Do you think it's bad or *ok*? I mean, does it harm the animals or not?

Well, what good is it?

I see no need for it.

Identical human (and animal) twins are clones.

I don't really see the point of cloning. Are they doing it for a reason (like cell regeneration studies) or are they doing it just to see if they can do it? What are the supposed benefits of the cloning studies?

Cloning is being done and researched to further other developments like gene therapy and genetic sequencing. These technologies have huge potentials to create cures for Cancer, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. It is widely being used to also further organ donation. It has already helped in Diabetes patients by making insulin something synthetic, being able to be made in a lab rather then extracting it from animals.

What should be addressed is whether the potential benefits outweigh the cost that are being stacked up by the hundreds, as over 90% of cloning attempts are classified as "failures"....meaning many animals are being created and dieing in the name of science.:whip: Dolly, the first cloned mammal, was only created after 276 sheep had died in the process. (Meek 2002, "Tears of a clone",The Gaurdian)

The BBC has some good sites for anyone who wants to do extra research
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/genes/gene_safari/clone_zone/intro.shtml

To clone animals who will grow organs for humans. Kinda unfair to those animals, it seems to me....

I just don't know. I'm very conflicted over this issue of animal testing, though I benefit from it, and my sister works in genetic research using mouse "models" (transgenic mice) or rather, she did before her illness. I'm just not entirely convinced these things are necessary anymore. No, I just don't know.

To clone animals who will grow organs for humans. Kinda unfair to those animals, it seems to me....

.

It's not exactly like that. They are "only" using animals at this stage because it is illegal in the US currently to use cloning technology on humyns.

"As envisioned for people, therapeutic cloning would take the DNA of a person needing a transplant and insert it into a woman's egg that had been stripped of its own chromosomes. Scientists would then trigger the egg to start dividing, and they would harvest so-called embryonic stem cells. These immature cells could be transformed, in theory, into any kind of tissue and would almost perfectly match the genetic profile of the intended recipient. "
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20020608/fob4.asp

Animals right now are being used to better science, but the actual goal doesn't work with using animals.

So why aren't they using human eggs?

holy leaping creep-o-rama! :sheep: :sheep: :sheep: :sheep: :sheep:

When did it become illegal in the US to do human reproductive cloning?

When did it become illegal in the US to do human reproductive cloning?

It's not a federal law; what has been happening is states that have research facilities that are making progress in this area are being outlawed through the state. If it isn't outright illegal in the state, all their public funding is being taken away. Most research is coming in from other countries, because between laws restricting cloning and stem cell research, and US patent laws on different gene sequences banning access to them, or setting too high of a price, laws are making it next to impossible to have accomplish anything. Not tech illegal, but effectually. It is in one of the houses now though I believe, and with this administration.....

Somebody just ought to tell Bush, "Don't worry. Nobody is about to clone you.":shifty:


States that have outlawed cloning or banned funding:::
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/genetics/rt-shcl.htm

They killed Dolly! Either that or she died of natural causes...I agree with cloning for some purposes(ex there is the potential for endangered/extinct animals to be cloned, if they only do so to animals that humans have wiped out that'd be cool, also cloning already slaughtered animal muscles for meat) but others not so much(ex House of the Scorpion/ animal testing ish stuff) The reproductive cloning would be ok, it's 'illegal' right now because it HAS been tried but they killed the baby girl two weeks into her life because they felt that her whole life would be tests etc. So as long as the thing about the kids being cloned isn't publicized, should be fine...Haven't decided how I feel about the whole 'we aren't God' thing, but wouldn't that also mean that we have no right to kill something in the first place?

Cloning endangered animals won't help their survival, because clones have no genetic diversity. Genetic diversity is vital to a stable population. Many endangered animals are endangered for the very reason that their populations have grown so small they do not have the proper genetic diversity for continued healthy reproduction. In highly inbred populations, there are many genetic disorders and low fertility.

Cloning endangered animals won't help their survival, because clones have no genetic diversity. Genetic diversity is vital to a stable population. Many endangered animals are endangered for the very reason that their populations have grown so small they do not have the proper genetic diversity for continued healthy reproduction. In highly inbred populations, there are many genetic disorders and low fertility.

I guess that that would only be an issue if the cloning appeared on a very large scale. The ammount of twins in the world don't seem to have that much of an impact on the genetic diversity. And a lot of clones need to be made before they would match the ammount of twins.

They killed Dolly! Either that or she died of natural causes...

She died of old age, which is what most cloned animals die of. They've found a way to clone animals, but they clone their cells are genetically the same age as the animal they cloned them from, so it's like making a baby with a 50 year old bone structure.:think: