Human Fetus Cloned

[Truth Teller]

New Scientist magazine [www.newscientist.com] has reported that a woman IS eight weeks pregnant from cloning.

Dr.Severino Antinori reported [a fertility doctor who specialises in this field] is reported to have said this during a meeting.

If true,this is the first time a human woman has been made pregnant by cloning.

The pregnacy/cloning probably took place in Italy where such a procedure is legal.

Most of the "anti-human cloning " crowd is anti-choice and abortion and anti-escr[embryonic stem cell research].

I am staunchly broth pro-chioce and pro-escr,I am deeply opposed to human cloning for one reason and one reason only: I have had various genetic defects in my body since birth.

EVERYTHING that has been cloned so far has genetic defects,no exceptions.

It's one thing to have a case like mine where a woman becomes pregnant and the child turns out to have defects.

It's another to deliberately conceive a child that defintiely will have defects like mine [or possibly even worse],that is totally cruel and subhuman.

I just hope this child has LOTS of love,money and health care because it's going to need all three.

[jillianjiggs]

Well I definately agree with you on the pro-choice and stem cell research issues. I was born with a rare autoimmune disease. My only hope for a cure is a stem cell transplant down the road. Doctors don't even know what caused my disease, but it's THEORIZED that one of my genes somehow lost it's marker cell. That kicked my immune system into a frenzy trying to kill the gene. I wouldn't want another human being to have to go through what I've gone through. Cloning humans goes into a grey area. Sure, the benefits of having harvestable organs would be tremendous. But how many times will we have to try in order to get it right? How many babies will be born with severe congenital defects?

I think the most appropriate measure would be to open up embryonic stem cell research and to halt human cloning. Embryonic stem cells have the potential to turn into any type of human cell. This could mean eventually growing organs instead of having to clone in order to get them. It could also mean a cure for people with disease such as diabetes, MS, or Behcets and Sjogrens like myself. I've got a lot weighing on this matter, and I can tell you I was pretty pissed when I heard Bush's plan earlier this year.

[Powerboss]

Pro Life, Undecided on Stem Cells, Totally against Cloning.
I cant believe we would start getting into this type of crap.

[u8nxprt]

There's no way to put the Genie back in the bottle.

[Truth Teller]

Originally posted by jillianjiggs
Well I definately agree with you on the pro-choice and stem cell research issues. I was born with a rare autoimmune disease. My only hope for a cure is a stem cell transplant down the road. Doctors don't even know what caused my disease, but it's THEORIZED that one of my genes somehow lost it's marker cell. That kicked my immune system into a frenzy trying to kill the gene. I wouldn't want another human being to have to go through what I've gone through. Cloning humans goes into a grey area. Sure, the benefits of having harvestable organs would be tremendous. But how many times will we have to try in order to get it right? How many babies will be born with severe congenital defects?

I think the most appropriate measure would be to open up embryonic stem cell research and to halt human cloning. Embryonic stem cells have the potential to turn into any type of human cell. This could mean eventually growing organs instead of having to clone in order to get them. It could also mean a cure for people with disease such as diabetes, MS, or Behcets and Sjogrens like myself. I've got a lot weighing on this matter, and I can tell you I was pretty pissed when I heard Bush's plan earlier this year.

A lot of what you say about your condition applies to me as well.

I agree,escr- yes,cloning humans -no.

If humans could be cloned without them having birth defects I'd have no problem with cloning,that isn't reality,everything that is cloned has genetic defects.

As to Bush:I agree with Michael J. Fox:"We're finally off the launching pad but he [Bush] could have given us more fuel".

[Truth Teller]

Originally posted by u8nxprt
There's no way to put the Genie back in the bottle.

That is true.

[ChaoticThoughts]

I don't think we are really traveling down a bad path... We always bend the world by the technology and science advances.

However, we really should not clone humans yet. Perhaps not for a long time. Birth defects and unforseen other problems will be shown as this baby grows. I wonder how retarded the mom is. I feel sorry for the baby-to-be. I think even pro-lifers would consider stopping this pregnancy.

[Šñøü†ê®]

It seems insane to me. If the cloning was of a highly controversial intellectual like Cornell West or a highly talented entertainer like Elvis, that is one thing. But to clone some average retard is arrogant and asking for problems as the world has so many retards to begin with.

[RightWingZealot]

>Most of the "anti-human cloning " crowd is anti-choice and abortion and anti-escr[embryonic stem cell research].<


Im Pro-life. Im no more anti-choice than you are pro-abortion.

I am pro-life probably for the same reason I am opposed to human cloning. It is a sanctity of human life issue. It is one thing to use technology to save, or improve the lives of human beings. It is another to create human beings in a most unnatural way.
It sickens me that there are people out there in this world who apparently have no moral values whatsoever and are willing to "experiment" with human beings.

As TT said, there are many genetic abnormalities present in clones, and I dont see any reason why a human clone would be any different. You'll certainly be able to tell them apart from natural humans on the beach...

[Karen]

"I am pro-life probably for the same reason I am opposed to human cloning"

Are you opposed to invitro-fertilization or the use of fertility drugs? (not attacking, just curious)

I agree with the 'genie in the bottle' analogy. There's no stopping this technology. So rather than hide in fear from it, we should embrace it, regulate it, and fiercely research it. By just refusing to participate in the process of cloning, we open the door for the opportunistic struggling for notoriety more than the improvement of human life.

So the question becomes, how do we insure that cloning will not produce genetic defects without experimentation? That would still include creating an embryo and testing it for certain defects, diseases, etc.? (correct?) It keeps being reduced to pro-life/choice. Stem cell research isnt hacking down small children, its utilizing tissue that could cure disease, etc.

This sort of reminds me of people who preach abstinence or 'just say no to drugs' Human nature dictates that these policies are failures. We need to have more courage and not be so frightened by the unknown. However, I dont know enough about the process of cloning or stem cells to be definite. Anyone know of any good sites or books that explains these processes from beginning to 'end' ?

[RightWingZealot]

>Are you opposed to invitro-fertilization or the use of fertility drugs?<

Actually yes I think I am.

I dont know a whole lot about it, except that sometime women on fertility drugs end up having a whole litter of babies.. like 5,6,7..

and then they end up having to abort some of them or they have them and then som of the babies are messed up.

My wife and I have never had to struggle to make babies, so perhaps I simply cannot relate, but if I were that desperate to have children I would be looking at adopting waaaay before I would look to fertility drugs.

baaad mojo.

[ChaoticThoughts]

Well, thats easy to say. But I know how people are, and they want to have their own kids. So I don't think you can relate to those who can't have kids. I can't relate to them because I don't want kids.

But when it comes to abortion, I don't think we should have control over other peoples choices. It is their life and responsibility, not ours. Would you like it if I decided that you can not eat meat because it kills animals, and have your guns taken away because I don't like them?

You may choose to not have an abortion, because of religious views, etc. But not everyone holds themself to the same ideals.

[RightWingZealot]

>But when it comes to abortion, I don't think we should have control over other peoples choices. It is their life and responsibility, not ours. Would you like it if I decided that you can not eat meat because it kills animals, and have your guns taken away because I don't like them?<


The fact that you can equate human life with a hamburger is fucking sick.

I'll bet you even did it with a straight face.

[DngrMse]

Originally posted by ChaoticThoughts

But when it comes to abortion, I don't think we should have control over other peoples choices. It is their life and responsibility, not ours. Would you like it if I decided that you can not eat meat because it kills animals, and have your guns taken away because I don't like them?

You may choose to not have an abortion, because of religious views, etc. But not everyone holds themself to the same ideals.

We deny people their 'choices' every day. Our prisons are full of such people. Why is this particular choice sacred?

[The Frog]

Originally posted by jillianjiggs
Well I definately agree with you on the pro-choice and stem cell research issues. I was born with a rare autoimmune disease. My only hope for a cure is a stem cell transplant down the road. Doctors don't even know what caused my disease, but it's THEORIZED that one of my genes somehow lost it's marker cell. That kicked my immune system into a frenzy trying to kill the gene. I wouldn't want another human being to have to go through what I've gone through. Cloning humans goes into a grey area. Sure, the benefits of having harvestable organs would be tremendous. But how many times will we have to try in order to get it right? How many babies will be born with severe congenital defects?

I think the most appropriate measure would be to open up embryonic stem cell research and to halt human cloning. Embryonic stem cells have the potential to turn into any type of human cell. This could mean eventually growing organs instead of having to clone in order to get them. It could also mean a cure for people with disease such as diabetes, MS, or Behcets and Sjogrens like myself. I've got a lot weighing on this matter, and I can tell you I was pretty pissed when I heard Bush's plan earlier this year.

I have to say I’m against Embryonic Stem Cell Research for two scientific reasons that are totally separate from my Pro-Life moral reason for not wanting to create disposable babies for research.

1) There is no evidence whatsoever that embryonic stem cells are any better than adult stem cells for working with. Read the published papers on both sides of the argument and you will see that the thinking the embryonic cells are better is just conjecture. It’s just easier to get them from the embryos.

2) So far, all evidence shows that an altered stem cell used to produce the desired effect will be acceptable only to the being from which the stem cell had been harvested. In other words, they would have to use your cells anyway.

That said, I don’t mind at all if they have lots of volunteers that donate stem cells for research. Great- it’s good science and no one had to give up their life, willing or no.

As for the cloning thing, I’d have to say I’m okay with limited partial cloning, if and when they can do that. To wit, I don’t want them to clone a whole human and then take what they want (organs) and toss the rest. That would be murdering the person from which they harvested it, in my opinion. However, if, say, I had a bad left kidney and they took cells from my right kidney (or a bad liver and they took some remaining healthy liver cells) and from that they could clone a new kidney or liver- by themselves- that would be a great achievement. Then you could have replacement parts for yourself that your body would have no reason to reject and there was no dispose-a-clone killed for it.

You don’t have to be anti-science to hold the Pro-Life view. You just have to be Pro-Responsible Science.

[jillianjiggs]

How is it any different to use an embryo for research than to grow a liver or kidney with adult cells? Adult stem cells are fragile and theorized to not last as long when used. If you grew a kidney with adult stem cells, it would be more prone to defect because of the age of the stem cells. Same thing when a women in her forties tries to have a baby; the a lot of the kids end up with Down Syndrome. There also is are not enough adult stem cell lines for the research that is needed to clone human organs. At the current rate, there are fears that companies will copyright stem cell lines so that only say, Pfizer can work on a certain line.

By the way, embryos used for research are generally 1-14 days old. How is a bunch of cells more sacred?

[The Frog]

Well, that just comes down to a difference of opinion on where life begins, I and many others believe it's at the point of conception. Thus, as far as I'm concerned they're killing defenceless people when they harvest those cells from them.

As to the adult stem cells the key word there is 'theorized'. They don't know the adult cells are any more fragile. I've seen research in the last 14 months posted where tests run with adult cells are showing great results.

Growing a single body part from an existing person is different because no one dies to produce it. As opposed to growing a full-grown clone of a person, taking the parts tehy want, and chucking the rest.

See what I mean?

I'm not going to try to browbeat anyone about it, but I want people to know why some of us view it differently and it's not just baseless whining or being unwilling to accept new science.

[Klassy_Kat]

Despite being at UW-Madison, I don't know as much about stem cells as I should, but it's my understanding that they weren't being used anyway? Is that incorrect? Since the only aunt I like has MS, and I don't think a blob of cells is the same thing as a baby, I'm all for it. But are they going to be become babies if we don't use them? Seems like they'd end up the same as an abortion if we don't use them, right?

As far as cloning, what would be the benefits of cloning a whole person if we could do it right? That's just weird to me.

[RightWingZealot]

unfortunatley the morals of the scientific community can besicly be summed up with "because we can".


that is all the moral justification they need.

they dont have a legitemate purpose to clone a whole human being. they just want to see if they can do it.

[soylentgreen]

Originally posted by jillianjiggs
Adult stem cells are fragile and theorized to not last as long when used. If you grew a kidney with adult stem cells, it would be more prone to defect because of the age of the stem cells.

Okay, but this doesn't refute the point that The Frog made..which is that your own stem cells are needed to help you. Correct?