PDA

View Full Version : "Scientists Claim to Have Cloned Human Embryo"


Reborn Outcast
02-12-2004, 11:12 AM
Here (http://www.cnn.com/2004/HEALTH/02/12/science.clone/index.html)

Well... here goes the global controversy again.

IG-64
02-12-2004, 11:20 AM
1. I don't care

2. People aren't science projects

3. Who ever that clone is will be misrable for his whole life, good job.

swphreak
02-12-2004, 11:28 AM
I think they should continue research. Screw the nutcases and their unethical crap. If the research requires sacrificing eggs and embryos and whatnot for the better good, I'm all for it.

BawBag™
02-12-2004, 01:08 PM
*Moves to Senate Chambers* :p
Yeah, controversial. Seen as scientists claim cloning may help cure disease I can't see a problem. But it's just so damned unnatural.

ET Warrior
02-12-2004, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by IG-64
3. Who ever that clone is will be misrable for his whole life, good job.

Did you READ the article? They made stem cells, not a person...:rolleyes:

XERXES
02-12-2004, 02:53 PM
thats kinda cool.

Hermie
02-12-2004, 03:39 PM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
Did you READ the article? They made stem cells, not a person...:rolleyes:

but we all know that sooner or later they will make a person soon. now all we have to do is to find a way to keep memories, and we have practically discovered infinete life! Kamino next!

Neverhoodian
02-12-2004, 04:03 PM
originally posted by ET Warrior:

Did you READ the article? They made stem cells, not a person...

Ah, but this is only the first step...

I believe that it's only a matter of time before human clones start being produced. There could be any number of reasons why. Gay/lesbian couples might want a child using a method besides invetro-fertilization (sp) or adoption. Some parents might want their child to "look a certain way." Heck, some countries might see clones as cheap labor that can be easily exploited. Keep in mind that some scientists will do whatever it takes, even eschewing certain moral and ethical standards, to accomplish a "first." being the first to bring a fully-functioning human clone into the world would certainly be an auspicious "first." However, religious beliefs aside, there are some fundamental problems with cloning.

One possible problem with clones is that the process is far from perfect. All cloned animals have had weaker immune systems and less developed organs than the original animal. Consequently, their lifespans have been shorter. If humans are cloned, the already tottering health care system (in America at least) would be strained even further caring for clones who come down with diseases faster than humans who are not cloned.

Another problem deals with equality. Clones may experience feelings of inferiority because they may be percieved as "different" and "strange," because they were not "born," but "manufactured." Since they would be copies, they would feel like they are not an individual, and that, on the surface at least, there is someone else just like them. Such feelings may lead to psychological problems later in life.

If we are to undertake human cloning, we must be aware of all the ethical and moral implications it brings. If we aren't careful, we could find ourselves in perilous moral problems with no easy answer.

ExcelsioN
02-12-2004, 04:22 PM
They're saying that this would be a step forward to curing dieases. But this is obviously the first step towards proper cloning. Sheep were cloned a while back.

IG-64
02-12-2004, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
Did you READ the article? They made stem cells, not a person...:rolleyes:

No, i didn't read it (see #1)

If they didn't make a person then why is it a big deal?

XERXES
02-12-2004, 06:31 PM
Originally posted by IG-64
No, i didn't read it (see #1)

If they didn't make a person then why is it a big deal? I read your #1, and if you don't care then why are you acting concerned about it?

You should read the article anyways, so you at least know whats going on before you make claims to false accusations. Its an interesting read as well.

Jared
02-12-2004, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by IG-64
No, i didn't read it (see #1)

If they didn't make a person then why is it a big deal?


*runs in circles around the room*


we're all gonna die!!!!


we're all gONNA DIE!!!!!!



AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!


*silence*















...ok the way I see it, if we can murder our babies before they are born, then why not grow them as well?

and then kill them?

and none of this..."oh its just a fetus"....in latin that means baby...as I recall.

so...in the name of science?

instead of a one night stand?

you guys swear, like its some big controversy.


get the hell over it.
no big difference there.

ET Warrior
02-12-2004, 07:17 PM
I see absolutely no reason to assume that, simply because we've now got technology to clone stem cells, which would completely revamp current medicine, giving us the abillites to cure what are currently uncurable diseases mind you, we're going to start making humans. Sure, maybe, someday. But would it be better to just make this technology hands off and have people dying all the time from parkinsons and diabetes, when we know that if we follow this research we can SAVE them?

IG-64
02-12-2004, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by XERXES
I read your #1, and if you don't care then why are you acting concerned about it?

You should read the article anyways, so you at least know whats going on before you make claims to false accusations. Its an interesting read as well.

Well, sorry, I din't mean to make any accusations, but when I hear "cloned human embryo" the first thing that pops in my head is, well, cloned people.

Breton
02-12-2004, 07:31 PM
Originally posted by Neverhoodian
Gay/lesbian couples might want a child using a method besides invetro-fertilization (sp) or adoption.

Adoption and that other thing you mentioned are both better alternatives than cloning. And anyways, it's possible to make egg cells out of normal cells, and I'm pretty sure the same goes with sperm cells, so if they want children that are genetically connected to them, there are way better alternatives than cloning.

Some parents might want their child to "look a certain way."

Perhaps, but that technology has little to do with cloning.

Heck, some countries might see clones as cheap labor that can be easily exploited.

Clones are both more complicated to make and more expensive to make than normal children. So that won't happen. And in any case, there's no reason for why clones should have less rights than other people.

Keep in mind that some scientists will do whatever it takes, even eschewing certain moral and ethical standards, to accomplish a "first." being the first to bring a fully-functioning human clone into the world would certainly be an auspicious "first." However, religious beliefs aside, there are some fundamental problems with cloning.

It'll be a breakthrough for technology and science, and will open a lot of new paths. There's no problem in wanting to be "first".

One possible problem with clones is that the process is far from perfect. All cloned animals have had weaker immune systems and less developed organs than the original animal. Consequently, their lifespans have been shorter. If humans are cloned, the already tottering health care system (in America at least) would be strained even further caring for clones who come down with diseases faster than humans who are not cloned.

If properly cloned, it won't be any worse health-wise than it's origin. Faults in organ and immune systems shouldn't have anything to do with the cloning itself, but rather with inperfection in the cloning process.

Another problem deals with equality. Clones may experience feelings of inferiority because they may be percieved as "different" and "strange," because they were not "born," but "manufactured." Since they would be copies, they would feel like they are not an individual, and that, on the surface at least, there is someone else just like them. Such feelings may lead to psychological problems later in life.

Firstly, clones are born in the same way as humans, and I would definatly not say they are manufactured. Second, genes are only a part of what makes an induvidual, and even though two people share genes they will be two different persons.

IG-64
02-12-2004, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by Breton
I would definatly not say they are manufactured.

sure, none of us would but threre are alot of mean people in the world

ET Warrior
02-12-2004, 08:17 PM
Woah, I totally agree with Breton for once......


*waits for the world to end*

DarkLord60
02-12-2004, 08:28 PM
:Thinks of movies Like The 6th day and remembers what happened: Umm I dont think we should be messing around with nature its just isnt right it could cause new problems.

Jed
02-12-2004, 08:37 PM
I'm all up for letting them continue research to make breakthroughs with new diseases, but cloning a human? I dunno, doesn't seem right.

There are enough people on this earth - if parents that can't conceive want a child badly, they should adopt.

*shrugs*

DarkLord60
02-12-2004, 08:41 PM
Dont get me wrong its good for having extra organs to replace bad ones but i also dont think its natural.

RoxStar
02-12-2004, 09:49 PM
Originally posted by Jed
I'm all up for letting them continue research to make breakthroughs with new diseases, but cloning a human? I dunno, doesn't seem right.

There are enough people on this earth - if parents that can't conceive want a child badly, they should adopt.

*shrugs*
Ya. I think they should find a way to slone spinal cords or something.

ET Warrior
02-12-2004, 10:10 PM
Originally posted by DarkLord60
Dont get me wrong its good for having extra organs to replace bad ones but i also dont think its natural.

Neither are synthetic drugs, but do you feel bad about taking some tylenol when you have a headache?


We're not talking about making actualy PEOPLE here, I mean, sure, maybe eventually we COULD, but practicality takes over, and people realize how impractical cloning is. aside from the massive expense, why wouldn't you just do it the old fashioined way? It's about 5,000,000 times more fun than cloning anyways.

But cloning STEM cells IS a big deal. stem cells are very impressionable and can be used to create tissue that our bodies won't reject in transplants. This is invaluable for burn patients, people who need heart transplants, the list goes on.

Crazy_dog no.3
02-12-2004, 10:15 PM
Why is cloning wrong? :confused:

IF it's OK to clone sheep why not humans?

IG-64
02-12-2004, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by Crazy_dog no.3
Why is cloning wrong? :confused:

IF it's OK to clone sheep why not humans?

Depends on what your opinion is about animals and humans, sheep are bred for fleece, humans are much different, I guess

Datheus
02-13-2004, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by Jared
and none of this..."oh its just a fetus"....in latin that means baby...as I recall.

Fetus is both a noun and adjective in Latin. It can mean "pregnant" as an adjective or "childbirth" as a noun.

The Latin word for baby is infans.

Anyway, what's wrong with saying "Oh it's just a fetus."? I've got a list scores long of animals slaughtered every day with more life invested in them than a fetus does.

SkinWalker
02-13-2004, 01:09 AM
Originally posted by IG-64
1. I don't care

2. People aren't science projects

3. Who ever that clone is will be misrable for his whole life, good job.

4. You didn't read the story (because of #1 perhaps :) ) since they didn't clone a person, but rather a person's cells. There was no sperm, no egg, and no fetus implanted, therefore no pregnancy... the cells are cloned to get stem cells for transplant. Stem cells can become any cell in the body, and could provide a way for "curing" millions of people who suffer from neural disorders or injuries ranging from paralysis to alzheimer's to parkinson's.

But I have to disagree... people are the greatest science project ever conducted.... :)

ZBomber
02-13-2004, 01:45 AM
If they do pull this off, and make any type of cell, I'll kiss Jed.

I just don't think it will happen, but I am most likely wrong ^_^

BongoBob
02-13-2004, 03:35 PM
What crazy dog said there, that is the cornerstone for my post.

Yes, who really cared about cloning sheep. It was cool. But now that we're starting to work on cloning humans, than all this moral and ethical crap. What's the difference. They both have spirits? They both live, breathe, and eat right? Well then this is funny. Now you see how the sheep might feel. I mean, everyone didn't really care, just wow cool. Humans:NO IT'S WRONG RELIGION MORALS ETHICS, just what a double standard.

Think about that.

Agen
02-14-2004, 02:19 AM
There were plenty of outcries about the cloning of Dolly the Sheep. :rolleyes: Didn't you watch the News :p :)

But cloning STEM cells IS a big deal. stem cells are very impressionable and can be used to create tissue that our bodies won't reject in transplants. This is invaluable for burn patients, people who need heart transplants, the list goes on.
Yep. That's really important unlike clones. We don't need clones at all.... do we??

*Moves to Senate Chambers*
-_-
No need, anything goes here. (you know what I mean)

El Sitherino
02-14-2004, 03:01 AM
Originally posted by Agen_Terminator
There were plenty of outcries about the cloning of Dolly the Sheep. :rolleyes: Didn't you watch the News :p :)


Yep. That's really important unlike clones. We don't need clones at all.... do we??


-_-
No need, anything goes here. (you know what I mean) except particular acts with dolly the sheep.

I think this is a breakthrough for science. I hope someday we can cure parkinsons and even diseases like diabetes.

ET Warrior
02-14-2004, 05:49 AM
Originally posted by Agen_Terminator
Yep. That's really important unlike clones. We don't need clones at all.... do we??

I see no reason why we would need clones. but Stem cells, those are HUGE. I really hope this technology gets pursued.

MennoniteHobbit
02-16-2004, 08:56 PM
Originally posted by Jed
I'm all up for letting them continue research to make breakthroughs with new diseases, but cloning a human? I dunno, doesn't seem right.

There are enough people on this earth - if parents that can't conceive want a child badly, they should adopt.

*shrugs*

Yep, I do see the relevance in the health parts and "reproducing tissue to replace damaged ones" but still, we sacrifice stem cells/embryos when we research, and that's kinda like taking away something that can develop into life later...

Oh yeah, adopting is a great idea. There are a bunch of kids in this world who do not have ne1 who would look after them...

Breton
02-16-2004, 09:21 PM
Originally posted by MennoniteHobbit
Yep, I do see the relevance in the health parts and "reproducing tissue to replace damaged ones" but still, we sacrifice stem cells/embryos when we research, and that's kinda like taking away something that can develop into life later...



Let's see...a fertile male produces about 1000 sperm cells each second. Each of those can develop into a human being. Does that mean that everyone who masturbates is a mass murderer?

And with cloning it's even worse, as it is done by taking DNA from a single cell of your body. As your body is made up by billions of cells, each with DNA, and these die and get created in an insane tempo, this means millions upon millions of wasted potential human lives. For each single human body in the world.


Anyways, to be more on-topic, I would just like to say that the cloning technology is vital for effective stem cell research and development, not to mention carrying out the actual curing.

Agen
02-16-2004, 11:20 PM
Originally posted by MennoniteHobbit
Yep, I do see the relevance in the health parts and "reproducing tissue to replace damaged ones" but still, we sacrifice stem cells/embryos when we research, and that's kinda like taking away something that can develop into life later...
That's a bit daft, I agree with Breton, this is just what happens. Sperm isn't aware of itself and I don't think cells are that much either ;) :p

Why is cloning wrong?

IF it's OK to clone sheep why not humans?
1. It's a waste of money
2. The clone is ridden with disease and doesn't live as long as it should (most scientists agree that all would be like this)
3. Dolly the sheep is dead already.
4. It wasn't ok, as far as I know, it's illegal.
5.It's not needed

Although, cloning is different from stem cell research etc.

ET Warrior
02-17-2004, 01:41 AM
Originally posted by MennoniteHobbit
Yep, I do see the relevance in the health parts and "reproducing tissue to replace damaged ones" but still, we sacrifice stem cells/embryos when we research, and that's kinda like taking away something that can develop into life later...

And so is using a condom during sex. I mean, if you wouldn't have worn it there's a good chance she would've had a baby.

Crazy_dog no.3
02-17-2004, 10:35 AM
Well the "morals" and stuff aside, it is important to pursue cloning technology becuase besides all the "new organs" it could lead to something else further down the line.

Druid Allanon
02-17-2004, 01:47 PM
Bah, if human clones are created, most mean people would shun them or think them strange. Why clone a person when they will have a miserable life? If we're not careful, 'clone wars' might start when scientists have cloned lots of people in the future.

SkinWalker
02-17-2004, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by Druid Allanon
Bah, if human clones are created, most mean people would shun them or think them strange.


Why? If done correctly, you will never know that a person was a clone. It's not like they'll walk around with a big "N" on their foreheads. Or "666" for the superstitious lot...