Scientists clone human embryos

[DanS]

I think this is on very shaky ground ethically.

[curtsibling]

It's easy to talk of ethics...

Have anyone you had a relative or parent dying of cancer?

If cloned organs were available, I would have no qualms about using them.

Amazing how people let religious scripture become more important than survival.

[Drogue]

I have no qualms using cloning for creating children either. If someone wants a child of their own biological data, then I don't see, other than safety reasons, why they should be able to clone themselves. The only ethics involved, IMHO, is the quality of the research and that the person who's DNA is being used agrees to it.

[Eli]

From what I understand, basically, when one die of old age, it means on the cellular level, cells has been replicating itself so often that the quality of new copies are not as good and eventually the quality is so poor those cells just don't function. (cell A replicates itself into cell A.1 which replicates itself into cell A.2 copying from A.1 not A and so on. Imagine doing that with a paper and a copier. 100th copy wouldn't be as good as the first copy

That's what happens when you use analog systems...

[chequita guevara]

Excellent news!

[Starchild]

Originally posted by DataAeolus
I'd like to take an opportunity to bring up a thought. Hopefully someone with extensive knowledge of biochemistry can help me out here ( I know at least one of you are studying that field!). From what I understand, basically, when one die of old age, it means on the cellular level, cells has been replicating itself so often that the quality of new copies are not as good and eventually the quality is so poor those cells just don't function. (cell A replicates itself into cell A.1 which replicates itself into cell A.2 copying from A.1 not A and so on. Imagine doing that with a paper and a copier. 100th copy wouldn't be as good as the first copy) When the body has so many of cells that are not functioning, the body die. Would it be possible to use stem cells to revitalize the body? Those cells would be closer to orginial copies. Would this enable a person to live longer until basically his brains stop functioning?

The ends of chromosomes have "caps" called telomeres. As the cell divides, genetic information gets copied and these telomeres are eroded. That's because, IIRC, the copying enzymes can't actually grab onto the end of the DNA coil but have to start a bit of the way into it. Telomeres are genetic safeguards, meaningless bits of DNA that can get worn away safely instead of having functioning genes be degraded.

So as a person ages, their telemores wear down, increasing the chance of genetic damage when the cell next divides. Cancer cells (and I think stem cells but don't quote me on that) possess an enzyme called telomase that can rebuild telomeres. That's why cancer cells are so very long lived. However, once the cells are assigned their "proper" role in life, such as liver or nerve cell, they can no longer manufacture telomase.

So there's really not much point in growing a human clone to adulthood to harvest its organs. The organs would be the same age as the person since the original genetic material would have to come from the adult needing the organs. Growing organs from preserved stem cells makes more sense since the organ is geneticall "younger" than one from a clone.

Also, stem cells aren't closer to the original copy. Cloned stem cells are the original copy. Of course, there's a lot more to aging and death than telomore erosion. Free radicals (like che) play a part too along with tons more stuff.

In the end, flesh with always turn to dust. That's why my money is on uploading human minds into machine bodies.

[Japher]

Yaaay!!!

I am all for stem cell research and use for treating diseases This is excellent news for supplying a stable supply of stem cells with which to experiment on.

Ethics, schemcics... life comes from like, that's natural. So, if you got a problem with the ethics you're going to have a problem with nature. IMO, these stem cells are more like a plant that can be harvested instead of a cadaver, on top of that you can manipulate that plant to grow what ever type of fruit or vegie you want.

[alva]

Free radicals (like che) play a part too along with

interesting read

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by curtsibling
Amazing how people let religious scripture become more important than survival.

I'm actually quite undecided about these things. I'm not concerned about it because of religious reasons, because I'm atheist. And healing deseases is fine, I'm just concerned about how serious potential abuses of gentech on humans could be and if they can be effectively limited. So in short, I want to know more about chances AND risks of such things before I take a position....

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by DanS
I think this is on very shaky ground ethically.

Well OK, but seeing as I'm 12 years into watching my Mother's slow decline with Parkinson's Disease you'll probably understand why I don't share that opinion. I'm just sorry that it's probably too late for her.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Drogue
I have no qualms using cloning for creating children either. If someone wants a child of their own biological data, then I don't see, other than safety reasons, why they should be able to clone themselves. The only ethics involved, IMHO, is the quality of the research and that the person who's DNA is being used agrees to it.

I strongly disagree with that, since the child would have a very hard time developing an own personality and uniqueness.
It is much more difficult to develop a personality while being a clone of your parent than while being a twin, simply because your "clone" is somebody superior, somebody that has authority, and somebody that is already well known and acknowledged by the others.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Combat Ingrid
As far as I'm concerned it's a bunch of cells with enormous medical potential

Same here. As long as it's a bunch of cell unable to think or to feel, I see nothing wrong in exploiting them at our heart's content.

But god forbid we develop them enough for them to become human beings. It would be extremely cruel to "give birth" to these people only in order to farm them later.

[Sava]

we should clone embryos to get stem cells... harvesting organs


OMFG BUT THINK OF ALL THOSE CELLS AND THE HORRIBLE DEATHS OMFG OFMGOMFOFMGOFMGOFMG WE CANNOT EXPLOIT CELLS OMFOFMGOFMGOFGOMFGOMGF

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I strongly disagree with that, since the child would have a very hard time developing an own personality and uniqueness.

That's crap. Kids will be who they are unless they have an overbearing parent. The real problem is that cloned animals start out with older DNA. Not enough research has been done, but it may cut short their life span. We wno;t know for a while, until the first cloned animals start reaching middle and old age

[JohnT]

Sava is in top form today.

How's that Chick Publications internship coming along, Sava?