561
Sports Khelan / Re: Come On Man!
« on: October 29, 2012, 05:18:15 AM »i thought its a girl screaming "come on man!"Hahahha.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to. 561
Sports Khelan / Re: Come On Man!« on: October 29, 2012, 05:18:15 AM »i thought its a girl screaming "come on man!"Hahahha. 562
Jokes Majaak / Re: Tell Me My Age« on: October 29, 2012, 05:16:43 AM »
F**k sakes. Translate the last bit
563
PJ Da Dhaba / Re: When u hv no time (instant cooking)« on: October 29, 2012, 05:11:57 AM »
That's why you get frozen foods
564
what is this :?:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: It was accidentally posted and wasn't meant to be. 565
Religion, Faith, Spirituality / Re: Sikhs who converted to christianity« on: October 25, 2012, 06:41:06 AM »ya her name was bhupinder kaur now shes is nisha diasShe changed her name as well :waitin: she must really love him 566
PJ Games / Re: When was the last time you..« on: October 25, 2012, 06:39:12 AM »
Few months ago.
LAST TIME YOU WENT OFF TOPIC? 568
News Khabran / Making an embryo with 2 women and 1 man« on: October 25, 2012, 06:35:55 AM »
Scientists in the US have created embryos with genes from one man and two women, using a provocative technique that someday could be used to prevent babies from inheriting certain rare incurable diseases.
The researchers at Oregon Health & Sciences University said they are not using the embryos to produce children, and it is not clear when or even if the technique will be put to use. But it has already stirred a debate over its risks and ethics in Britain, where scientists did similar work a few years ago. The British experiments, reported in 2008, led to headlines about the possibility someday of babies with three parents. But that's an overstatement. The DNA from the second woman amounts to less than one per cent of the embryo's genes, and it isn't the sort that makes a child look like mum or dad. The procedure is simply a way of replacing some defective genes that sabotage the normal workings of cells. The British government is asking for public comment on the technology before it decides whether to allow its use. One concern it cites is whether such DNA alteration could be an early step down a slippery slope toward "designer babies" - ordering, say, a petite, blue-eyed girl or tall, dark-haired boy. Questions have also arisen about the safety of the technique, not only for the baby who results from the egg, but also for the child's descendants. In June, an influential British bioethics group concluded that the technology would be ethical to use if proven safe and effective. An expert panel in Britain said in 2011 that there was no evidence the technology was unsafe but urged further study. Laurie Zoloth, a bioethicist at Northwestern University in the US, said in an interview that safety problems might not show up for several generations. She said she hopes the United States will follow Britain's lead in having a wide-ranging discussion of the technology. While the kind of diseases it seeks to fight can be terrible, "this might not be the best way to address it," Zoloth said. Over the past few years, scientists have reported that such experiments produced healthy monkeys and that tests in human eggs showed encouraging results. The US scientists reported on Wednesday that they have produced about a dozen early human embryos and found the technique is highly effective in replacing DNA. The genes they want to replace aren't the kind most people think of, which are found in the nucleus of cells and influence traits such as eye colour and height. Rather, these genes reside outside the nucleus in energy-producing structures called mitochondria. These genes are passed along only by mothers, not fathers. About one in every 5000 children inherits a disease caused by defective mitochondrial genes. The defects can cause many rare diseases with a host of symptoms, including strokes, epilepsy, dementia, blindness, deafness, kidney failure and heart disease. The new technique, if approved someday for routine use, would allow a woman to give birth to a baby who inherits her nucleus DNA but not her mitochondrial DNA. Here's how it would work: Doctors would need unfertilised eggs from the patient and a healthy donor. They would remove the nucleus DNA from the donor eggs and replace it with nucleus DNA from the patient's eggs. So, they would end up with eggs that have the prospective mother's nucleus DNA, but the donor's healthy mitochondrial DNA. In a report published online on Wednesday by the journal Nature, Shoukhrat Mitalipov and others at OHSU report transplanting nucleus DNA into 64 unfertilised eggs from healthy donors. After fertilisation, 13 eggs showed normal development and went on to form early embryos. The researchers also reported that four monkeys born in 2009 from eggs that had DNA transplants remain healthy. Mitalipov said in an interview that the researchers hope to get federal approval to test the procedure in women, but that current restrictions on using federal money on human embryo research stand in the way of such studies. The research was funded by the university and the Leducq Foundation in Paris. Dr Douglass Turnbull of Newcastle University in Britain, whose team has transplanted DNA between eggs using a different technique, called the new research "very important and encouraging" in showing that such transplants could work. But "clearly, safety is an issue" with either technique if it is applied to humans, he said. 569
Religion, Faith, Spirituality / Re: Sikhs who converted to christianity« on: October 25, 2012, 06:33:16 AM »she married to a south indian guy who is chirstian tooCool. Interesting 570
PJ Games / Re: When was the last time you..« on: October 25, 2012, 06:28:46 AM »Be little niceI didn't go off topic, if you haven't noticed, i created this game so i would know. This is not the place to be having a conversation 571
PJ Games / Re: Last textmessage that u received« on: October 25, 2012, 06:25:57 AM »
I'm not hungry
572
Religion, Faith, Spirituality / Re: Sikhs who converted to christianity« on: October 25, 2012, 06:24:49 AM »Jehda ehda karda oh landuuu hundaGood on you for sharing for your opinion. Translate it to english :pagel: 574
Funny Videos / Re: Living In A Brown Family« on: October 25, 2012, 06:02:45 AM »
:wow: :wow: :wow: :wow: :wow: :wow: :wow: :wow:
http://punjabijanta.com/english-videos/living-in-a-brown-fam-1-2-3/ 575
PJ Games / Re: When was the last time you..« on: October 25, 2012, 06:00:55 AM »
waheguru man stop going off topic.
LAST TIME YOU WENT OFF TOPIC? 578
Religion, Faith, Spirituality / Re: Sikhs who converted to christianity« on: October 25, 2012, 05:48:53 AM »Neither I will convert nor i will ask her to convert.Aye haye ni!!!!! mr intelligent boy! Yup. They felt they connected better :)Was there any particular reason behind that? E.g. Partners were christians etc. Or they simply wanted to become christians? 580
Religion, Faith, Spirituality / Re: Sikhs who converted to christianity« on: October 24, 2012, 06:51:52 AM »I do :)Mm, if you got into a relationship with a christian girl. Would you convert or ask her to convert? |