(Mike Lyle) wrote in
om:


As far as converting feces and odors into
substances that the body can use, that would require
lots of
energy. There is already a system where this occurs,
namely the
rest of the environment.

Of course. But I'm enjoying this trip to lunar park. And
the idea
of not needing to eat? Spike Milligan territory, and it
could be
made into a very funny story. But away from surrealist
humo[u]r,
you can't get out more than you put in; and I can't quite
visualize the GM bacteria which would recycle your body-
heat and
exhaled CO2 for you, not to mention trifles like shed
hair, skin,
and nail-clippings. Is it time to get onto sex yet...?

Mike.


You could put some Cyanobacteria in your blood, but you do
need light for them to take care of the CO2. There is some
evidence that many bacteria share plasmids in a sex-like
transaction, so that part is already covered, besides, that
same transaction is how you are going to do the GM.

Sean

You try that, Sean.


"Sean Houtman" wrote in message
news:1095655347.512RUex2R1ahcHuyJgpTGw@teranews...
(Mike Lyle) wrote in
om:


As far as converting feces and odors into
substances that the body can use, that would require
lots of
energy. There is already a system where this occurs,
namely the
rest of the environment.

Of course. But I'm enjoying this trip to lunar park. And
the idea
of not needing to eat? Spike Milligan territory, and it
could be
made into a very funny story. But away from surrealist
humo[u]r,
you can't get out more than you put in; and I can't quite
visualize the GM bacteria which would recycle your body-
heat and
exhaled CO2 for you, not to mention trifles like shed
hair, skin,
and nail-clippings. Is it time to get onto sex yet...?

Mike.


You could put some Cyanobacteria in your blood, but you do
need light for them to take care of the CO2. There is some
evidence that many bacteria share plasmids in a sex-like
transaction, so that part is already covered, besides, that
same transaction is how you are going to do the GM.

Sean

Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1095655347.512RUex2R1ahcHuyJgpTGw@teranews. ..

You could put some Cyanobacteria in your blood, but you do
need light for them to take care of the CO2.

Cyanobacteria are photosynthetic. Wouldn't chemosynthetic bacteria be
better for this application?

(Curious) wrote in message . com...
Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1095655347.512RUex2R1ahcHuyJgpTGw@teranews. ..

You could put some Cyanobacteria in your blood, but you do
need light for them to take care of the CO2.

Cyanobacteria are photosynthetic. Wouldn't chemosynthetic bacteria be
better for this application?

Sure. You familiar with the sort of places where chemosynthetic
bacteria live? Anaerobic mud and sulfide-bearing water make the
contents of your large intestine smell like perfume in comparison.

--
Chris Green

(Curious) wrote in
om:

Sean Houtman wrote in message
news:1095655347.512RUex2R1ahcHuyJgpTGw@teranews. ..

You could put some Cyanobacteria in your blood, but you do
need light for them to take care of the CO2.

Cyanobacteria are photosynthetic. Wouldn't chemosynthetic bacteria
be better for this application?

No, because the chemical energy they need has to come from
somewhere, and the chemicals that can be used by chemosynthetic
bacteria are generally immediatly toxic to humans. If you want them
to use sugars from your blood, well, the inefficiencies of
thermodynamics mean that they will end up creating more CO2 than
they use.

Sean

Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1096397186.3WUZQGoSSox59jJh7ILi3A@teranews. ..
(Curious) wrote in
om:

Sean Houtman wrote in message
news:1095655347.512RUex2R1ahcHuyJgpTGw@teranews. ..

You could put some Cyanobacteria in your blood, but you do
need light for them to take care of the CO2.

Cyanobacteria are photosynthetic. Wouldn't chemosynthetic bacteria
be better for this application?

No, because the chemical energy they need has to come from
somewhere, and the chemicals that can be used by chemosynthetic
bacteria are generally immediatly toxic to humans. If you want them
to use sugars from your blood, well, the inefficiencies of
thermodynamics mean that they will end up creating more CO2 than
they use.

Sean

There are some bacteria that use CO2 and give out oxygen

(Curious) wrote in
om:

Sean Houtman wrote in message
news:1096397186.3WUZQGoSSox59jJh7ILi3A@teranews. ..
(Curious) wrote in
om:

Sean Houtman wrote in message
news:1095655347.512RUex2R1ahcHuyJgpTGw@teranews. ..

You could put some Cyanobacteria in your blood, but you do
need light for them to take care of the CO2.

Cyanobacteria are photosynthetic. Wouldn't chemosynthetic
bacteria be better for this application?

No, because the chemical energy they need has to come from
somewhere, and the chemicals that can be used by chemosynthetic
bacteria are generally immediatly toxic to humans. If you want
them to use sugars from your blood, well, the inefficiencies of
thermodynamics mean that they will end up creating more CO2 than
they use.

Sean

There are some bacteria that use CO2 and give out oxygen


Yes. There are. Parts of this thread actually discuss that, they are
called Cyanobacteria, and they are photosynthetic.

Sean

Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1097638184.eLdCiXkY8VVSsCiH6cCP0g@teranews. ..

Yes. There are. Parts of this thread actually discuss that, they are
called Cyanobacteria, and they are photosynthetic.

Sean

Is it feasible to genetically-engineer bacteria to use acids, acidic
substances, sulphides, oxides [including smoke], ketones, skatole,
phosphides, sulfates, phopshates, halogens [atomic, ionic, isotopic],
carbon [ash, charcoal, etc.] lipids [including gasoline], chlorine
[atomic, ionic, and isotopic], alcohols [organic OH- compounds],
radioactive wastes, histamines, salts, and urea for energy?

(Curious) wrote in
om:

Sean Houtman wrote in message
news:1097638184.eLdCiXkY8VVSsCiH6cCP0g@teranews. ..

Yes. There are. Parts of this thread actually discuss that, they
are called Cyanobacteria, and they are photosynthetic.

Sean

Is it feasible to genetically-engineer bacteria to use acids,
acidic substances, sulphides, oxides [including smoke], ketones,
skatole, phosphides, sulfates, phopshates, halogens [atomic,
ionic, isotopic], carbon [ash, charcoal, etc.] lipids [including
gasoline], chlorine [atomic, ionic, and isotopic], alcohols
[organic OH- compounds], radioactive wastes, histamines, salts,
and urea for energy?


Bacteria already use many of those for their own energy uses. Oxides
already have most of the chemical energy removed, so they tend to be
low value. Bacteria have been used in remediating some wastes, for
instance toxic metals (including your radioactive wastes) can be
chemically processed by bacteria to be less available or mobile in
the environment.

Sean