The merging of man and cow produces human milk.

[joepistole]

Scientists have now successfully merged human genes with bovine genes to create bovines capable of producing human milk. What do you call these new creatures? Would you feed your children milk from these cows?

Are there any ethical concerns? Typically milk cows are slaughtered when they get old and less able to produce milk. Is this a problem for those consuming the cow? Could we all become inadvertent cannibals? Are there religions implications? If so, does it matter?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ag...tically-modified-cows-produce-human-milk.html

Now that the cow has replaced the human breast, how long can it before the cow replaces the human uterus? You do know we have similar gestation periods?

 

[Lori_7]

i hope the apocalypse happens soon.

 

[spidergoat]

Unlike Lori, I don't have a death wish. I'm all for the modification of bovines, they are useful creatures. Maybe they can throw some spider silk proteins in there too.

 

[jpappl]

Don't mix humans with cows MMKAY, it's bad real bad MMKAY.

Seriously, just because we can doesn't mean we should.

Ironically, people would have a cow if we started selling human breast milk from humans in grocery stores.

 

[spidergoat]

I don't drink milk, but this could be a real lifesaver for some babies who's mothers are unable to lactate.

 

[jpappl]

I don't drink milk, but this could be a real lifesaver for some babies who's mothers are unable to lactate.

Yes, probably. And my reaction was from the gut.

Kind of like how many might stop eating chicken Mcnuggets if they saw what they were made from.

""There is a question about whether milk from these cows is going to be safe from humans and it is really hard to tell that unless you do large clinical trials like you would a drug, so there will be uncertainty about whether it could be harmful to some people."

Represents one of my concerns. Do we know enough about what happens downstream ? trypically we find problems later and try to clean up the mess.

But this is interesting:

"He said: “Human milk contains the ‘just right’ proportions of protein, carbohydrates, fats, minerals, and vitamins for an infant’s optimal growth and development. "

Which makes sense but most can only get a limited supply, what if babies are drinking 3 times as much milk as they can normally get from their mothers via the bottle ?

 

[Kennyc]

i hope the apocalypse happens soon.

rofl!

 

[Lori_7]

I don't drink milk, but this could be a real lifesaver for some babies who's mothers are unable to lactate.

Many many women who are able to breast feed don't because its inconvenient and/or uncomfortable.

 

[scheherazade]

However, during two experiments by the Chinese researchers, which resulted in 42 transgenic calves being born, just 26 of the animals survived after ten died shortly after birth, most with gastrointestinal disease, and a further six died within six months of birth.
From the link supplied by the O.P.

My first concern is for the health and welfare of the animal species being manipulated. The high rate of animals that died soon after birthing is far in excess of what is normal for dairy cows, as the following link to data from 2009 demonstrates.

The calf mortality rate during the first year of life in all herds registered in the NDHRS was 7.8%, including abortion (0.7%) and stillbirth (3.4%).

http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Paper/13654041

The numbers alone do not induce any confidence in me for pursuing such an experiment. I would not be interested in adding either the milk products or the meat to my own diet.

 

[Lori_7]

i just read in one of my pregnancy mags that 97% of women can breast feed 100% of the time. i guess by 100% of the time they mean without needing any kind of supplementation. also, if the 97% would donate breast milk when possible, the other 3% could easily be covered. these stats prove to me that the only reasons we're doing this to animals is because we're greedy and lazy.

edit: by greedy i don't necessarily mean the mother in particular. i mean society in general, for lots of reasons, making it very difficult on mothers to be mothers nowadays.

 

[Kennyc]

Yep, we used to have wet-nurses.

 

[chimpkin]

Doubt it would give an infant the bennies of diathelic immunity:

A mother produces breastmilk containing antibodies to infectious agents that a newborn might be exposed to. If a mother breast feeds her newborn, a process known as diathelic immunity takes place, in which the baby receives the necessary antibodies to fight infection.

http://www.fitwise.com/Milk_Truth.asp

So it would almost certainly not have the adaptive, population-based immunoprotective factor of breastfeeding-because a mother is going to produce antibodies to what she's being exposed to in realtime....
And I suspect it would not help protect babies from getting allergies later like breastfeeding.

Might help prevent foot and mouth disease in human infants...:shrug:

 

[Bells]

So it would almost certainly not have the adaptive, population-based immunoprotective factor of breastfeeding-because a mother is going to produce antibodies to what she's being exposed to in realtime....
And I suspect it would not help protect babies from getting allergies later like breastfeeding.

A lot of which is gained in the first few days, when the baby consumes the colostrum, which is full of anti-bodies and actually helps the baby's digestive system.

Which is why midwives always, err, encourage women who can, to at least try to breastfeed so that the newborn gets some of the colostrum - not only is it extremely beneficial to the newborn and to its long term health, it also helps the baby do it's first essential poo which in turn helps prevent jaundice.

I can understand why there may be a need for cows to produce more human like milk, for babies whose mothers cannot breastfeed due to illness or disease - as human milk is generally best for the baby. It still has that certain 'ick' factor though. However if you have a child and you cannot breastfeed and your child, as one example, and you cannot afford or access donated breastmilk and you want the closest you can get to human milk for your child, then so what? But.. there has to be a but..

I am not overly comfortable with the notion of genetically modified cows being designed specifically to fulfill this need. I think that is my biggest problem with this. Are we going too far that cattle now also serve this need for us? This is one of those things that yeah... I wonder if I want to go to the supermarket and see 'human milk' on the shelves and knowing that somewhere, someone actually genetically modified a cow to produce "human like milk". It just seems wrong to me.. deep down. Don't ask me why. I can agree with the need or necessity of it. But yeah.. Just doesn't sit right with me.

 

[joepistole]

A lot of which is gained in the first few days, when the baby consumes the colostrum, which is full of anti-bodies and actually helps the baby's digestive system.

Which is why midwives always, err, encourage women who can, to at least try to breastfeed so that the newborn gets some of the colostrum - not only is it extremely beneficial to the newborn and to its long term health, it also helps the baby do it's first essential poo which in turn helps prevent jaundice.

I can understand why there may be a need for cows to produce more human like milk, for babies whose mothers cannot breastfeed due to illness or disease - as human milk is generally best for the baby. It still has that certain 'ick' factor though. However if you have a child and you cannot breastfeed and your child, as one example, and you cannot afford or access donated breastmilk and you want the closest you can get to human milk for your child, then so what? But.. there has to be a but..

I am not overly comfortable with the notion of genetically modified cows being designed specifically to fulfill this need. I think that is my biggest problem with this. Are we going too far that cattle now also serve this need for us? This is one of those things that yeah... I wonder if I want to go to the supermarket and see 'human milk' on the shelves and knowing that somewhere, someone actually genetically modified a cow to produce "human like milk". It just seems wrong to me.. deep down. Don't ask me why. I can agree with the need or necessity of it. But yeah.. Just doesn't sit right with me.

Yeah I have to agree with you. It is the ick factor. There is a definate ick factor here. But I am sure that there is a market for this product, and I am sure there is a marketer out there willing to market the product. What about cheese products made from human milk? I am sure the sales line would be that the milk is healthier for humans. Can you imagine putting human milk on your cereal?

 

[NietzscheHimself]

i just read in one of my pregnancy mags that 97% of women can breast feed 100% of the time. i guess by 100% of the time they mean without needing any kind of supplementation. also, if the 97% would donate breast milk when possible, the other 3% could easily be covered. these stats prove to me that the only reasons we're doing this to animals is because we're greedy and lazy.

edit: by greedy i don't necessarily mean the mother in particular. i mean society in general, for lots of reasons, making it very difficult on mothers to be mothers nowadays.

I hear they have the best breast-milk in brooklyn. I only drink the finest breast-milk.. I love the Chapelle show.

 

[scheherazade]

Cow's milk provides the best nutrition for baby cows (calves) and human milk was designed by nature for similar purpose, IMO, to provide the nutrients we need until we grow dentition.

All other mammals outgrow their use of the mother's milk.

It is rather interesting that our species has evolved a whole line of dairy products utilizing the milk of other species.

Our diet has evolved far quicker than our digestive system, which does raise the question whether much of our growing current health epidemics (diabetes, heart disease) are related to same.

The combo cow-human milk thing sets my hackles on edge. Perhaps better we evolve humans with the digestive system of a ruminant, as there is going to be a need to evolve our digestive system if we keep polluting and depleting the planet's essential resources, IMO.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Many many women who are able to breast feed don't because its inconvenient and/or uncomfortable.

Having a cow in the house is also inconvenient.
Even if it is half human.
Powdered baby milk would be a better option.
Simpler, and probably cheaper than keeping a cow.

 

[chimpkin]

Powdered baby milk would be a better option.

Yanno, they don't make that from real powdered babies.

Baby powder isn't made from babies either.

I DEMAND TRUTH IN ADVERTISING!:soapbox:

 

[Bells]

Yeah I have to agree with you. It is the ick factor. There is a definate ick factor here.

The whole thing makes me uncomfortable. The number of calves that die to produce cows that make the human like milk is huge, from what I understand.

Is it really worth it to provide something that is already available? While some cannot breastfeed - either by choice or circumstance - they do have other options available to them that does not result in genetically modifying animals and causing possible suffering to said animals.

As I said before, I understand why there may be a desire or need for this type of product, is it really necessary though? More to the point, is this product really necessary? And is it worth putting animals through all sorts of err pain to make it happen and be necessary?

I am left to wonder if the demand for such a product does not stem from societal pressure - you know how some women are abused when breastfeeding in public and whether these scientists have identified a niche that they can work within.. I can understand the medical reason to have more babies breastfed, but really, is it necessary to go to this kind of extreme?

But I am sure that there is a market for this product, and I am sure there is a marketer out there willing to market the product. What about cheese products made from human milk? I am sure the sales line would be that the milk is healthier for humans.

Well you can buy breastmilk icecream. And cheese. So there could be a market out there. But I don't think this is aimed at that kind of market.

 

[Michael]

Cow's milk provides the best nutrition for baby cows (calves) and human milk was designed by nature for similar purpose, IMO, to provide the nutrients we need until we grow dentition.

All other mammals outgrow their use of the mother's milk.

It is rather interesting that our species has evolved a whole line of dairy products utilizing the milk of other species.

Our diet has evolved far quicker than our digestive system, which does raise the question whether much of our growing current health epidemics (diabetes, heart disease) are related to same.

The combo cow-human milk thing sets my hackles on edge. Perhaps better we evolve humans with the digestive system of a ruminant, as there is going to be a need to evolve our digestive system if we keep polluting and depleting the planet's essential resources, IMO.

I'm leaning too much fructose.

As for human milk from a cow uke: