Why can't two women or two men have a child together?

Question

I'm NOT asking your opinion as to whether it would be right or wrong. This question has nothing to do with any associated ethical or moral issues. This is a pure science question.

If scientists and doctors can do in vitro fertilization with an egg and a sperm, why can't they do it with two sperm or two eggs? Why can't they take the nucleus out of the egg of one woman, and then put it directly into another egg from another woman? Wouldn't it have the same effect as injecting a sperm into an egg? What about removing the nucleus from a donor egg, then replacing it with the nucleus of a sperm from one man, and then fertilizing the resulting egg with the sperm of another man?

Would this work? What factors would make this impossible? Is it possible and it just hasen't been done yet? Has it been done yet, and I just haven't heard about it?

I want educated answers please. Thank you.

It can be implied that the egg made with the two sperm would be placed in a surrogate mother.

I understand that one of the sperm cells would have to be an X sex chromosome.

Let me remind you one more time:

EDUCATED ANSWERS!

And please read the whole question, I am very aware of what a uterus is and what in vitro means. I am also sure that I know what egg and sperm are and which gender has which.

Answer 1

I dont know much cuz im just in high school and not pro but heres my understanding:
Lets begin with the possibilities. Two sperm cells cleary would not work cuz of the YY issue and that wouldn't techniquelly be human anymore. However, in the female XX would be human. problem is The egg cell has a jelly coat whihc protects it. The one sperm cell that fertilizes uses enzymes to digest it away and the sperm cell must bind to a receptor site. Since we know very little about the protein world and how these receptors exactly work, just like we dont know how EXactly carrier proteins work in plasma membranes, its difficult to figure how to do it. Since implanting and fusing the two nuclei of the eggs would not initiate these receptor cyets, the zygote may not necessarly divide. It would just be a mutated egg like before and a sitting duck. You wouldn't get mitosis since it still techniquelly thinks its a gamete and wouldn't replicate. Also, too my understanding, the egg and sperm nuclei are drastically different in size and also chemical makeup may vary.Thats my assesment of the situation. Again, I'm not an expert but i think that might be enough to answer the question.

Answer 2

Mechanical Isolation.

Its a term in evolutionary theory that states that adaptive constraints have been put on breeding pairs so as to constrict what breeding matches are made. This would control gene flow and probably increase genetic variability. It would also contribute to the generation of the genders since the male contributes either the X or Y to the organism. If two females bred, they would continually produce more females, thus decreasing their viability in the wild. If males interbred, there would be the possibility of the joining of a YY genotype which would eventaully lead to a dead organism since all the vital genes are on the X chromosome.

The mechanism we have now is the only way in which variation could exist so as to promote continued survival and balance.

Answer 3

I'm not expirienced enough to answer this question fully because I don't want you to go to Biology class and look like an idiot. All I have to say is that there are specific hormones and chemicals withing the sperm and egg cells that must interact with each other. Also the punnet square suggests an XY cell and an XX cell combine, otherwise the chemical makeup of the orgranism will be faulty, if it even is possible in the first place. Also, keep this in mind. If you have an XY cell and XY cell, your options will by XX, XY, XY, and YY. And YY does not exist in the first place.

Answer 4

because the fusion of an egg and a sperm is required in order for fertilization to happen. fertilization results in the formation of the zygote which will turn into the fetus after millions of cell division.

two egg cells or two sperm cells just wont undergo fertilization..thus no baby!

Answer 5

In order to start new human life you need an human egg, a human sperm and a place to keep it for 9 month called uterus.
2 men have a lot of sperm but no uterus nor egg.
2 women have 2 uteruses and some eggs, but no sperm to fertilize them.
If you take an egg and fertilize it in vitro (outside of women body) and implant it in woman uterus, then you have a man involved.

Answer 6

Sperm and eggs are not complete cells until they fuse to form the zygote. They only contain one chromosome set from either parent. One reason implanting a nucleus into an unchanged egg would not work is that it would end up with 3 sets of chromosomes, and would die. If you were to remove the genetic material from an egg and implant a cell into it, you would be cloning the organism from which that cell came.

Hope that helps.

Answer 7

exciting question. Theoretically it really is accessible, you're top: a million/2 + a million/2 = a million. yet, few issues might want to be considered. One: you want an egg to be hatched from. 2d: you want a minimum of one X chromosome (2 sperms received't have one...) 0.33 (maximum significant): through no ability do you ought to believe that each and every one which defines you is residing on your cellular nuclei. :) area of your genes is outdoors of your nucleus, a significant one - mitochondrial DNA. significant. also, the cytoplasm is full of platforms: scaffolds that are waiting for the creation of a complicated being. in case you're taking out a nucleus and insert a sparkling one, you may want to harm the intimate crosstalk between nucleus and cytoplasm. this can lead on to intense issues in progression. So, in precis: you want a minimum of one lady for an offspring (egg). something else is as a lot as you, yet i advise the classic way, it really is plenty better exciting! ;)

Answer 8

It is contrary to nature. For instance, if scientists were able to implant a puppy in a woman to gestate, would it be a right thing to do, because she wanted to give birth to a dog and it was possible?

It is wrong. It would be wrong for a child to be brought into the world like that. The child would be seen as a freak by others. I think it's wrong.

Answer 9

It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature. All kinds of bad things are likely.

Answer 10

it would turn out a horrible genetic mutation and the baby could die at child birth
ya know?
but its always good to ask questions
and sry if my answer isnt the best...:(