Could using bacteria DNA in humans make them resistant to radiation?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential of using bacterial DNA to enhance human resistance to radiation, particularly in the context of nuclear power applications. Participants explore the feasibility of integrating such DNA into human genetics and the implications for radiation exposure in everyday life.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants mention that certain bacteria, like D. radiodurans, can withstand extremely high radiation levels, raising the question of whether this DNA could be integrated into humans.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the feasibility of integrating bacterial DNA into human cells, suggesting that it could alter the entire cell structure and chemical properties.
  • Another participant argues that humans are already exposed to significant radiation from various sources, questioning the need for enhanced resistance through genetic modification.
  • There is a mention of thorium-based nuclear reactors as a potentially safer alternative to traditional nuclear power, indicating a broader discussion on energy sources and radiation exposure.
  • Some participants reflect on historical uses of radioactive materials, such as polonium-210 in spark plugs, suggesting that past beliefs about radioactivity may have been flawed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the feasibility and implications of using bacterial DNA for radiation resistance, with no consensus reached on the practicality or desirability of such an approach. The discussion includes both support for exploring this idea and skepticism regarding its implementation.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions about the integration of bacterial DNA and the effects of radiation exposure, but these assumptions remain unresolved. The discussion also touches on historical perspectives on radiation use without reaching definitive conclusions.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring genetic engineering, radiation biology, and the implications of nuclear energy in society.

chound
Messages
163
Reaction score
0
I read in alocal daily that some bacteria have around 1000rads. Can we take that dna and put it in humans and make them resistant to radiation. Then can we use nuclear power everywhere(like planes, cars, etc)
 
Science news on Phys.org
Don't you mean that there are bacteria that can "withstand" 1000 rads? :wink:

Yes, such bacteria do exist. There is even one bacteria called D. radiodurans that can survive in radial doses exceeding 1,000,000 rads.

Can this unique feature be intergrated into human DNA? I would like to see you try. :smile:

BTW, this job is left up to biologists and not physicists. :-p
 
Last edited:
This may be possible put I am not to sure how... I am pretty sure that if we implemented that DNA into humans, I am only saying this in this case, that it wouldn't work as the entire cell structure would change as it is chemical properties that make it resistant so we would need and have new chemicals going around that would probably ruin everything
 
umm, we use more radiative devices and absorb more radiation in 1 day than we would if we has properly shielded nuclear reactors on transportation and no other radiative devices.

educate yourself on nuclear power and radiation and the amount we take in from coal on a daily basis before you make a decision on nuclear power...

also, look into thorium based nuclear reactors, much more friendly to the environment and the the political world. plus, with a fully nuclear based energy supply, we could split water and use H2 as a container for the energy rather than having to have nuclear reactors everywhere.
 
didn't they use to make spark plugs with Po-210?
http://www.theodoregray.com/PeriodicTable/Elements/084/index.s7.html
They used their radioactivity as a selling point.
I don't know why they thought they were better spark plugs.
Maybe it had something to do with a flawed mental connection between the anti-static properties and sparking in a car's cylinder.
 
shrumeo said:
didn't they use to make spark plugs with Po-210?
http://www.theodoregray.com/PeriodicTable/Elements/084/index.s7.html
They used their radioactivity as a selling point.
I don't know why they thought they were better spark plugs.
Maybe it had something to do with a flawed mental connection between the anti-static properties and sparking in a car's cylinder.


I'd say that it was due to the era and nuclear/radioactive mania that made them think it was a good idea. Tesla, a very brilliant man, used to bombard his head with x-rays because he believed that it stimulated neural activity.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 118 ·
4
Replies
118
Views
13K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
7K