at the very least you'd have to let the blastocyst implant somewhere, and there's a complicated molecular handshake going on
-
-
that and you'll need ova; but honestly once we have enough knowledge to tackle this we could probably induce parthenogenesis much easier
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
meaning it'll more likely to spell doom for men than for women ;P
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
apparently since the last time I read about this, we've found a way to create human embryos through parthenogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis#Humans …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
this comes with a huge huge disclaimer that these embryos are more likely cannot be carried to term than can. but it's a prerequisite
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
(currently looking through follow-up papers on that to see if something got lost in translation...)
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
yeah, they're both easily obtainable in mammals and completely useless if your goal is a viable fetus, eg [1-17] inhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4608834/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
tl;dr of https://sci-hub.cc/https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0027-5107(97)00180-2 …: viable embryo requires specific epigenetics from both the egg and the sperm; 46,XX from egg alone...
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
results in an ovarian teratoma, 46,XX from sperm alone in a hydatidiform mole (do NOT google it); loss of epigenetic inhibitions results…
3 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
it looks like haggis
-
-
Replying to @allgebrah @nmgrm
*stares at a box of [REDACTED] that has retrograde amnesia as a side effect*
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.