NationStates Jolt Archive

So NSG, what do you think about cloning? Do you have any particular opinions on reproductive cloning, therapeutic cloning, research, or any other types of cloning? Anybody involved in the field? Got any predictions for the future?

There might be a poll coming soon...

Waste of time.

If I want a replica of myself I'll just split in two, thank you very much.. hrmph.

not really for the whole person copy thing as it just seems slightly pointless (and as dolly the sheep showed, a bad idea)

however the cloning of organs has some future I'd say

Cloning organs is a good idea. However, it's a lot easier to take stem cells from the person and induce them to grow in to organs (inkjet production methods are some of the best) than to try to clone them in the truest sense of the word. Either way, it's a good way to ensure not only abundant organs for medical purposes but also to research various improvements and enhancements for said organs. I donate stem cells and a little while later I have a new organ that is as good or even better than the ones I currently have. Of course, the surgery is still an issue...but thank God for nanotechnology. It makes precision surgery all the easier.

I'd say the first medical tests of cloned organs in 5 years, approval in 7, and widespread commercial use by 10. The main barrier now isn't even technical, it's economic; organ and tissue engineering is expensive and still pretty difficult, so there are some issues that need to be resolved before it becomes a viable source of badly needed organs and tissue. Still, there are no objective barriers and the quality of research in the field has increased explosively over the past five years, so it's safe to say this is a reasonable timeline based upon current work in the field.

Waste of time.

If I want a replica of myself I'll just split in two, thank you very much.. hrmph.

mind if I help you with that? I've got the chainsaw and everything

mind if I help you with that? I've got the chainsaw and everything

I did say "If I want.."

I think you all agree that one of me is enough.

The main barrier now isn't even technical, it's economic.

Besides the religious groups that will identify it as 'playing god' and 'immoral' and will try to have them banned?

not really for the whole person copy thing as it just seems slightly pointless (and as dolly the sheep showed, a bad idea)

however the cloning of organs has some future I'd say

The technology has some ways to go, but it could be a very interesting experiment. We could really see the effects of nature v. nurture.

Cloning organs is a good idea. However, it's a lot easier to take stem cells from the person and induce them to grow in to organs (inkjet production methods are some of the best) than to try to clone them in the truest sense of the word. Either way, it's a good way to ensure not only abundant organs for medical purposes but also to research various improvements and enhancements for said organs. I donate stem cells and a little while later I have a new organ that is as good or even better than the ones I currently have. Of course, the surgery is still an issue...but thank God for nanotechnology. It makes precision surgery all the easier.

I'd say the first medical tests of cloned organs in 5 years, approval in 7, and widespread commercial use by 10. The main barrier now isn't even technical, it's economic; organ and tissue engineering is expensive and still pretty difficult, so there are some issues that need to be resolved before it becomes a viable source of badly needed organs and tissue. Still, there are no objective barriers and the quality of research in the field has increased explosively over the past five years, so it's safe to say this is a reasonable timeline based upon current work in the field.

I think it may take longer, and there are places that banned therapeutic cloning, although I think those are less often than bans on reproductive cloning. There may be better ways of course, but I think cloning presents us with lots of interesting options. Personally, I think we just need to put in more research for now.

Besides the religious groups that will identify it as 'playing god' and 'immoral' and will try to have them banned?

Yeah, that's kind of already happened. Not so much the banning, but a lot of people seem to look at cloning in a very negative perspective, even the non-religious. Something about it being unnatural, but really, bacteria do it all the time.

Besides the religious groups that will identify it as 'playing god' and 'immoral' and will try to have them banned?

How is it immoral to clone organs using your own stem cells? You're not using embryonic cells or anything like that, but stem cells taken from the body of the person for whom the organ will be cloned (or others, if they perhaps want to sell them). I mean, if you find it immoral to do that, you can't in any kind of good conscience find blood transfusions or donor organs any more ethical.

Now, for embryonic organs, that's a possibility, but one that's not likely to remain an issue for much longer. Aside from advances in stem cell technology that help to displace the role of embryonic cells, there's been a shift towards greater support for these technologies as evidence comes out confirming their potential in medical applications.

How is it immoral to clone organs using your own stem cells? You're not using embryonic cells or anything like that, but stem cells taken from the body of the person for whom the organ will be cloned (or others, if they perhaps want to sell them). I mean, if you find it immoral to do that, you can't in any kind of good conscience find blood transfusions or donor organs any more ethical.

Now, for embryonic organs, that's a possibility, but one that's not likely to remain an issue for much longer. Aside from advances in stem cell technology that help to displace the role of embryonic cells, there's been a shift towards greater support for these technologies as evidence comes out confirming their potential in medical applications.

All I've ever really heard is that it's "unnatural" and that it's "playing God", since "God creates", not humans. But of course, I don't think any of those are good reasons to ban cloning.

I think it may take longer, and there are places that banned therapeutic cloning, although I think those are less often than bans on reproductive cloning. There may be better ways of course, but I think cloning presents us with lots of interesting options. Personally, I think we just need to put in more research for now.

The recent breakthrough in directing other human cells to produce embryonic stem cells is promising; I don't think there would be any grounds to ban therapeutic cloning from any moral standpoint if all of the materials in question are taken from a consenting adult. In this case, it's absolutely no different from conventionally donating blood or organs and in fact can be far safer, far more abundant, and far cheaper saving thousands of lives. Anyone who opposes this kind of cloning is pretty vile and will undoubtedly be seen as such by the overwhelming majority of people.

And, of course, there's the simple fact of economics. The first company to market and sell cloned organs is going to make a fortune even if it means patients in other countries undertaking medical tourism to go get them...eventually, economic and ethical reality are going to sink in and there will be little opposition to any form of cloning.

All I've ever really heard is that it's "unnatural" and that it's "playing God", since "God creates", not humans. But of course, I don't think any of those are good reasons to ban cloning.

Maybe on the fringe, but by this same logic any form of medicine is unnatural or playing God (of course, similar accusations were levied against the very practice of medicine itself in ages past). If I can ethically donate my blood or organs to someone else, it's hard to argue that allowing people to donate stem cells for organ cloning is somehow immoral. The number of lives that could be saved is in the hundreds of thousands, and many millions more could see vast improvements in quality of life thanks to this technology.

I could never understand why people would consider the use of our God-given minds to improve the wellbeing of our fellow humans somehow immoral or wrong.

Sign me up.

Although, whole clones are pointless unless you're going to do something like what they do in EVE Online (You die and your mind is transfered to a whole new body)

The recent breakthrough in directing other human cells to produce embryonic stem cells is promising; I don't think there would be any grounds to ban therapeutic cloning from any moral standpoint if all of the materials in question are taken from a consenting adult. In this case, it's absolutely no different from conventionally donating blood or organs and in fact can be far safer, far more abundant, and far cheaper saving thousands of lives. Anyone who opposes this kind of cloning is pretty vile and will undoubtedly be seen as such by the overwhelming majority of people.

And, of course, there's the simple fact of economics. The first company to market and sell cloned organs is going to make a fortune even if it means patients in other countries undertaking medical tourism to go get them...eventually, economic and ethical reality are going to sink in and there will be little opposition to any form of cloning.

I understand, but apparently some people think that therapeutic cloning would involve the creation of a human being simply for the sake of harvesting its organs. But I agree, when people actually understand what's going on, there isn't too much to complain about.

By the way, have any thoughts on reproductive cloning?

Speaking as an actual "clone" (by which I mean identical twin), who's familiar with the subject, human reproductive cloning is completely harmless, and can be nothing except beneficial.

I understand, but apparently some people think that therapeutic cloning would involve the creation of a human being simply for the sake of harvesting its organs. But I agree, when people actually understand what's going on, there isn't too much to complain about.

By the way, have any thoughts on reproductive cloning?

I never really saw much use for it. It'd make more sense to use technologies like genetic engineering or bionics for enhancement and/or treatment purposes than to use cloning. These would allow you both to improve yourself as well as to ensure your children are as healthy as possible; other than that, you might as well just go ahead and have a child.

Now, if somebody wants to clone themselves, they can go ahead...they should be forewarned, of course, that they're creating another person just like having a baby and the same kinds of responsibilities apply.

I support all kinds of cloning technology! :)

By the way, have any thoughts on reproductive cloning?
If you have sex with your clone, is it masturbation or incest?

If you have sex with your clone, is it masturbation or incest?

Incest. It's another person who's related to you.

Incest.

Exactly.
It would also be statutory rape, depending on how long you wait after your clone is born.
People tend to forget a clone is an entirely separate person simply with your genetic code and is still born the same way regular humans are.

If you have sex with your clone, is it masturbation or incest?

:confused:

Wow, I'm, not sure.

What is this "cloning" you speak of? Do you humans think you can clone yourselves? It would amuse me to see you try.

On second thought, it would anger me, because you humans have no business cloning when you should be kneeling before your rightful ruler!

Now kneel before me, humans! Kneel before BOTH of me, General Zod!

If you have sex with your clone, is it masturbation or incest?

Incest. It's another person who's related to you.

:confused:

Wow, I'm, not sure.

It's incest, because it involves TWO bodies (your own and that of your clone), whereas masturbation only involves ONE.

Now kneel before me, humans! Kneel before BOTH of me, General Zod!

You just wait Zod, you just wait.

People tend to forget a clone is an entirely separate person simply with your genetic code and is still born the same way regular humans are.

Exactly. Mind you, they'd be genetically identical to you, but that hardly means they will be anywhere near the same person, even if raised in a similar environment.

Exactly. Mind you, they'd be genetically identical to you, but that hardly means they will be anywhere near the same person, even if raised in a similar environment.

Which is in fact the case with identical twins who are indeed naturally created genetic clones. My brother and I share the exact same genetic material, however despite this fact we have very different personalities, tastes and opinions. Not only that, we are not even truly "identical" in a physical form either. We actually look different. Very similiar, but definitely different.

however the cloning of organs has some future I'd say

That's a good point

You just wait Zod, you just wait.

Wait? Wait for WHAT?

Coward.

Odd that in a cloning thread, there be no mention of this:
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2007/12/123_15447.html

Next All Hallows' Eve oughtta be s-mashing!

Cloning organs is a good idea. However, it's a lot easier to take stem cells from the person and induce them to grow in to organs (inkjet production methods are some of the best) than to try to clone them in the truest sense of the word. Either way, it's a good way to ensure not only abundant organs for medical purposes but also to research various improvements and enhancements for said organs. I donate stem cells and a little while later I have a new organ that is as good or even better than the ones I currently have. Of course, the surgery is still an issue...but thank God for nanotechnology. It makes precision surgery all the easier.

I'd say the first medical tests of cloned organs in 5 years, approval in 7, and widespread commercial use by 10. The main barrier now isn't even technical, it's economic; organ and tissue engineering is expensive and still pretty difficult, so there are some issues that need to be resolved before it becomes a viable source of badly needed organs and tissue. Still, there are no objective barriers and the quality of research in the field has increased explosively over the past five years, so it's safe to say this is a reasonable timeline based upon current work in the field.

It really depends on the organ. We've had tissue engineered skin out there for years. Anthony Atala's lab has implanted more than one tissue engineered bladder now. Something like a viable tissue engineered small-diameter vascular graft or a heart valve, on the other hand, has seemed to be just out of our reach for well over a decade, and still remains there. Matching the mechanical and biological properties of these types of organs have just turned out to be too difficult.

As for whether or not therapeutic cloning will ever be a major part of tissue engineering, that is still unclear. First of all, there is still a huge technical barrier. ESCs have not yet been isolated from a cloned blastocyst and we're still doing the basic science to determine how to get relatively pure populations of specific cell types from them. Second of all, there are some cell types we can reconstitute from adult stem cells and some cell types (like skin fibroblasts) proliferate enough in culture that we don't even have to go back to a stem cell. For those tissues, there is no need for therapeutic cloning. But other cell types are much harder to obtain or derive in large enough numbers - especially when the person's own tissue is unhealthy. If therapeutic cloning is going to be a part of the process, it will most likely be in those tissue types.

The recent breakthrough in directing other human cells to produce embryonic stem cells is promising;

Promising in a research sense, but highly unlikely to ever find use in a clinical setting - not until we greatly improve upon genetic manipulation techniques, anyways. As it stands, we cannot direct where the inserted genes go when we genetically manipulate cells. That makes them a huge cancer risk if ever used in a clinical setting.

I don't think there would be any grounds to ban therapeutic cloning from any moral standpoint if all of the materials in question are taken from a consenting adult.

Taking cells from an adult and growing organs is not considered therapeutic cloning. Therapeutic cloning actually involves a cloning process - somatic cell nuclear transfer - in which an adult's cells would be used to create a blastocyst and derive embryonic stem cells.

Odd that in a cloning thread, there be no mention of this:
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2007/12/123_15447.html

Next All Hallows' Eve oughtta be s-mashing!

Wow

Wow

Tis truth. Predictable, even, although it's been so long since the last time we heard something along these lines, i had to go through a huge spiel last night about ANDi to a bunch of people who had no idea about that either. :(