# Scientist Claims to Produce Human Clone

Discussion in 'Biology & Genetics' started by dkb218, Dec 27, 2002.

1. ### thecurly1Registered Senior Member

Messages:
1,024
C'mon now you're just being silly.

Identical twins seperate, from a single embryo inside the mother. The twin is a clone of the other child, who has been produced by sexual means.

In our case with the "Raelians", the mother has cloned herself. A prexisting human shouldn't be cloned. This defies all logical and moral sense. There isn't a reason in the world for humans to reproduce asexually.

I'm for cloning embryos up to the point where they are stem cells. At this point the cells have not differnetiated, becoming kidneys, skin, eyes, etc. This stem cell embryo therefore is not yet human. Plus that stem cell embryo should not be allowed to further advance or be implanted for development.

WellCookedFetus:
Oh how did I know the IFV juxtoposition would occur? Oh yeah, because it has zero relevance. IFV is still taking sperm and egg and combining them. I have no problem with reproduction if its not occuring strictly by sexual intercourse. I understand there are a host of reasons people may not be able to have intercourse and I'm sorry for that.

To say that anti-cloning people or even pro-lifers are similar to Inquisitioners is just a weak argument for someone that can't come up with a reason why human cloning for reproductive means is needed.

I've stated my reasons for opposing cloning, now gimmie yours in support.

3. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,140
yes but these people represent the majority of the population around the world... Maybe not china and Japan though. I’m not connecting Anti-cloning with pro-life... I say that most people have the false dogma that all that is natural is good and that is unnatural is bad. That belief is totally untrue!, unless you think living in a cave, eating rotting flesh and live to a rip old age of 40 is better then it is today.

I Am not saying it is needed... there is little to no need for cloning people to make children. Im saying that there is nothing wrong with it.

Last edited: Jan 4, 2003

5. ### John MaceRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
101
Curly:

The clone is just like the identical twin-- a clone of human who was produced by sexual means.

Again, you are simply stating your opinion w/o any reason. "Defies all logic and reason"? What does that mean?

The main reason someone might want a clone is glaringly obvious. A man or woman is infirtile and wants a child who is geneticall related to him or her. The clone will be a seperate individual with an entirely different life experience than the parent. Sure, they'll share genetic tendencies, but so do children born the old fashioned way.

If you told me you were highly religious and beiieved you'd be violating God's law or something, I could understand your posiition. But just saying that you don't like it doesn't do much to convince me that cloning should be banned.

C'mon, Curly. Give us a concrete reason...

Messages:
18,140

8. ### John MaceRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
101
Fetus:

Come on! You might as well say, why use IVF, just adopt. A great many people simply want a genetically related child. Myself, I would go the adoption route, but a lot of people feel otherwise. Is that hard to believe or to understand?

9. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,140
Ya thats selfish genetics! ok let say we have a couple in which one of them can not produce any gamates. so we take that person make a stem cell clone of them and force it to go into meiosis. we take the gamate that forms fuss it with the gamates from the sterile ones partner and batabing batabang a normal healthy child that is not a clone!

10. ### John MaceRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
101
Well, for one thing, your method has never been accomplished in any animal to date. Maybe some time in the future.

Still, there are plenty of single people who want kids. Have you ever seen The Big Chill?

BTW, I believe it is "bada-bing", not "bata-bing".

Face it, cloning is very appealing to a certain segment of society. Again, I'd never do it myself, but I can see that a lot of folks would.

I think I'm done with this subject (getting kind of repititious and boring).

11. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,140
Like I have said a thousand times now i have NOTHING against cloning my only worry is the backlash from all those ignorant people (most of the world population) that is the only problem with cloning is it pisses others off! this I think voids its very limited reproductive uses.

Hey but again IVF was hated when it first came out now very few disagree with it. Give this 30 years and it will be common place to, hopefully.

My worry is that cloning will have serious side effects to stem cell cloning… dam republicans way can’t they all become non-voting Amish farmers!

bata-bing, bada-bing sorry I only got 50% Italian in me. If I were my grand father I would say “succhiate il mio asino”

12. ### ViennaRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,741
This is just another attempt to promote a following for a cult. This time the cult are called Raelians. These Raelians have already refused to have DNA tests on their "clone".....nuff said.

13. ### John MaceRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
101
As for stem cell research being quashed, yes that will likely be a negative side effect of cloning. I'm guessing that it'll get going somewhere, though. Too much promise, too many  potentially involved. Also, I think it's not so much that congress will ban cloning for stem cell research, as that it will not allow public money to be used. That's fine with me. Just look at Stanford-- a group there has already announced plans to do research w/o public funding. Chalk one up for the private sector.

14. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,140
that’s going to slow development! Private sector money is not going to have most organs being produce in farms or lab by 2020. Its going to have much greedier plans were people are going to be force to pay for the rest of there miserable live (for some cure to whats align them) to feed some CEO wallet.

15. ### John MaceRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
101
Now we're venturing into a discussion about socialism vs capitalism. I don't think you and I would have a very fruitful exchange on that subject. I'll just say, give me the greedy CEO any day over the lazy parasite feeding at the public trough. The former has a stake in getting results. The latter only has a stake in keeping his head burried in the free slop.

BTW, check the article on theraputic cloning in today's NYT's Week in Review section. Kind of puts in perspective how far away theraputic cloning is to being medically useful. (I'm not justifying a ban, just pointing out that it's a LONG way off. Too bad, as I'm sure I could be a benificiary in the not too distant future...)

16. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,140

Second yes theraputic cloning is a long way off but the growth of organs form other sorces of stem cells is not. yes there will still be a immunity rejection problem but we have got that covered resonable for now.

17. ### thecurly1Registered Senior Member

Messages:
1,024
There is no reason, that has been presented, why there is a NEED to clone humans. This procedure is illogical to me because sexual reproduction works, weather it be by intercourse or IFV. There isn't a reason that people need to clone. I believe that this is creating an artifical human, while it may be living I don't believe it has been sanctioned by God. I would ask that I not be persecuted as a religious fanatic, or zealot. This is my core believe.

A more secular reason is as follows:

Every cloning procedure so far has need multiple tries, in which there have been aborted fetuses and deformations. Even some clones that have been born are subject to physical problems and either are handicapted or die several years later. I think its flat-out wrong to bring a human into the world and expose it to a higher than normal risk of dying or disablement than usuall. As a matter of fact its just cruel. Who wants to clone yourself if it dies in 10 years or is autistic?

BEYOND IT ALL:

The "Raelians" have no proof that they have indeed produced a clone or clones. They have yet to present photographic evidence or DNA samples. As far as we know this is a PR stunt to promote their so-called religion.

18. ### John MaceRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
101
Curly:

OK, now I can understand where you are coming from-- religious beliefs. I disagree with you, but I do understand your position.

Fetus:

What is it that you don't understand? You gotta be more specific for me to respond.

19. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,140
It is my belief that greed is the cause of ALL problems... so in that respect the rich CEO are far worse then poor bottom feeders!

20. ### John MaceRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
101
We're venturing quite a bit off topic here, but...

HIV AIDS is a huge problem in the world. Is thatdisease CAUSED by greed?

21. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,140
YES! if they had not cut down the forest were the disease came from we would have never known about it.

22. ### goofyfishAnalog By Birth, Digital By DesignValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,331
Unfortunately, that is not always the case.
So it has no soul and can be used for organ harvests for the original.

:m: Peace.

Messages:
2,007