combination of cloning and genetic engineering. But which country will do it first?
The species-resurrection scenario would involve inserting the reconstructed nuclear genetic material from the extinct creature into the living egg of a closely related present-day species, sparking the cell into dividing, and then implanting the resulting embryo into the womb of a female from the present-day species. It has been discussed in the context of using elephants to bring back mammoths, or chicken hens to bring back dinosaurs. Interestingly, the DNA that's found in modern humans said by scientists to come from Neanderthals, actually came from Neanderthal males to human females. See, "My great-great-great grandfather's a Neanderthal | COSMOS," and "Neanderthal Genome Study Reveals That We Have a Little Caveman." The DNA didn't come from Neanderthal women to Homo Sapiens, only from Neanderthal males to human females.
Did this mean human women were taken as mates by Neanderthal men in some type of confrontation such as kidnapping, or in a type of marriage ceremony where human males traded their human females to Neanderthal men as mates for something valuable, perhaps food or hunting gear? It depends on how Homo Sapien women were valued by their male family members more than 30,000 years ago in Europe, the Middle East, and Central Asia.
Some archaeologists report that some Homo Sapien females were tossed on the garbage heap rather than buried in some prehistoric human societies. Were they treated better or worse when living among Neanderthals and having children with them? Also check out the site, "Scientists create new Neanderthal model using 70,000-year-old."
Now that the genome of Neanderthal has been examined from fossils, it's possible to use whatever bits of reconstructed genetic code to reprogram human cells and produce increasingly Neanderthal-like stem cells, the NBC News article reports. First scientists would generate a stem cell line that after many iterations comes out closer to the sequence of Neanderthal DNA that scientists found when they extracted DNA and found the DNA code of Neanderthals from fossils. See, Decoding the Neanderthal Genome - Archaeology.org.
Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology found the DNA sequence of Neanderthals
Last year scientists at the Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany found the DNA sequence of Neanderthals. The conclusion is that Neanderthals survived and they are us.
The Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig is a research group led by genetic anthropologist Svante Pääbo. The team of scientists completed a first-draft DNA sequence of a Neanderthal.
The only problem is that this sequence includes only 60 percent of the Neanderthal genome. So a human surrogate would be needed if scientists ever actually decide to make a Neanderthal baby. Synthetic DNA would have to be generated to fill in the other 40 percent.
The Neanderthal sequence showed that variations in just one gene might account for the differences in the shape of the skull, rib cage, and shoulder joint between Neanderthals and modern humans. But as the research continued, a major insight developed. When researchers compared the Neanderthal DNA to the DNA of three modern people (one French, one Han Chinese, and one Polynesian), the team found that all three had inherited between 1 and 4 percent of their DNA from Neanderthals.
Scientists also compared the Neanderthal sequence to two African individuals (one Yoruba and one San) and found no indication that they had inherited genes from Neanderthals, who are known to have evolved outside Africa. The research supports the idea that Neanderthals interbred with Homo sapiens between 100,000 and 80,000 years ago as our anatomically modern ancestors left Africa and spread across the globe. But other scientists say, maybe it wasn't Neanderthals that bred with humans, but that both humans and Neanderthals inherited their genes from an earlier common ancestor of both whose DNA still shows up in modern humans.
How scientists would create a new Neanderthal in the lab
First scientists generate a stem cell line close the Neanderthal DNA. It's a semi-automated procedure done in the lab. Then they put the Neanderthal stem cells together in a human stem cell. The result is the ability to create a Neanderthal clone. But if this ever happens, think of what the baby would be like growing up.
Would the Neanderthal baby have the ability to learn modern job skills and become independent? But the political climate really isn't going to let any scientists create a Neanderthal through back engineering the species, at least not in the USA. Even though researchers are closing in on a high-quality Neanderthal genome, they're not quite there yet, according to the NBC news article. Check out the article, "How synthetic biology will change us."
The question is whether Neanderthals would think so differently from humans that the modern world could be abusive to them. But on the other hand, Neanderthals had a larger brain and skull. So their way of thinking could be superior. Scientists don't know whether or not they were more intelligent than humans. But they surmise that they didn't leave any art behind on cave walls compared to the quality of art painted by Homo Sapiens when both lived during that overlap of time 30,000 years ago on the same continent. On the other hand, the Neanderthal genetic code may be so worth studying.
Should scientists generate an entire population of neo-Neanderthals? Or will Homo sapiens treat them differently? No one is asking a Neanderthal if he wants to be created in our society at least in the imagination with an emphasis on empathy and walking in his or her shoes. Would you like to be re-engineered and brought back as you were then? The reason the scientists think about bringing back Neanderthals is to "increase diversity."
Scientists would like to see more diversity in humans
It's more than curiosity. Our society of only humans today, Homo Sapiens, that is, has low diversity. You don't want low diversity because that means low immunity. Monoculture are at risk of perishing from lack of immunity to emerging viruses and bacteria mutations. Check out the article, "Neanderthal DNA lives on in some of us."
To have more diversity, the scientists think the re-creation of Neanderthals would lessen the risk of humans being wiped out by microbes. But maybe the answer is to create stronger species more resistant to diseases than present humans? In any case, finding a Neanderthal surrogate mother is a possibility. See, "How sex with Neanderthals made us stronger."
For now, there are no ads in the paper asking for volunteers to be impregnated with a Neanderthal baby because who knows if you're allowed to raise your child in privacy if a volunteer ever is accepted? After all, the media, doctors, and geneticists would be on your case and follow your child life-long.
Also please subscribe to my various nutrition, health, or cultural media columns such as the Sacramento Nutrition Examiner column, Sacramento Healthy Trends Examiner column, Sacramento Holistic Family Health Examiner, Sacramento Media & Culture Examiner column, and my national columns: National Senior Health Examiner column, National Children's Nutrition Examiner column, and National Healthy Trends Examiner column.
Follow Anne Hart's various Examiner articles on nutrition, health, and culture on this Facebook site and/or this Twitter site. Also see some of Anne Hart's 91 paperback books at: iUniverse. Or see the author's website. Please follow my columns on Pinterest or Pinterest Sacramento Nutrition Examiner.
For more info: browse my books, How Nutrigenomics Fights Childhood Type 2 Diabetes and Weight Issues, (2008). Or see my books, How to Safely Tailor Your Foods, Medicines, & Cosmetics to Your Genes, (2003), How to Open DNA-driven Genealogy Reporting & Interpreting Businesses. (2007). Or Neurotechnology with Culinary Memoirs from the Daily Nutrition and Health Reporter. (2009). (Or the book of assessments), Do You Have the Aptitude & Personality to Be A Popular Author: Creative Writing Assessments - IUniverse, (2009).
Comments