Topic: Bring on the Clones
started by: Wolfguard
Posted by Wolfguard on Feb. 15 2002,16:56
Why is cloning being looked at as this great evil that must be stamped out?With this tech you could grow your own body parts. This means NO REJECTION from a transplant. No waiting for someone to die that may be "close enough"
You could grow a full body and once they figure out how to reattach the spinal cord, or just move info from one brain to the next, you could just grow the clone and move in when its ready.
Im not seeing a down side here.
Posted by BlackFlag on Feb. 15 2002,16:59
they can already do brain transplants on monkeys, right? only a matter of time before they can do so on humans. will probably only be 10-20 years before superman gets his spinal cord fixed and can walk again.
Posted by Del7a on Feb. 15 2002,17:03
There are several downsides to this, but the one I will touch here is of an ethical nature.If you clone a person, that clone is a person. Just because you call the person a "clone" that does not give anyone the right to kill that person to harvest body parts.
What scares me even worse is that some of the research is being done in Kentucky...hehe...
Del7a
Posted by Wolfguard on Feb. 15 2002,18:02
The thing that makes the person a person is not in there. If you clone me there is not instantly 2 of me walking around. The thing that you just grew is nothing but an empty shell with nothing in it but parts.But if this makes you feel better...
You grow the clone with nothing but the brain stem so it keeps it alive. No brain, no person.
or, if you can tranplant information between brains. run a current from the eyes to the base of the brain. This will keep it asleep. you could condition the muscles electricly and when it has grown enough you start the transfer.
Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Feb. 15 2002,18:06
well it would be alive if it had full cognotive thought. growing just the parts is easy people seem to think ou have to grow the whole person first.
Posted by Del7a on Feb. 15 2002,18:10
I'm all for growing parts. Skin, hearts, ect...could all save lives. But, if you clone a person, what do you do with the rest of the parts you don't need?And what is left out from cloning a person that does not make it a person? How do you know it wouldn't be capable of thought or life? Nobody has ever cloned a person, and so far all "cloned" animals act like regular animals.
Del7a
Posted by Wolfguard on Feb. 15 2002,18:14
controlled developmentYou can twist the dna so it does not grow a brain, just the brain stem.
you just need to keep it alive till the parts grow.
Posted by Del7a on Feb. 15 2002,18:21
Still, it would be more economical and cheaper to grow parts. Why grow a whole new body if all you need is a heart? Also, it would be extremely difficult and time consuming to grow a human body to the adult stages. There is a lot of changes that happen to the DNA going from child to pubesent to adult, and as far as I know there is no way to speed that up (please prove me wrong on this--I love to read about advancements in medical technology).As far as regrowing limbs, why not just implant replicating virul RNA into the cells at the stub? Turn on the right sequences, let the modifed virus replicate, regrow the limb and then turn off the sequences? The DNA still as the information on how to grow an arm, so let's just give it a little kick-start.
Del7a
Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Feb. 15 2002,18:28
its true. discovered form the adaptly named frankenstein cancer (it would randomly grow body parts from teeth to hair to skin) we are born with a set number of special cells that create growth of EVERYTHING from bone to brain. these are used up after the first few weeks of conception. now scientists are on the verge of re introducing them into parts of the human body to stimulate growth of anythign they want. even a few more inches on your manhood 
Posted by Nikita on Feb. 15 2002,18:32
stem cells, stem cells, stem cells!
Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Feb. 15 2002,18:42
yeah i guess that the name. i'm not an expert on biology 
Posted by askheaves on Feb. 16 2002,01:22
The biggest ethical problem right now is the 'means' leading up to 'ends' of all this being possible. To do that requires the creation of a lot of throw-away human life. To pro-lifers like me, it's troubling to make thousands (tens to hundreds of thousands) of proto-humans, killing them one way or another for research...And, for interest's sake... the stem cells (or undifferentiated cells) are generic cells that can become anything. In an embryo, they become certain types of cells that are destined to become muscles, skin, etc... The genes that tell the cells where they're supposed to be are called 'homeobox' (spelling) genes. If you fuck with these genes, you get eyes on your arms and legs growing out of your nose. Arms don't have to grow from the side of a chest, hearts don't have to be inside a chest cavity.
Posted by Del7a on Feb. 16 2002,01:28
Stem cells aren't just in embryos. Scientists have found very similiar cells in (I think) the base of the spinal column. They can be harvested without killing the patient (which is good).askheaves--I'm with you on that.
Del7a
Posted by Wolfguard on Feb. 16 2002,01:47
This is not a pro-life debate. If i wanted one of those i would go post in the abortion fourm.The point is if we do the research on cloning we can help a lot of people.
Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Feb. 16 2002,01:54
genetics is the cure to almost every disease in existance if you can cure it at the dna/rna level there is no form of defense the disease can take
Posted by DuSTman on Feb. 16 2002,04:53
I'd be interested to know how stem cells work out where they are in the body.I mean, upon fertilisation there is, to start with, just a growing mass of undifferentiated cells, with the body shape and function occurring later on when the cells start to specialise themselves. The cells must have some sort of logic going on to decide what to specialise themselves as.
I seem to remember an article once - they made a tube out of a wool like natural fibre, so that blood could seep through it, then transplanted it into an animal to serve as a blood vessel. They then checked later on and found that the walls of this impromptu artery had grown with proper, muscular blood vessel tubing - it had grown into a proper artery.
Another time they were experimenting with badly broken bones. If a section of the leg bone was smashed they would simply cut a chunk out of it, one or two inches long, and a metal structure to keep the two remaining pieces in place. What happened was that new bone grew in between the two sawed off surfaces and formed a single, solid bone again.
Very interesting stuff.
Posted by askheaves on Feb. 16 2002,05:18
Undifferentiated cells are found in a bunch of different spots in the body... with concentrations around fatty regions. That's why they're commonly found in spinal columns and in mammary tissue. Dolly was cloned from sheep boob.Also somewhat interesting... we've all heard of the telemeres... the extra garbage DNA stuck at the end of useful strands of DNA in cells. As cells reproduce, the stuff at the end can break off, dissolve, or never really reproduce correctly and over generations it erodes until useful DNA is affected. This is the main process currently blamed for aging. Germ cells (ie, sex cells or the precursers to sperm and egg cells) don't experience the loss of telemeres. I don't remember exactly why, but it's handy. That's why after generations of the organism's reproduction (and trillions of splits) these cells are relatively unscathed. The fear with cloning is that the harvested stem cells have already suffered severe erosion of the telemers, and the cells of the newly created animal already think that they're the age of the parent at birth. They've seen Dolly already go through some VERY early arthritis and other late-onset diseases in her short life thus far.
Mmmm... too much biology in my life.
Posted by DuSTman on Feb. 16 2002,05:55
I thought tha main process of aging was DNA damage caused by free radicals. They tested a medication on ameoba which absorbs these free radicals and found that it doubled the lifespan of the test subjects. They're trying it on mice now.
Posted by askheaves on Feb. 16 2002,06:09
I beileve it's the same process. Through natural processes, and the introduction of free radicals, the telemeres erode over time. Lower the free radicals, and you extend the time that stuff exists.And, didn't mean to make it a pro-life argument... just that the main reasons people are against the research right now is that same reason. It's hard to justify, in their mind, creating all this life that doesn't even get a chance to grow up... do dah do dah. That's why Bush compromised the way he did back in September. Research is allowed to continue on existing stem cell lines, but no creating new ones.
Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Feb. 16 2002,14:26
free radicals are resopnsible for neural tissue damage and as the body can't grow it back over time signals stop being recieved hance why old people suffer from not being able to walk properly and other mental problems. i heard about the telemeres as well if thats what they're called its in lamen terms like the rings on a tree only in reverese. when a cell ages a certain amount and needs to regenerate itself it loses wone oft hese off the end of the dna strand. as theres a finite amount of these after a set amount of years there are no more to hepl keep the cell in fully working order so the body slowly dies...i.e aging. from what i've seen and i must stress i havent seen that much so dont quote me on this if they were able to reintroduce thsese back into the body theres no reason why you couldnt grow back to your former young self for an extended lifetime of mabye 300 years or so. the free radical problem is also what stem cell research is being used for.
Posted by kuru on Feb. 16 2002,16:03
So this friend of mine has a bad heart. Genetically deformed. She's toast before she's 40.If they could clone her another heart by using embryonic stem cells, the odds are that the new heart would also be good for 40 years. She'd get a normal life span.
But hey, who gives a fuck about her? Apparently not all the idiot pro-life groups who'd rather save a bunch of frozen embryos that are NEVER going to be implanted anywhere than a living, breathing, sentient person who is totally aware of her own mortality.
Fuck her. She's more expendable than a bunch of goo in a petri dish.
Therein lies my entire opinion on ESCR and cloning.
Posted by Dark Knight Bob on Feb. 16 2002,16:06
...word...
Posted by TheTaxMan on Feb. 16 2002,19:07
These are the very same pro-lifers that aren't apposed to "killing off" embryos, but rather opposed to have sex w/o the repercusions. They can all go fuck themselves (hah) as far as I'm concerned. Just because something is pleasent does mean it's wrong all you uberconservative assholes. For this same reason, they oppose the morning after pill (which -by far- they should be pushing to be made even easier to get if they were truely against abortions). This, however, is another topic I'm not going to bother creating...In summation, Fuck Off you idiots and let us do the research.
Posted by Wiley on Feb. 16 2002,21:36
My woman is in the biotech/research field and at times has had to have the doors bolted shut and armed security gaurds standing between PETA and the cages full of chimps and cats with things stuck in their heads. Now, I don't know why those things were in the heads of the cats and rats, nor why there were dead monkeys in a big freezer ...but I do know she is not a cruel person by nature and pretty damn smart. If she says it's for the betterment of mankind, that's good enough for me.I always wonder if the PETA people take a minute to think that if it weren't for scientists, most of them would be dead by now. In the pre-science days most of us wouldn't have made it this far. Scientists should stike back at these people by denying treatment when them or their loved ones are sticken with horrible ailments. They should say "Oh I'm sorry, we were right on top of being able to culture cells to repair your spinal cord but you made us stop doing the research because you thought the rats were cute ...you fucking idiot!!" And then we should let some wild monkeys and rats loose in thir homes.
I say On with the cloning, the stem cell research, the sticking of strange objects on the heads of cats because I don't want to fucking die any time soon!!
Posted by solid on Feb. 17 2002,03:02
How long (theoretically?) does cloning one human take?If not long, what if it gets manipulated for military purposes?
Posted by DuSTman on Feb. 17 2002,09:33
| Quote (solid @ 16 Feb. 2002,19:02) |
| If not long, what if it gets manipulated for military purposes? |
What?
I don't see how this could easily be exploited for military means, other than firing the corpses of fucked up, dead clones at enemy troops.
Posted by solid on Feb. 17 2002,10:31
How about creating a massive army(I bet I'm missing something)
Posted by Dysorderia on Feb. 17 2002,11:26
| Quote (DuSTman @ 17 Feb. 2002,01:33) | ||
 2-->
What? I don't see how this could easily be exploited for military means, other than firing the corpses of fucked up, dead clones at enemy troops. |
solid has a tendency to get off on technicalities like that.. 
Posted by DuSTman on Feb. 17 2002,11:40
Oh I see. The genetic code doesn't specify the position and nature of every cell in the body, just describes the pattern which creates them. Therefore it does not store knowledge which is represented by the connections between neurons. You could clone you. End up with an identical body, but it'd know nothing.
Very little knowledge is stored in the genes (and this basically extends to what can be read in Hungry Minds incs "Suckling on nipples for dummies" book.
Posted by Wolfguard on Feb. 17 2002,13:27
| Quote (solid @ 17 Feb. 2002,05:31) |
| How about creating a massive army (I bet I'm missing something) |
it would take about 20 years to grow such an army. the bodys have to grow and the brains mature.
Im guessing you could twist the dna and make them grow and mature faster.
Your not far from the mark on this worry. Here is the danger of this line of thought.
Ok, im going to grow a solder and i have complete control of his development and his dna.
For starters, lets make him bullet resistant. harden his skin a bit.
he wont need his frontal lobes cause we dont want him to think to hard about things.
Lets make sure that his adrenal levels can be sustained for long periods of time.
lets give him twice the muscle mass and increase the strenght of his bones.
Now you have a muscle bound, bullet proof, psycho that is making adrealin like we make sweat.
And pitbulls were a good idea at first to...
Posted by Vigilante on Feb. 17 2002,17:13
And once they break free and turn on their creators, leaving a civilian wake of destruction behind them, our government will have no choice but to assemble mankind's last hope, a strike team of: Chuck Norris, Steven Seagal, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Michael Dudikoff, and of course... Pat Morita. Godspeed, brave heroes! 
Posted by TheTaxMan on Feb. 17 2002,18:53
China seems to have done ok w/o cloning!
Posted by askheaves on Feb. 17 2002,19:04
| Quote (TheTaxMan @ 17 Feb. 2002,11:53) |
| China seems to have done ok w/o cloning! |
Yeah, those chinks all look alike.