Atalanta Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Here's a recent news story about asexual reproduction experiments with human embryos...what do you think? http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/12/16/scien...reut/index.html Link to post Share on other sites
Jayann Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Parthenogenesis is not known to lead to the development of a fetus in mammals. "If implanted into a woman's uterus, we don't think it would develop into a child," he said. Blast. So far the embryos are only good for mining stem cells and not for actual human cloning, as they aren't known to be able to develop into fetuses. I wonder why not? Interesting article. I got all feministic when I read this part: parthenogenesis -- using only a human egg cell and no sperm Just goes to show. Someday the human race will be free to reproduce without men. YAY. Link to post Share on other sites
mindlife Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 From the article: 'virgin birth'Even more successful were the parthenogenesis experiments -- in which five of eight human eggs were coaxed into growing into blastocysts. At this stage -- approximately 100 cells -- an embryo can be mined for its stem cells. The stem cells -- nature's template for all cells -- can become any sort of cell or tissue in the body. Scientists hope the cells may one day allow custom-made tissue transplants to heal damaged hearts or cure diabetes by replacing dead pancreatic cells. Opponents raise moral objections, saying that cloning technology involved in making embryonic stem cells creates a living human being. The U.S. federal government refuses to fund embryonic stem cell research beyond a few limited cultures, while Congress and some members of the United Nations have made several failed attempts to ban so-called therapeutic cloning outright. Lanza says parthenogenesis can bypass these objections. Parthenogenesis is not known to lead to the development of a fetus in mammals. ... It's not known to lead to the development of a fetus in mammals, but that doesn't mean that it isn't possible. Parthenogenesis has been associated most with rotifers. I've never seen one through the microscope, but they sound cute. Link to post Share on other sites
dabishop Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 They've made a good start, but we're a long way from viable people out of this process, I'm afeared. Dolly was the result of dozens of tries and still developed a wide range of health problems (mostly auto-immune, I think ?) and didn't actually live that long. It's great that we can sequence the whole human genome, but that's only Chapter One - until someone can tell exactly how GAAATTCAGTTA produces a nose ("well, it makes these, like, proteins..."), we're not going to be making noses (or anything else) as good as with the Original Recipe. Can't be much more than a few decades, though.... Link to post Share on other sites
fluffy_hime Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Sex disgusts me, but I'm against asexual reproduction. Ironic, isn't it? LOL bishop...the "Original Recipe." Excellent. Link to post Share on other sites
Jayann Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Why are you against asexual reproduction? Link to post Share on other sites
mindlife Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 asexual reproduction is more widespread in the biosphere and older than sexual reproduction. Prokaryotic fission is the simplest process for it, parthenogenesis, I believe, is the most complex. Link to post Share on other sites
fluffy_hime Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 Let me rephrase: I'm against artifical, human-induced asexual reproduction. Cause it can only lead to very bad things. Link to post Share on other sites
Jayann Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 You mean cloning and the like. I understood that. But I'm not understanding why. For what reasons are you against artificial nonsexual reproduction? Link to post Share on other sites
JKReagan99 Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 Clones currently don't tend to live as long as sexually produced offspring in normally sexually reproducing species... If people could find a way to make clones live without the negative side effects like shorter lives... then I would not have as much a problem with it... I'm not against it completely now anyways though... Link to post Share on other sites
fluffy_hime Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 This sounds silly, but how would a clone have a soul? Link to post Share on other sites
Jayann Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 The same way someone's identical twin has a soul (if any of us in fact do.) That's what a clone would be, essentially. A person's identical (monozygotic) twin - just born far later and under different circumstances. In fact, "natural" identical twins occur when the zygote splits and its genetical material is cloned in the copy (scientific folks, feel free to correct me if I've misspoken.) One wouldn't say that one twin has the soul and the other does not. Genes are genes and don't affect the presence of a "soul." It's not as though clones are brainless copies. They are individuals. Link to post Share on other sites
----------- Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 I can see why one would not want artificial reproduction. Some might try to classify them as second-class citizens or something bad like that. Link to post Share on other sites
cronos Posted December 30, 2003 Share Posted December 30, 2003 This sounds silly, but how would a clone have a soul? If the soul itself could be cloned. *remembers that scene in Evangelion with the vat of Rei* :shock: Link to post Share on other sites
fluffy_hime Posted December 30, 2003 Share Posted December 30, 2003 I totally need to see evangelion. Link to post Share on other sites
Artemis Posted January 1, 2004 Share Posted January 1, 2004 Parthenogenesis has been associated most with rotifers. I've never seen one through the microscope, but they sound cute. Rotifers rock! I saw one at work (don't know where it came from, but we were all looking at it under the microscope). I can't remember the addresses, but there are some nifty internet sites on rotifers. You are correct, Julie. Identical twins occur when the fertillized egg splits into two and develops into two fetuses which have identical DNA, so they are effectively "clones" Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.