The superhuman concept in Science Fiction by: GF WILLMETTS

'...we have the technology.' End quote from the Universal TV series 'The Six Million Dollar Man' (1973-1978) despite the fact they were probably 30 years too early.

'Dolly isn't Science Fiction come true. She's a Sheep.' Dr. Ian Wilmut: project leader of the 1st cloned sheep, Roslin Institute 1996

Look at how children play games pretending to be their sports heroes or the larger-than-life action heroes. This isn't very far removed from African tribesmen beliefs that dressing in an animal skin will give them the attributes of the animal it belonged to.

To be the best is an ethic that seems to dominate current human societies. It's almost a tribal genetic trait. People want to be better than they are. Some will take it to extreme levels with steroids, risking life-threatening side-effects.

If it can't be done personally, then it is by emulation. Humans don't want to appear to be failures. It loses personal self-esteem. Is it any wonder there is an envy for the powers of the comicbook super-hero? The belief that we can be better than we already are is probably a key attribute to consider when we examine super-humans as applied in Science Fiction.

It is a common daydream that anyone who has read comicbook super-heroes can recognise. To be stronger. Have heightened senses. To fly. To possess some extra advantage that other people don't have and sometimes don't suspect the hero possesses.

The only difference lies in higher stakes where we become what is, to some extent, still only dreams today but might be possible in the near future. This chapter of Science Fiction Nomenclature explores the concept of super-humans, their relationship to society and SF story plausibility considerations.

There will also be the usual thoughts regarding guidelines and what's already been done should you decide this might be an interesting avenue for further exploration when writing your own Science Fiction stories. It's one of man's greatest desires to be able to exceed the limitations imposed by nature or failing that reach the limits that the body can tolerate.

From the latter's ambitions we have our athletes, gymnasts, weight-lifters and body-builders. It takes dedicated training to acquire such physiques not instant radiation or gene-splicing therapies. All-round athletes tend to lack the strength and speed of someone who specialises in one or the other. It would appear that for humans there can only be a middle-ground in either field.

The illegal use of enhancing steroid drugs can promote rapid development of muscular tissue but risks fatal damage to the liver and other vital organs. There is a limitation to how long any sort of 'perfection' can be maintained with the human body before the aging process tears it apart and muscle is rapidly converted into fatty tissue.

If anything, Man is currently in an evolutionary ghetto. He has reached the apex of physical development and only marginally, albeit slowly, developing intellectually. Any change has been the adaptation of his environment to his needs than to himself. Whereas we have examples of other species diversifying to take advantage of the seas, land and skies, Man has had to devise his own ways to do this in an auxiliary function to himself.

He creates boats, cars and airplanes to do the things he himself could not do unaided. In this respect, the major evolutionary development is in the comparative development of his brain. It isn't just in his development as a tool-maker - as our close relative, the chimpanzees, have demonstrated similar skills - but also in the ability to imagine and then create such images on a physical level.

It is this distinction that has led Man to have such a dominate role on this planet. Before we take this on to a more galactic comparable scale (see Chapter 11: Predator Be Thy Name), it is inevitable that Man will see it as a necessary step to see how he can improve himself through his own scientific breakthroughs and developments.

It is from the creative use of his imagination that Man will make any breakthrough in his own physical and/or mental development than wait for evolution to make the next step. What was once only considered the domain of Science Fiction is rapidly becoming close to fact today. What was thought to be only fiction just over 20 years ago has become accepted technological words in society.

Cybernetics and bionics refer specifically to the mechanical replacement or enhancement given to organic life. The possibility of seeing a cloned human in the next decade seems less of an impossibility and more a matter of when. With recent work in regrowing nervous tissue likely to have its own breakthrough the possibilities related to cybernetics suggests better control of physical enhancement as well.

Genetic modification or gene-splicing of unrelated species to each other, creating chimeras, also offers possibilities in providing better chances of survival if not on our own planet but others suitable for colonisation.

Such changes in our genetic code can jump the slowness of conventional natural selection in a couple generations in ways previously undreamt of. Although SF authors led the way in discussing or using such 'super-humans' as a means to an ends in their stories, none have actually come up with anything new in such arrangements.

Outside of Psionics, as discussed in Chapter 4: Something In Mind, there are only really 4 options that can be considered when developing a human being away from what we would largely regard as the 'baseline standard issue' we're born with.

SF authors have tended to be less interested in the changes themselves but how this affects the individual or group to that of a standard society. Both sides of this issue will be explored in this chapter. It should also become apparent that there is still plenty of possibilities for neo-SF authors in this subject range and it is probably still a fruitful development area for fresh ideas.

Before examining the changes Man can commit and change to himself, we first should look at what Nature can do if left to its own devices. Natural selection is very much Charles Darwin territory. He perceived life as 'survival of the fittest' against a background of predator interest and environmental conditions. In the food chain, it's in the interest of any species to propagate or breed sufficiently to ensure that enough of its genetic material contained in a deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) chromosome helix is passed to the next generation.

Bisexual reproduction allows for recombinant combinations to allow for the greatest variety of change allowing for every environmental change eventuality. A different colour pattern, for example, can camouflage against a particular predator or warn them away by signifying their body contents are poisonous.

One only has to look at the variety of insects and bird life to appreciate how effective this is. Each change brings out a sub-species. Such traits are carried over into the 'higher' predators although the camouflage factor is used to conceal them when stalking their prey.

The effectiveness of these patterns can be summarised by the fact that there is so little variation within the set patterns and an individual species has stabilised in this format to the exclusion of other patterns. Albinos in the wild rarely survive infancy simply because they are so easily recognised by predators. With the primates, colouring became singular and when early Man had less body hair garbed himself in animal skins for warmth than camouflage.

Only on a multi-generation scale can we see any significant change as both prey and predators up the stakes for survival and other traits begin to change to preserve the species. Failure to do any of this results in a species extinction. I should point out this is only the briefest of summaries. There are a lot of detailed textbooks that examine all the aspects of natural section in the animal kingdom for you to draw your own conclusions.

The important thing to consider here is that natural selection is a means to ensure a species survival. Animals at the bottom of the food chain are more likely to breed quickly in quantity than quality with less of a need for anything beyond rudimentary intelligence. Animals at the top of the food chain tend to be more sophisticated hunters and far more likely to teach their young how to hunt their prey.

Intelligence is largely a bi-product of this process combined with having time for things other than eating. My own personal observation is that Man is largely an evolutionary anomaly trying out intelligence as a survival trait. If it was a common trait, then we'd see a lot more animals developing along this particular route, assuming of course, that they could regulate themselves to the changing environment.

Daniel Galouye's novelette 'Project: Barrier' suggests that after Man, the bear might be his successor in the intelligence stakes. In reality, Nature could well ignore intelligence as a survival trait.

It took a variety of conditions and physical attributes, like the development of hand co-ordination and speech, to give Homo sapiens a jump up the evolutionary ladder. A comparative examination of the primates indicates the real development of the brain has only occurred with this branch of mammals.

It isn't enough that the brain is more complex but is also supported by a body that can make the best use of it. If this wasn't the case, cetaceans like dolphins and whales, from sheer brain size and apparent complex 'song' speech would have developed beyond their environment.

As the sea apparently provides all their needs, there hasn't been any requirement to develop any physical aids like tools to assist them. It isn't just intelligence or the right body but the need to command or conqueror environments than be ruled by them that will signify the dominant species. Cetaceans actually dominate their sea world by adaptation but are unable to adjust it further to their own needs.

The development of speech also meant that there was less reliance on genetic traits to pass information from one generation to the next. It enhances the learning pattern to adapt to environmental conditions rather than migrate through poor periods. It allows the compartmenting of skills, allowing some true creative thinkers to develop their skills.

If anything, this is also a demonstration of segregation on an evolutionary scale allowing growth of social skills and what is commonly called 'civilization' today. It has been speculated that future man is likely to have an over-developed brain in proportion to a minuscule useless body, supported by robot slaves. This imagery was supported for a time even in SF circles but seems improbable these days. The brain requires a healthy body to survive and evolution tends towards survival traits than degenerate.

Human brain-size is unlikely to grow larger than it already is. We currently only use about 10% of our brains' potential. It isn't size which is important but the complexity and capacity to use what's there that signifies the greatest potential. Hardly surprising that the Science Fiction 'superman' tends to be endowed with superior intelligence or Psionic abilities than physical attributes. Oddly enough, comicbook super-humans do the reverse, tending to support the develop of physical change to take advantage of the graphic imagery.

Where additional brain complexity will really take us is hard to say. It may not necessarily be intellect. This doesn't imply that we aren't likely to become any smarter than we are, just unlikely to happen. On a statistical level, the range of moron to genius tends to follow a regular curve with every generation and every predatory species.

We might appear more intelligent than our forebears but it comes largely from how we accept the growing changes in our environment and those most willing to adapt. With improving educational systems and access to knowledge, we set our own limitations subject to individual intellect. Poul Anderson's novel 'Brain Wave' depicted that our overall intelligence has been impaired by our Solar System moving through a natural electro-magnetic inhibitor.

Once out of this field, not only does Man's IQ shoot up to 500 IQ, but every other animal becomes equally smarter. Being smarter doesn't lead to greater happiness because emotional inadequacy and lack of purpose of what to do with their lives becomes its own downfall.

This was quite revolutionary for 1954 when Anderson wrote this book but didn't expand to cover all its implications. If anything, it indicates the problem of a conventional human writing about intellectual giants that can make sense to normal intelligence readers. We are limited by our own intelligence level. Would a story written by a super-intelligent being make any sense to us in the same way? Doing the reverse has the same problems.

No doubt this is the reason why Anderson dwelt on the emotional inadequacy than the intellectual change. Why else do city populations leave with no real explanation about where they went or how they survived? It's left to the reader to imagine than any speculation. If the development of the brain isn't in an intellectual factor, one can always consider it as a psionic switchboard. One of the more interesting aspects of A.E. Van Vogt's 'Null-A' novels is the development of its chief protagonist, Gilbert Gosseyn's double brain potential.

It develops the skills to similarize or teleport across the galaxy once he has an image in his head of where he is going. He uses a similar technique to manipulate electricity and later begins to perceive future events once he realises he can do so. Despite opinions to the contrary, this was rather ground-breaking stuff for 1949. Van Vogt's forte was in writing super-humans in his novels and is worth exploring 'Slan' and 'The Silkie' amongst his other books to examine how he handles such beings.

There are few SF authors who have covered such variety. With the world becoming more of a global village, it is inevitable that the future will be an amalgam of the genetic material of all the diverse races of mankind than the current segregation that often seems the norm.

Quite what the final mix will show as the most dominate characteristics can be left to the imagination. We could well end up being darker skinned - to protect from ultraviolet light, with the oriental epicanthic fold eyelids to protect the eyes. The build, hair and facial features may still vary, but the individual characteristics that serve us best in extreme environmental conditions will end up being a major part of our race's survival not the dictates of any racial purity.

With Man capable of living anywhere he chooses, it is these two factors that are likely to stay the most variable. Overall, the survival of any species depends on having a variable set of characteristics to tackle any situation. This not only includes environmental change but resistance to new strains of viruses. The black population carry the sickle-cell trait in their red blood cells and although this can cause its own complications also appears to protect them from malaria.

It's unfortunate that Nature has its own way of weeding out those with no resistance but is also a practical demonstration of 'survival of the fittest' in practice. SF authors have applied Selective Breeding to encourage certain characteristics to be brought out in a matter of generations than over several millennia. It certainly is a short-cut and a clever plotting device for rapid development of any quirky breeding program spread over a millennia or two, even if it tends to focus on the end results than what leads up to it.

Robert Heinlein's 'Methuselah's Children' and it's sequel, 'Time Enough For Love' with the Howard families - named after their instigator than any specific member family - bred for long life. The program was set up to pair off families who demonstrated extended longevity and ultimately kept going when medical science could keep it going even longer.

The problem with this intense cross-breeding in the early days resulted in a large percentage of retarded idiot children or a select few who demonstrated psychopathic tendencies. The biggest benefit came from the rather more randy exploits of its longest living member, Lazarius Long, who ultimately was related to all the long-lifers in the galaxy.

Immortality has its own price in boredom leaving Long always on the look out for greater challenges to stimulate himself. The longer the life, the more the 'seen that, done that' scenario develops. Frank Herbert's 'Dune' saga was an observation of the Bene Gesserit cult who used Royal bloodlines to develop a prescient saviour. They badly miscalculated by a generation when instead of a female they had the male Paul Attrides and his sister, Alia, from the Lady Jessica's desire to give her husband a son proving their undoing.

Oddly enough, it was Attrides' own children that enforced the final solution the Gesserit sought. One should not assume that it is always humans who want to breed better humans. E.E. 'Doc' Smith's 'Lensmen' series had the discrete alien Arisian genetic program to produce humans better able to manipulate the lens device. The alien Pierson's Puppeteers of Larry Niven's 'Known Space' stories subtly bred humans to yield those exhibiting a knack for good luck.

The result here gave the extremely lucky Teela Brown, who accompanied the Puppeteer Nessus, the human Louis Wu and the K'zin Speaker-To-Animals to 'Ringworld'. By being at the right place at the right time, Brown saved this famous artefact from destruction. These examples should illustrate the point that things don't necessarily go to plan or do as expected. From a writer's point of view, one should examine any planned breeding program for its failures as much as their successes.

The biggest problem is always that people don't always do what is expected of them. They can't act as mathematical pre-determined units. As that's an accepted normality of life, it should be no hardship in consideration in any story planning. Selecting what traits should be bred should always be considered against the overall plot. It can also turn into 'convenience plotting' where the right person appears at the right time to solve a problem so requires imagination in seeking out such solutions from an unusual insight or produce an unexpected twist to keep the reader interested.

Although natural selection is always Nature's guiding light, the means for any radical change has always been through mutation. Generally speaking, this normally affects the offspring than the parents as the DNA helix is the most vulnerable to change. In adults, for example, the effect of radiation is mostly a detrimental terminal cancer, not to mention infertility.

One should also distinguish between the terms. A mutation is an effect on the DNA helix. The result, usually applied to the off-spring, is a mutant. Any effects to an already living being can equally be a mutate or mutant. Usually the term 'mutate' is used as it distinguishes between the two terms. Should the traits be carried onto further generations, then it is no longer a mutant but a sub-species of the original baseline species. There are only four options for enduing mutation: Natural, Enduced, Chemical and Radiation.

Their examination here will start from least to most probable causes. Radiation Mutation is probably the most revered form of genetic change in SF. It was popularised in films and comics and caught the public imagination largely through Marvel Comics' Incredible Hulk. It was even used as a means to develop monsters in SF's early films. It is also the most wrong choice to make. In reality, as can be seen from the effects on the survivors of the nuclear fallout after the two atomic bombs over Japan in 1945, there were no super-humans or monsters.

The survivors outside of the immediate area who showed no overall physical effect themselves were affected on the genetic level. Any children that weren't stillborn suffered severe genetic damage resulting in loss of limbs, sensory organs or imbecility. DNA is extremely fragile to radiation and if this is your choice for mutation then thoughts of the consequences to your characters have to be considered deeply.

A side-note on the Hulk and other Marvel Comics-based gamma-induced mutants is that they were supposed to have a mutant gene that presupposed a favourable reaction to gamma radiation or any other form or radioactivity. A number of their friends weren't so lucky.

This shows some considerable after-thought by their writers to this problem even if it would probably not happen elsewhere. In our enlightened times, this is not the method of choice. That's not to say people haven't taken radiation's worse effects as an indication of failure in the DNA code to such conditions. The film 'Beneath The Planet Of The Apes' combined epidermis loss with developed psionic abilities and insanity in the remaining mutated humans.

This was quite a revolutionary statement indicating that the pay-off for radioactive bombardment having mixed effects. Chemically-enduced mutation is almost as bad. It is potentially less destructive than radiation to DNA but has a lot more control over potential damage.

As such, it should also be considered in the same breath as Induced Mutation. Certain chemicals make the DNA helix easier to manipulate for genetic manipulation or gene-splicing. The effects of gene-splicing will be dealt with under its own subject further in this chapter. As a means to itself, the use of any chemical without further supporting aid should be regarded as dangerous as standing in irradiated room.

The best examples of detrimental effect in our reality is the effects on the offspring of mothers given thalidomide to reduce morning sickness but damaged the DNA of their children resulting in stunted or no limbs. A harsh reminder that places such manipulation nearly up the top of the list with radiation as not a particularly inspiring direction to use. In the real world, any experimental activity of this nature to change the DNA code would always be carried out in animals prior to any direct work on human DNA.

To anyone reading this who dislikes animal experiments and abhorred such thoughts needs to consider the following argument and thoughts that I will say, bearing in mind their key argument:- It is always said that the results of experiments on other animals cannot possibly reflect the outcome on human DNA. Radiation or chemical exposure to any part of the DNA matrix similar to the parts most associated with the same places in our own DNA helix will have a similar effect.

Our nearest relative, the chimpanzee, is only 2% different to ourselves on a genetic level. The first diagnosis will be for bad or malevolent rather than beneficial effects. Where thalidomide was concerned, no one bothered to consider the effects on subsequent offspring, just the relaxant effects on the pregnant mothers.

The results, thankfully, has made all pharmaceutical companies much more thorough in their tests before allowing certain medicines loose on the public. Failure to do so tends to lie in court with multi-suit claims for damages that risks the company's public name, image and untold expenses. Fortunately, the more reputable companies in the Western world adhere to their Government protocols in upholding this principle.

Fortunately, elsewhere lacks the expertise, facilities or funds to be truly effective in such schemes. Any initial tests on subsequent generations has to be carried out on any species that has a quick breeding cycle turnover and why mice, rats or rabbits are usually the first mammal subjects. With some statistical data of potential problems, tests can be carried out on primates before ultimately Man himself. Even then, initial trails tend to be under control conditions.

Essentially, this involves using two groups of people, one given the 'medicine' and one without as a comparative control, to observe the difference. This is also done in a 'double blind-situation', so that neither the examiners or the subjects know who is having the treatment although all are treated alike. Should the overall results prove that there is a marked difference for the better and no placebo or wishfulfilment effect taking place would such treatments be considered for general use.

The days of a solitary scientist working in a basement laboratory producing genetic monsters clearly do not represent what would go on in reality. It isn't just resources or talent, but skilled manpower that is required. Such trained people tend to be absorbed into large companies than work independently.

Licences are required in most countries to do human experimentation and even then, only for the benefit against certain diseases. Although there are certain countries in the world that would and are only too willing to allow such work be done, there would be some difficulty in exporting the results elsewhere in the civilised world, even with a fait accompli success.

This doesn't mean that such changes couldn't be a drug side-effect. David Cronenberg's film 'Scanners' presented this scenario with the drug 'ephemerol' that yielded people who had various mental abilities. Many of them were also mentally disturbed and unprepared for what they were. This might also explain why so many of them were killed by gunfire rather than retaliated against attack.

This shouldn't rule out the need, at some point, to do such experimentation quickly should necessity make it a priority to save human life. The deterioration of the ozone layer and increased exposure to ultraviolet light thereby increasing skin cancers may force a rapid development of genetic treatments without lengthy delays. One can only hope there aren't that many detrimental side-effects.

Scientists today are beginning to make sense of Man's genetic code from the Genome Project that will allow rapid DNA repairs, which will be dealt with below in discussing gene-splicing. A problem with a subject is there so much cross-linking with similar overall results. Whether this will yield a perfect society is hard to say.

There are a lot of genetic defect illnesses that endanger the quality of life that could be resolved. Government sanctions of such genetic repairs would ultimately save any health service vast expense on what would have been considered incurable cancers or other long-term illnesses. The main worry is how far such manipulations would go? Using such techniques to pre-determine intelligence or physical appearance would probably be frowned upon.

Creating a self-perpetuating DNA helix that doesn't deteriorate with age implies immortality is possible. Unless this was balanced with a smaller population, we also risk over-population or the worse case SF scenario of an elite group of powerful rulers as with Frederick Pohl's novel 'Drunkard's Walk'. A system where the people in charge are changed periodically at least permits development by change than maintaining a static society.

There are possibilities for somatic genetic engineering. This would allow some effect on a particular individual's DNA but would not be passed onto the next generation should he or she breed. Some genetic manipulation is extremely complex and no guarantee such work would be foolproof.

With a society that tends to demand instant results, one often forgets Nature also yields its own surprises amongst its Natural Mutations. Diversification tends to be the key to any species survival, allowing at least one variant to be saved from natural disaster. There are far too many examples to turn this chapter into a biology lesson. However, we need an example and I opt for the dinosaur. Despite becoming rapidly extinct some 200 million years ago, its diversification resulted in the birds we have today.

A rather drastic change in appearance from their ancestors but ensured survival of the overall DNA adapting to its environmental conditions. Whether Man would go through quite so many changes for his own survival has been a case of much debate and many SF stories. An examination of today's society can give some possible hints where survival tactics are being employed against Mankind. Despite current thoughts regarding anti-biotics overuse hitting the food chain reducing Man's immunity to certain viruses, early death only appears to kill those most susceptible.

In evolutionary terms - and this is not being callous or unsympathetic to anyone reading this who has relatives or friends who have died in this manner - this is Nature's way of weeding out those who wouldn't survive against our own willingness to keep them alive. It's also interesting to note that Third World Africans seem to have a better survival rate against AIDS than their Western counterparts.

In the broader sense, it would appear that the dangers to Man have more to do with his reaction to bacteria and viruses than anything that is likely to produce dangers on the physical macro level. That doesn't mean to say that there hasn't been radical natural mutants. Nature weeds out those least likely to survive.

Whether a single successful mutant can introduce its DNA into the wider genetic pool is highly debatable. In the rest of the animal kingdom, such mutants tend to happen in multiple occurrences before breeding to allow a chance for propagation, suggesting a reaction to a common problem than a freak occurrence.

From a mechanics point of view, this tends to suggest that it is probably a combination of the correct genetic pairing with a reaction to environmental change to yield such mutations. They dominate by having the greater survival opportunity and cross-breeding in such situations with positive attributes. There are vast areas of the DNA helix that doesn't appear to be used. This is either disused material from earlier evolutionary change or genetic material waiting for the required conditions.

It could be both. Nature tends not to be dependent on only two choices for survival. It would only be called 'mutation' simply because it hasn't been seen before. What must always be remembered is that unless a mutation is allowed to propagate, then it will only be a 'sport' and die out. Such sports are probably happening all the time but dying before breeding because the conditions that would enhance their own survival haven't arrived.

From a Science Fiction perspective, all of the above gives immense range for potential writers. Not only in the form and type of mutation but also the ethical considerations. It's rather interesting that today's society is questioning the ethics in ways that SF writers rarely bothered with until the sub-species had developed a foothold in society.

This awareness could possibly be attributed to the awareness of such problems through earlier SF material. Yes, they were concerned about the mutant strain's survival but it was and is often depicted as a fight for supremacy in one form or another against normal humans. The argument that this is the direction that all Mankind is likely to be heading tends to be ignored. Considering how much SF is depicted as seeing the future, these sorts of arguments are sorely neglected.

As to the nature of the mutation, this author can only suggest that any thoughts should be based on the most primal reaction of all species: Survival! Present a condition that is likely to persist then provide genetic mutants most likely to survive and there's an instant story waiting to be written. Geneticists are not all later-day Frankensteins with Nietzschean pretensions. Much of their work will eventually resolve many inherited genetic diseases that plague Mankind.

Of course, one shouldn't neglect Man's intervention in such activities. This is not so much in terms of manipulation of his own DNA, but to the results of terrorism. It has been widely speculated that the dangers of an atomic bomb are nothing compared to a biological bomb. Bio-bombs could be either a virus or potentially something capable of attacking a certain genetic code combination wiping out a large proportion of any population.

Such techniques are being developed to control insect pests although there is concern as to how this will affect other parts of the food chain. What is more frightening is someone or a small group with the right background and experience could make such a bio-bomb in a basement and devastate the world in an instant. The survivors of such a bomb would have their own biological protection and propagate it in the same way that genetic sports in the animal kingdom come into their own.

The overall cost to the genetic pool of losing potential DNA recombinant material for other evolutionary emergencies could seriously devastate Mankind's own development and risk extinction. Probably the best example of a biological bomb in action has to be the start of the 'Wild Cards' mosaic anthology series edited by George R.R. Martin. Instead of being made by humans, it is an alien device. A proportion of humans are killed outright.

The survivors either suffer deformities, called Jokers, or improvements, the Aces. We might well prevent bio-bombs being made by ourselves but there is nothing stopping aliens wanting to experimenting on us themselves. The diversification of our DNA is the only thing likely to give our species the greatest chance of survival.

As we're in the arena of speculation, let's consider why we would need a 'super-human'. Certainly, it wouldn't be to act as vigilante crime-fighters. They might not be needed on this planet. Interstellar journeys or any length of time in zero-gravity has proven that Man loses calcium from his bones, presenting a rather fragile problem on returning to Earth, let alone landing on a different planet.

Deliberate gene-splicing of someone living or in the next generation to provide someone with the right DNA material to compensate for this might be considered good practice. This could be accomplished by preventing calcium loss or increasing the bone density or both.

With stronger heavier bones, one would also have to contemplate increasing muscle density to support it as well. Then there is the supply of the necessary nutrients to feed all this additional tissue means a much improved digestive and blood circulation system, not to mention a decent sized heart to propel the plasma.

For just a simple facility as 'super-strength' we are talking multiple mutations, a lacking in any would kill instantly. It would be unlikely, with what we currently know about our DNA, to indicate that anything but deliberate artificial manipulation could do so many changes so quickly. Even then, it would take several generations to guarantee that it was successful.

Whether individuals bred this way would have the intellect to match the body is also debatable. A super-strong individual would be a disaster if he was also proportionately clumsy. It's also the only case that could be argued for a perpetuating DNA helix and limited immortality to allow explorers time to reach another planet.

As mentioned above, there is a distinct possibility that unused DNA material might be from now relegated parts of the evolutionary tree. During the course of the development of the human foetus, we develop rudimentary gills for a period. A manipulation of such material could possibly provide a marine human but it would be unlikely that he would be a match for a dolphin without the aforementioned bone and muscular support, let alone a fat layer to insulate from the sea's cold temperature.

Considerations for possibilities along these routes require thought as to what is really needed to make it work. To just give gills, as indicated above, is simply not enough to ensure survival underwater. Where genetic manipulation would come into it's own would be in adapting for survival on alien planets. Here, we are entering the current controversial subject of taking genetic material from one species and successfully transporting it into another.

Such techniques are called gene-splicing. In essence, providing the consequences are fully appreciated, it is only another short-cut on evolution's lengthier process. It is also a subject that has been explored extensively in Science Fiction, especially with James Blish's 'The Seedling Stars' where colonies are laid at every planet on a starship's journey, each being adapted specifically to the environmental conditions they discover.

It can also be used, as with Fred Hoyle's 'A For Andromeda' to incorporate alien DNA into a human matrix. A genetic change that will make Man survive in what would otherwise be a hostile atmosphere, whether by gaseous content or air pressure, could only be regarded as an aid to living outside of an environment suit. It should be pointed out that changing from an oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere to something more toxic is certainly a lot more complex in making use of say, a higher carbon dioxide concentration.

In comparison, a change of air pressure to something at the height of the Andes is more a question of being adapted to making better use of the air available by merely living at such altitudes. Providing the best options doesn't appear to be contrary to any desire for survival.

If anything, it can be viewed as an improvement on Nature's more random pattern. There is nothing to say that the effects of such manipulations couldn't be reversed at a later date. What worries the purists is the potential dangers of such manipulated DNA being inherited, through lack of choice, to future generations. What is often failed to be realised is that such children are likely to take such changes for granted rather than think they are abnormal.

Manipulating human DNA with members of the animal kingdom produces, for the want of any other word, chimeras. Although it's doubtful that we would want to take on the attributes of animals because it might make us physically resemble them as well, the reverse might not be true. There are two examples of this.

The earliest is H.G. Wells' novel 'The Island Of Doctor Moreau' where surgical techniques result in chimeric cross-breeds. Wells was less concerned with the experiments then in how the man-animals rebelled over their treatment. In that respect it was mostly an example of metaphor in the same fashion as George Orwell's novel 'Animal Farm'.

A means to show an action that explores what it means to be like this any overall consequence to the reality as a whole. Of more importance is the works of Cordwainer Smith and his 'Instrumentality Of Mankind' stories. With only a small number of long-lived humans, animal stock was manipulated into humanoid shape. Classed as the 'Under-People' and given servile jobs with little regard beyond that until they fought for their rights in a rebellion that ended in the slaughter of many of their number.

Again, it hits on the old nerve that no creature likes to be slaves to their masters. Oddly enough, David Brin's 'Uplift' novels display an almost contrary view where aliens and later humans strive to bring other species up to articulate sentient level. In our case, humans concentrated on dolphins and gorillas. Such activities are also encased in galactic bureaucracy and diplomatic one-upmanship largely because there is so much dissension on what really is sentient.