Go Ahead for Human Cloning!

ravenhead

Breaking News - How is this right?

Scientists at the University of Newcastle have been granted permission by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority to clone human embryos for medical research.

GuanYin

Wanna put a link to that?

seamus

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3554474.stm

RE*AC*TOR

*edit* beaten to the punch....Seamus! (if that is your real name)

ravenhead

Thanks Seamus you got there before me

GuanYin

ravenhead wrote:

Breaking News - How is this right?

Scientists at the University of Newcastle have been granted permission by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority to clone human embryos for medical research.

I just saw the link on BBC Website, in fairness you totally sensationalised the issue here.

There is no "human" cloning per se, they have merely been granted permission to clone embryos to harvest stem cells for valuable research into many degenerative diseases.

This is very different to being given free reaign to brink back hitler or clone your aunt sally.

Perspective people.

ravenhead

syke wrote:

I just saw the link on BBC Website, in fairness you totally sensationalised the issue here.

There is no "human" cloning per se, they have merely been granted permission to clone embryos to harvest stem cells for valuable research into many degenerative diseases.

This is very different to being given free reaign to brink back hitler or clone your aunt sally.

Perspective people.

Once again Syke has to make an issue out of one of my posts!!

Lemming

In fairness ravenhead, he's right. It was a sensationalist, knee-jerk post.

ravenhead

Lemming wrote:

In fairness ravenhead, he's right. It was a sensationalist, knee-jerk post.

Apoligies - just copied & pasted the report from the sky news web site!

Lemming

ravenhead wrote:

Apoligies - just copied & pasted the report from the sky news web site!

heh. There's the problem right there. Sky News - the European arm of the Fox *ahem* "news" corp

ravenhead

Lemming wrote:

heh. There's the problem right there. Sky News - the European arm of the Fox *ahem* "news" corp

Yeah good point, but it was the first place I saw it reported, Guess I should have gone straight to BBC - Must remember to put that on my favourites bar!!

GuanYin

ravenhead wrote:

Yeah good point, but it was the first place I saw it reported, Guess I should have gone straight to BBC - Must remember to put that on my favourites bar!!

BBC has pretty much the same thing I think.

This is the big problem with people who just copy links or articles in without trying to understand or even contribute their own opinions to the post?

I mean, I can read these websites myself, I come here to hear what other people think.

As for the reporting and issue, this is the big problem with science journalism and then sensationalism. Too many people are ready to believe whatever they read without questioning anything or knowing the facts.
Case in hand...

ravenhead

syke wrote:

BBC has pretty much the same thing I think.

This is the big problem with people who just copy links or articles in without trying to understand or even contribute their own opinions to the post?

I mean, I can read these websites myself, I come here to hear what other people think.

As for the reporting and issue, this is the big problem with science journalism and then sensationalism. Too many people are ready to believe whatever they read without questioning anything or knowing the facts.
Case in hand...

As you can see from the original post Syke - I was passing on the news - not
elaborating on it - just posing a question.

With regards to the article, I personally find this very worrying - I can see what Syke is saying about the inital testing just involving testing on embryos but I honestly think that even this is too much - I mean who is going to draw the line ...

MiCr0

and now for some discussion on cloning?

Moriarty

What's so wrong about cloning ravenhead?

seamus

Moriarty wrote:

What's so wrong about cloning ravenhead?

I think we're all happy enough with one ravenhead, thanks...

I technically don't have many problems with this. I do believe that the potential benefits far outweigh any ethical concerns, especially since most people aren't agreed on the ethics.

So long as the practice is heavily regulated and inspected, I don't see any major issue from it.

GuanYin

ravenhead wrote:

With regards to the article, I personally find this very worrying - I can see what Syke is saying about the inital testing just involving testing on embryos but I honestly think that even this is too much - I mean who is going to draw the line ...

What initial testing? THEY ARENT TRYING TO CLONE ANYBODY!!!!

Stem cells are cells that differentiate (change) into all the other cell types in the body. We have them in our bone marrow throughout life and they are responsible for our renewed blood production.

Obviously stem cells would be very handy in medicine, as we could manipulate them to grow into different cell types which could be used to treat different diseases ie. heart cells (heart disease), or liver cells (liver disease) or nerve cells (severed spinal nerves) and brain cells (neurodegenerative disorders - Alzheimers, parkinsons).

Unfortunately the stem cells in our marrow haven't proved very suitable for this. But we're in luck. Developing humans (embryos and foetuses) have an abundance of stems cells as the different parts of our body form during gestation.

Now, because there are moral and ethical, not to mention emotional issues with harvesting stem cells from aborted foetuses, the next approach would be to use IVF style approaches to creating embryos in the lab, and harvest the stem cells from them.

Hence we have the above article. Nobody is being cloned, no human ever forms, you basically have a clump of a couple of thousand cells.

So how do you get away with creating a title saying "Go Ahead for Human cloning" and why do you find this worrying. You're unhappy about a scientific procedure being used to cure millions of people with neurodegenerative disorders or paralysis? Come off it.

BTW, sorry if this was a very basic explanation, but I didn't want to use too many techo words.

MiCr0

ravenhead wrote:

With regards to the article, I personally find this very worrying - I can see what Syke is saying about the inital testing just involving testing on embryos but I honestly think that even this is too much - I mean who is going to draw the line ...

all they have been given is a line - they are allowing "perform therapeutic cloning using human embryos"

From the HFEA page
"The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has granted the first licence to create human embryonic stem cells using cell nuclear transfer – a technique also known as therapeutic cloning. The licence will be held by Newcastle Centre for Life. Stem cells created under this licence will be used for research purposes only."

They can't produce clones, just reproduce cells. I'm well aware that cells are the basic building blocks of all of us, but this license isn't a carte blance to do as they want.

Saying that this shouldn't be done because we don't know where it will end up with means that we will never know and never learn. There are strict rules in place as to what you can and can't do. In this case, it was required to explain and justify what was being planned on being tested. You can't do a
Docter Frankenstein and build your self a son.All testing has to be ethically approved before it beings.

So you will always know where the line is.

Full details of the actual announcement here
http://www.hfea.gov.uk/PressOffice/Archive/1092233888

GuanYin

MiCr0 wrote:

and now for some discussion on cloning?

Yeah sorry, but this sort of uninformed tabloid scaremongering really pisses me off.

Its stuff like this that makes getting grants and approval for this sort of research so hard.

Alzheimers research hit a brick wall over opinions like this in the US at one stage.

fragile

syke wrote:

What initial testing? THEY ARENT TRYING TO CLONE ANYBODY!!!!

Now, because there are moral and ethical, not to mention emotional issues with harvesting stem cells from aborted foetuses, the next approach would be to use IVF style approaches to creating embryos in the lab, and harvest the stem cells from them.

While I recognise the enormous benfits that this could offer, its only a matter of time before any med student with access to a lab will be able to carry out these procedures, and at that stage it will be unfeasible to try and ban cloning as it is the next logical step.

I am not against what the UK is currently doing, I just find the future scary as I think that ultimately this will be uncontrollable (bombs are illegal, but its rediculiously simple to make one with a little research).

GuanYin

fragile wrote:

While I recognise the enormous benfits that this could offer, its only a matter of time before any med student with access to a lab will be able to carry out these procedures, and at that stage it will be unfeasible to try and ban cloning as it is the next logical step.

I am not against what the UK is currently doing, I just find the future scary as I think that ultimately this will be uncontrollable (bombs are illegal, but its rediculiously simple to make one with a little research).

Firstly, most med students can't culture a cell line or clone a plasmid, so if you could find 50 in the world capable of cloning embryos you'd be lucky.

Secondly, the enormous cost of equipment, the specialist facilities required and the highly technical aspects of teh procedure mean that not only will it be fairly obvious who is carrying out this work (don't think for a second that the authorities don't constently watch who buys what equipment) but that only the larger laboratories will be able to afford to carry it out.

Again, this is slighlty uninformed scaremongering.

Kevok

In my opinion, the possible benefits of stem cell research far outweigh any potential drawbacks. The possibilities range from cloning new organs to repairing neural damage (far future really and nearly impossible to repair completely I'd imagine).

Also, correct me if I'm wrong here, but from what I've gathered, clones made using stem cells won't suffer from the 'dolly' effect, which is essentially premature aging due to cloning from aged cells.

As for the morality of harvesting embryos, I'd suggest giving thought to what the fate of these embryos was going to be, assuming of course the original was aborted. I think it's much better an embryo be used for a potentially huge advance in medicine than have it be discarded after an abortion.

fragile

syke wrote:

Firstly, most med students can't culture a cell line or clone a plasmid, so if you could find 50 in the world capable of cloning embryos you'd be lucky.

Secondly, the enormous cost of equipment, the specialist facilities required and the highly technical aspects of teh procedure mean that not only will it be fairly obvious who is carrying out this work (don't think for a second that the authorities don't constently watch who buys what equipment) but that only the larger laboratories will be able to afford to carry it out.

I agree completely Syke, but when this becomes standard medical procedure internationally, and is taught in all major medical education institutions, how long do you think it will be before it does become accessible to a regular med student with a homemade laboratory, 10, 20, 50 years!

I am not trying to scaremonger, but at the same time I don't think the potential for disaster that is possible through the advancement of this technology should be taken so lightly. The best parallel I can draw is to that of nuclear power.

Kevok

You can hardly say that in the 60 or so years that nuclear power has around, that university physics students have been able to produce working nuclear bombs in lab experiments can you?

All new scientific endeavours have risks, but you must looks at both sides. From my point of view, the chance of curing many life threatening conditions for many thousands of people far outweighs the possibility you outlined.

Moriarty

Kevok wrote:

You can hardly say that in the 60 or so years that nuclear power has around, that university physics students have been able to produce working nuclear bombs in lab experiments can you?

A high school student in the states made a breader reactor (breader reactors are used to create material suitable for nuclear weapons, compared to 'normal' power reactors which don't really) in his garden shed in the mid ninetys. It's really not that hard to do, it's all fairly basic physics.

As time progresses nearly every scientific method and system will become cheaper and easier to produce. There aren't many experiments or methods which were first concieved in the early part of the twentieth century that a few members of the general public today couldn't carry out if they set their minds to it.

fragile

Kevok wrote:

You can hardly say that in the 60 or so years that nuclear power has around, that university physics students have been able to produce working nuclear bombs in lab experiments can you?

No, but that is more of a resource problem isn't it? besides its not from lack of trying on the physics students part

Kevok wrote:

All new scientific endeavours have risks, but you must looks at both sides. From my point of view, the chance of curing many life threatening conditions for many thousands of people far outweighs the possibility you outlined.

I agree completely, the potential to alleviate millions from needless suffering far outweighs the possible disaster scenarios, and all societies have a responsibility to their citizens to research, develop and share this technology. I certainly didn't mean to disagree with this in any of my previous posts. I do however feel that in moving forward with this research it is not possible to over stress the potential for disaster, we need to learn from the mistakes of previous generations, and ensure that the use of stem cells does not lead to the equivelant of another chernobyl

GuanYin

fragile wrote:

I agree completely Syke, but when this becomes standard medical procedure internationally, and is taught in all major medical education institutions, how long do you think it will be before it does become accessible to a regular med student with a homemade laboratory, 10, 20, 50 years!

I am not trying to scaremonger, but at the same time I don't think the potential for disaster that is possible through the advancement of this technology should be taken so lightly. The best parallel I can draw is to that of nuclear power.

MEd students and clinicans aren't taught these techniques in detail. This is why you have consultants and lab technicians so I'd question your portrayal of the systems you are worrying about.

Biomedical technicians and researchers would havethe access, but again, regulations don't fall by the wayside just because something becomes more widespread. By your logic, every scientist and medic would be growing ebola in his bedroom, but you can't even get hold of endemic viruses or bacteria or even toxins and every lab from breweries to hospitals to some schools have a microbiology lab.

You may not be trying to scaremonger, but you are constructing an unwanted scenario based on little fact or reality.

Paladin

Just out of curiousity, what would be the point in cloning a human being (besides research)? And what is the ethical problem? Just curious what the actually publically given reason is. I dont really have an opinion but you hear lots of touting that its unethical and I want to know why.

I dont thing Star Wars Attack Of the Clones is going to happen just yet...

Of course stem cell research in its pure form certainly seems to have only benefits.

chill

ravenhead wrote:

Breaking News - How is this right?

Scientists at the University of Newcastle have been granted permission by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority to clone human embryos for medical research.

Bloody great news !!!!

chill

fragile wrote:

I do however feel that in moving forward with this research it is not possible to over stress the potential for disaster, we need to learn from the mistakes of previous generations, and ensure that the use of stem cells does not lead to the equivelant of another chernobyl

Please explain what on earth you mean ? How is it not possible to over stress the potential for disaster ? and how on earth could such stem cells result in another 'chernobyl' ?

ravenhead

chill wrote:

Please explain what on earth you mean ? How is it not possible to over stress the potential for disaster ? and how on earth could such stem cells result in another 'chernobyl' ?

Basically it's down to man's ignorance & over confidence. You can be gauranteed when Hahn, Strassmann, and Meitner discovered Fission that they never thought that it would be used they way it was. The same principle applied here.
It may start out as what no one can deny will be benifical to the medical prefession but who knows how the knowledge will be used. Man's over confidence may be our downfall yet again .... Just my opinion...

GuanYin

ravenhead wrote:

Basically it's down to man's ignorance & over confidence. You can be gauranteed when Hahn, Strassmann, and Meitner discovered Fission that they never thought that it would be used they way it was. The same principle applied here.
It may start out as what no one can deny will be benifical to the medical prefession but who knows how the knowledge will be used. Man's over confidence may be our downfall yet again .... Just my opinion...

You have absolutely no semblence of a clue of what you are talking about.

Noone has approved any research into cloning a fully grown human. All thats happening is that scientists are harvesting stems cells from cloned embryos.

Thos embryos will never make it to even foetal stage and to be honest, I doubt that even if the scientists wanted to they could do it at present. Seeing as they aren't approved to do research any further than the embryo stage, thats where it ends.

Its comments like this, sensationalising simple and worth concepts in a negative manner, that are responsible for the deaths of those who don't get proper treatment due to ignorance and public opinion. Why don't you go read up on the area, find out exactly whats happening and then make an informed opinon on the matter?

ravenhead

syke wrote:

You have absolutely no semblence of a clue of what you are talking about.

Noone has approved any research into cloning a fully grown human. All thats happening is that scientists are harvesting stems cells from cloned embryos.

Thos embryos will never make it to even foetal stage and to be honest, I doubt that even if the scientists wanted to they could do it at present. Seeing as they aren't approved to do research any further than the embryo stage, thats where it ends.

Its comments like this, sensationalising simple and worth concepts in a negative manner, that are responsible for the deaths of those who don't get proper treatment due to ignorance and public opinion. Why don't you go read up on the area, find out exactly whats happening and then make an informed opinon on the matter?

I in no way indicated on any of my posts that I am fully aware of the reseach that is being carried out ..... I stated my opinion on the matter in general - I would like to get more information on the matter - As I stated in an earlier post I took the short articule from a web site - mainly to see what kind of information there is out there on this matter.. As you said yourself it's because of people not being informed that things like this get sensationalised.
So any links that you might have that I can read up on would be appreicated - because at the moment I & many other people , can only form an opinion with the limited information that we have. From your posts on this topic you seem to be well informed - so share the knowledge ......

fragile

chill wrote:

Please explain what on earth you mean ? How is it not possible to over stress the potential for disaster ? and how on earth could such stem cells result in another 'chernobyl' ?

Ravenhead got there before me and took the words right out of my mouth, and I said the equivelant of a Chernobyl i.e. a beneficial technology causing huge harm through goverments failure to listen to the warnings from the scientific community

ravenhead

fragile wrote:

Ravenhead got there before me and took the words right out of my mouth, and I said the equivelant of a Chernobyl i.e. a beneficial technology causing huge harm through goverments failure to listen to the warnings from the scientific community

Thanks Fragile -

sliabh

fragile wrote:

Ravenhead got there before me and took the words right out of my mouth, and I said the equivelant of a Chernobyl i.e. a beneficial technology causing huge harm through goverments failure to listen to the warnings from the scientific community

But in this case the scientific community (apart from those folowing the religious line) are pretty much all in favour of theraputic cloning.

fragile

sliabh wrote:

But in this case the scientific community (apart from those folowing the religious line) are pretty much all in favour of theraputic cloning.

Don't get me wrong I completely support theraputic cloning,it just annoys me when I make a point that caution should be used when moving forward, to ensure that the correct decisions are made, and preventions are taken, - people call me sensationalist

chancer123

silly me, banned

Syke

wrote:

i think fragile and ravenhead are doing pretty much exactly what they say they are not. several here have explained the situation quite clearly but you dont want to listen and are making up scenarios from science fiction and fantasy novels. why dont you read the replies and look up the facts.

i have relatives with alzheimers and the thought that tabloid opinions might stop a treatment being developed is sickening.

shame on you both

fragile

Capt.Sparrow wrote:

i have relatives with alzheimers and the thought that tabloid opinions might stop a treatment being developed is sickening.

shame on you both

I have repeatedly affirmed in my previous posts that I not only support stem cell research, but I believe that all governments have an obligation to their citizens to invest in R&D for disease treatments, organ transplants, tissue repair etc, and I would hope that voicing caution as I have been doing would not hold up this process but merely mean that suffficent resources are used to ensure that potential misuse of this technology is prevented.

It is possible to be supportive and cautious at the same time.

GuanYin

fragile wrote:

I would hope that voicing caution as I have been doing would not hold up this process but merely mean that suffficent resources are used to ensure that potential misuse of this technology is prevented.

It is possible to be supportive and cautious at the same time.

What exactly are you voicing caution about? Your previous comments about med students in underground labs is laughably sci-fi and quite frankly absurd (if you'd ever set foot in a genetics lab you'd know this).

So what exactly are we to be cautious of. Its great to be supportive but cautious, but only if you actually know what you are being cautious about. Otherwise it is scaremongering and more fitting of the sun newspaper than anything else.