First Cloned Human Embryos

Posted by: Dan Brosemer (odin) on November 26, 2001 at 06:44:39
from the in-time-for-episode-2 dept.

It seems a human embryo was cloned in advance of the upcoming legislation to make this sort of thing illegal. Read about it in the Scientific American article as well as in the MSNBC article. We have the press release for your reading pleasure as well.


The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for what they say.

no clone but hoax
by Alexander Jablanczy MD on 2001-12-01 19:34:09

No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no
no clone no cline no clune no cloon no clane no clyne no clene
By now you should get the idea. If you did not figure it out for yourself which you should have if you had taken even high scool level biology let alone if you have a BSc or MSc or PhD or an MD or a BScF or BScA or DVM in any of the applied biological disciplines.
Firstly as they admit they didnt succeed at all a 6 cell
is not even a morula or a blastocyst definitely its not an Embryo.
So it's a no go, it failed, its announcement is premature.
More important there has never ever been a clone pruduced yet on this planet. Dolly was not a clone and all annoucements of various so called clones are lies distortions false hopes hoaxes canards.
Think of a simple analogy. If I clone a hundred VW but each with a Porsche VW Polski FIat Peugeot GM MG Yugo etc engines then clearly the seats paint undercarriage tyres etc etc might be the same identical in biological parlance cloned, obviously they are not even remotely identical equal not even similar. Same body different engine
not the same car at all. Not even close.
The falsely claimed clones are the same. The nDNA nuclear DNA
is identical each to each but the rest of the cell and any other information containing molecule is untouched uninvolved in the process.
Namely the mtDNA the mitochondrial DNA. The somatic nDNA dependent proteins and metabolic pathways and fats and sugars are indeed identical but any metabolic and synthetic processes such as energy transfer and production (hence the engine analogy above) that takes place in the mitochondria are different in each daughter ie cloned cell. Therefore THEY ARE NOT CLONES.
And shame on the idiotic editors of the Scientific American
the British Medical Journal THE LANCET the NEJM the Suzuki group and Greenpeace as they all suck up this idiocy about cloning which did not occur. Neither Dolly nor this six cell humanoid have benn clones.
The curious thing is that this has been known for nearly 2 years yet they keep on singing the same false tune. Type into your search engine the words clone nDNA mtDNA Dolly and even chimaera
and you will get an article by a group of MIT and Brit scientists who took the trouble and actually got poor Dollys samples and her mamas
and lo and behold proved that the putative clones were of course not.
They didnt have to as the thought experiment above or rather elementary biology about oocytes sperm and mitochondria would immediately tell you the minute you heard the term nuclear transfer
that they only transferred nuclei no other cytoplasmic inclusions. Therefore they didnt even try to clone.
The whole thing is akin to cold fusion and perpetuum mobile.
Here we have perpetuum unclonum.
aj
The lowly cytoplasmic incusion the mitochondrion triumphs and defeats the hoaxers. Without cloning the mitochondria as well there is no use even pretending to use the word clone. Cloned nuclei do not mean cloned organisms. Sorry. Go back to grade one biology.

OK, not a clone, but any better?
by odin on 2001-12-06 14:05:54

OK, I'm willing to buy that it's not a proper clone, but why are we getting caught up in symantics when we have a potentially very ethically scary issue in front of us?

mDNA or no, this is still playing with things that I don't think people in this society are willing to accept can be played with just yet.

-Dqn (that's not a typo but a dumb inside joke)

issues
by aj on 2001-12-07 21:15:01

I am glad that you follow the argument partially at least accepting that what is not a clone is not a clone. So far so good.
But this aint no semantics. This is the essence of the problem. We cant even argue if the apple is good for me or not or if its half poisoned as in the folk or fairy tale if what you have is not even an apple but a turd.
Of course a turd is not good for you even if it is one.

The other issue is of course other than the fact that we do not even have a clone is the abysmal ignorance of the scientific establishment let alone the media and going even lower the politicians who make the decisions ultimately. Or if it is poosible to descend ever further the clones who hold the purse strings and the ones who
aim to make money on DDT Thalidomide DES and the bioengineering
Gotterdammerung. Twilight of the gods though I dont know the German for the twilight of the gnomes.

silver jewelry
by silver jewelry on 2011-12-26 02:25:30

Non-pierced hoop earrings are most commonly worn by those that don't have pierced ears. Since Silver Earrings wholesale aren't for everyone, non-pierced earrings give women a chance to see if wearing earrings are an enjoyable choice. Non-pierced Pearl Earrings are a great way to try out a first pair of earrings or to see if a woman could handle a second or third piercing. Trying earrings for women cheap out before having the actual piercing is a wise choice for many women.

Main Menu:

Site Tools:


Here, spammer, have some addresses.