Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Move Closer to Human Therapeutic Cloning
"Human therapeutic cloning has moved a step closer after U.S. researchers said they had successfully created embryonic stem cells from monkey embryos. Scientists told a stem cell research conference in Cairns this week that they had successfully created two batches of embryonic stem cells from cloned rhesus monkey embryos."
The only reason they oppose embryonic stem cells is because of the possibility of it affecting abortion case law.
Of course, they'll likely decide this is the work of satan because it could maybe lend credence to "evilution".
The *real* problem here is religion.
"There can be but little liberty on earth while men worship a tyrant in heaven."- Robert Green Ingersoll
Care about privacy? Read this!
A switch to using polarized light in labwork instead of dye and ultraviolet light traditionally used to identify cell chromosomes may have led to the breakthrough, ...
So for years the scientists have been finding the chromosomes to transplant by:
- Flooding the donor cell with a fluorescent dye that bonds to DNA, then
- Shining ultraviolet light (i.e. ionizing radiation) on the cell, causing the dye to fluoresce (and also dump enough energy into the DNA molecule to break molecular bonds and produce free radicals in the nearby area).
And then they wondered why, after they transplanted this DNA into the denucleated egg, the resulting cell didn't work right.
Good grief!
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Right. One causes the other.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
The idea is that: You feel sad because you lost a leg. You have yourself cloned to create a new leg. You transplant the leg from the clone to yourself so you don't feel sad anymore. Providing, of course, that you can convince the clone to give up a leg for you.
In real life there are more issues (not withstanding the moral issues if the clone is allowed to develop a brain). For instance, we are not purely a product of our genes. Otherwise identical twins would look identical until the moment they both suffered a heart attack and died. If you need a solid organ, it needs to be grown in a viable host. It's likely impossible using current (or near-future) technology to create a viable host that does not have brain activity.
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
President Bush has used his veto to kill another bill that would have lifted some of the restrictions on research using human embryonic stem cells.
The news has been greeted with dismay, but not surprise, by the scientific community.
In announcing his use of the veto, Bush told reporters: "Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical."
Um, hello George...presumably it's OK if it's for oil?
It's the killing of a young human being.
a stocyst.gif
Actually, that is not the case. It's the destruction of a blastocyst, which is a compilation of 70-150 cells. These are often thrown out/discarded in fertility clinics. They are definitely not human. Here's a picture of one,
http://www.iscr.ed.ac.uk/outreach/images/Human-bl