In Other Words

Cloning

There’s a good piece on the cloning debate in the economist, though admittedly it is pro leaning in its orientation, despite its attempt to be objective. Nonetheless, it does seem to cover the bases found in the argument. Another plus point is, of course, that I agree with it (that’s always a strong indicator of how ‘good’ an article is). The fact that it’s an economist article can be taken as a good indicator that it is not absolute hogwash.

I’m also going to include an extract about what embryonic cloning actually entails, so that the I might help fight the common misconceptions about it, even if it is only for the handful of readers that grace this Blog.

“In November 2001, scientists from Advanced Cell Technologies (ACT), a biotechnology company in Massachusetts, announced that they had cloned the first human embryos for the purpose of advancing therapeutic research. To do this, they collected eggs from women's ovaries and then removed the genetic material from these eggs with a needle less than 2/10,000th of an inch wide. A skin cell was inserted inside the enucleated egg to serve as a new nucleus. The egg began to divide after it was stimulated with a chemical called ionomycin. The results were limited in success. Although this process was carried out with eight eggs, only three began dividing, and only one was able to divide into six cells before stopping.” –Cloning Fact Sheet

That’s a life? That’s what anti cloning people are so afraid to ‘kill’?

posted by Symbol @ 18.8.04