Female sperm - a step too far?

  Al94 12:36 13 Apr 2007
Locked

Just read this click here Are we not in danger of "messing" with nature too much?

  georgemac © 14:44 13 Apr 2007

yes - I think producing sperm from female bone marrow would be a step too far.

  The Brigadier 15:15 13 Apr 2007

So no more input at the local sperm bank!

  Woolwell 16:32 13 Apr 2007

Female sperm - isn't that an oxymoron?

It's too far.

  Forum Editor 18:24 13 Apr 2007

there's a long way to go yet before this becomes a viable technique - even if the government allows it to go ahead, which I doubt.

  Ho-Lin-Sok 20:39 13 Apr 2007

Presumably the population would be all female as females carry XX genes, there would be no male XY genes to make more XY progeny. Who would change all the lightbulbs?
And the phrase "Go **** yourself" would be a reality.

  Ho-Lin-Sok 20:41 13 Apr 2007

Shold read chromosomes rather than genes.

  sunny staines 20:52 13 Apr 2007

"give the dog a bone" could have a new meaning.

  PurplePenny 21:15 13 Apr 2007

"Presumably the population would be all female"

Well the progeny of this method would certainly be all female but I don't think that the world is going to embrace it as the only method of reproduction any time soon.

But even if the population did become all female we would still be able to reproduce: either by this method or by spontaneously developing parthenogenesis (which some scientists postulate would happen).

  Ho-Lin-Sok 09:13 14 Apr 2007

So its one big beehive or ant colony then.

  PurplePenny 14:48 14 Apr 2007

No, neither of those species reproduces parthenogenically.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Xiaomi Mi Mix 2 review

What went wrong at the Designs of the Year 2017

iPhone X news: Release date, price, new features & specs

Comment regarder des séries et talk-shows américains en France ?