Woman to give birth to cloned baby.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Angela Harlem

Jesus Online
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
30,163
Location
a glass castle
Woman to give birth to cloned baby
November 27 2002


Controversial Italian gynaecologist Severino Antinori said a woman carrying a cloned human embryo should give birth in early January.

He told journalists the woman's pregnancy was in its 33rd week, and the male fetus, which weighed 2.7kg, was healthy and had "more than a 90 per cent chance" of being born.

The gynaecologist also confirmed that two other woman are pregnant with cloned embryos, one them in the 28th week and the other in the 27th.

He refused to name the country or countries concerned or provide further details, but said all three women are "in the same geographical zone".

The doctor, who first announced the pregnancies in April, insisted he had not carried out the procedure himself, and that his involvement was merely "cultural and scientific".

Italy is preparing to pass legislation that would impose tough penalties for anyone involved in cloning humans.
A international group of about 20 specialists including Antinori and American doctor Panos Zavos announced in January last year they intended to clone a human being in order to help sterile couples have children.

Antinori said today that he now has almost no contact with Pavos.

Antinori, 57, shot to notoriety in 1994 when he succeeded in helping a 63-year-old post-menopausal Italian woman become pregnant through fertilisation treatment administered at his Rome clinic.

-----------------
Source www.smh.com.au
 
335%3B5%3A5523232%7Ffp66%3Dot%3E2326%3D9%3A6%3D599%3Dxroqdf%3E2323354534%3A%3B5ot1lsi
 
well as long as it benefits humanity. afterall, a reason why not everyone may be able to cary children is for an abvious reason such as overpopulation. lets not worry about anything, lets just do it.

hey, lets go science! *clap clap clapclapclap
 
I am scared, too.

In a few years I will be having children. When they have children (my grandchildren), will they be pressured to "clone" the perfect child as opposed to a natural birth? Will our future generations' physical, emotional, and psychological features be picked out of a hat?

I say, let's bring people into the world naturally, the way it was intended to be. I sympathize with couples who cannot have children, but there are many children in foreign countries who need a good home and are up for adoption.

Cloning scares the shit out of me, because we as humans always take things to the extremes. It may be used for positive things, but you never know when a Hitler-like leader raises up and demands that everyone but clones will be exterminated or something stupid and scary like that. Ever seen Gattica? That type of stuff is what I am talking about.

All I am trying to say, is that it seems harmless and innocent now, but there is no way it could stay that way.
 
Heard this on the radio this morning too, they also said that many experts are v. sceptical about the claims.
Though its only a matter of time I suppose :(
 
cloudimani said:
Heard this on the radio this morning too, they also said that many experts are v. sceptical about the claims.
Though its only a matter of time I suppose :(

yeah, i agree that this is the most likely case.....of course i know nothing about it....it may be just a premature announcement....but it is only a matter of time...

shit.
 
I think that there has to be some form of monitoring or regulation on cloning of any kind. The prospects of creating a master race or even a large number of "perfect" people should concern us all.

When your child loses out in school or athletics to some "super" genetically engineered kid, and has to deal with those types of disadvantages for their entire life, they will not maximize their natural potential and will probably end up being unhappy.

GATTACA and A Brave New World were merely the tips of the iceberg on this issue. Genetic tampering of any kind could easily be used for the types of evils that sci-fi authors and horror novelists only dreamed about. Genetic screening for jobs, class divisions within society (more so than those that exist today), prejudice, hate, violence are all easily forseeable consequences of making a group of people better equipped for every type of human endeavor.

I believe that there has to be an international coalition supervising these doctors, to make sure that this is used only for health purposes and situations in which parents could not otherwise have children (in other words, necessity). Otherwise, pick up your sci-fi books for a sneak preview of where this road leads.


AJ
 
the funny thing is...all those horrible evils exist without cloning human beings!! think of how fun the world will be when they do exist.

*SIGH*

I can't wait.
 
let the countdown begin.


the final countdown.
 
I have definite doubts about this.....

I mean, this would mean they had to clone the baby from another baby...what parent will agree to have their child cloned?

And besides, cloning is ridiculosy expensive, and an incredibly complex and difficult process involving taking an adult somatic cell ( a tissue cell) and returning it to a reproductive state ( a gamete)...I don't want to get all scientific here. But I really have my doubts that this is true.

...everyone seems to acts as though genetics is a teriible thing. Genetics can and will change the world. However, in the wrong hands, bad things can happen, but this is could happen with anything
 
The_Sweetest_Thing said:
Genetics can and will change the world. However, in the wrong hands, bad things can happen, but this is could happen with anything
yep, genetics and auditing have a lot in common
 
The_Sweetest_Thing said:
I mean, this would mean they had to clone the baby from another baby...what parent will agree to have their child cloned?


Sorry to say, but i think LOTS would. think of the fame and fortune to follow. Definitely a lot of cameos on sit-coms at the least.

Remember those "parents" willing to name their baby after it's corporate sponsor?

Couple auctioning off naming rights for new baby boy
By Elizabeth Lesure, Associated Press, 07/26/01

NEW YORK -- Jason Black and Frances Schroeder don't know what they will name the baby boy they're expecting. But they aren't leafing through any "Name Your Baby" books.

Instead, the Mount Kisco couple is looking for a corporate sponsor to pay half a million dollars for their son's name.

Will he be "Heinz" or "Microsoft," "Coke" or "Kraft"? Only time -- and money -- will tell.

"It's the opportunity to have this media moment when the name would be unveiled," said Black, who is a business editor at Internet World in New York City. "The exposure that it could bring to a business is potentially huge, and we think it would be well worth the investment on their part."

The couple has put the naming rights up for auction on both eBay and Yahoo!, at a minimum bid of $500,000. The ads were posted July 18 and will run through July 28. So far, there have been no bidders, but the couple plans to extend their offer.

Black said the idea came to them after they had a dinner of Chinese takeout, followed by a fortune cookie that read: "You will have a new home by the end of the year."

"That's our dream," Black said. "That's every young family's perfect fantasy."

Black and Shroeder, both 32, live in a 2-bedroom apartment with their daughters, Josephine, 4, and Lois, 22 months. They are anticipating that the birth of their son -- expected within the next few days -- will leave them scrambling for more space.

"It's going to be a little crowded," Black said.

The couple hopes that money from the deal would allow them to buy a house and save for their children's college education.

They aren't the first "ordinary" people to ask for extraordinary corporate funding. Two New Jersey teen-agers recently became the "spokesguys" for credit card distributor First USA -- in exchange for a full ride to college.

Will their son be little "Mastercard"? Or "Visa"? Black said they have not ruled out anything -- except cigarette or gun brand names.

"Those are personal values of ours," Black said. "Those are certain standards that we feel we have to stick by."

And whether he is "Starbucks" (Buckie, for short?) or "Amazon," Black said that he is not worried that a corporate name might have an adverse affect on his son's development.

"As long as we provide him with a comfortable and loving home, he's going to turn out fine," Black said.
 
I read about this yesterday and the article also said the raelians also have some pregant members who are carrying cloned babies. Has anyone experienced the raelians? They have a chapter in this area. hmmmmmmmm..i hope their boss isn't the donor, odd boy.
It feels as though since WW2(probably earlier) we have been hurtling towards an uncertain future, just allowing new ways to emerge and put into practice without much thought and consideration. Some things are ethical and beneficial, some feel as though they are just satisfying a few individual egos and lining someone's pockets. Wicked imho.
I witness less and less tolerance and compassion for difference in the world, so not much surprises me these days. A world without nature? a sad place it would be.
 
There are serious issues with cloning.

It has been noted that cloned animals are experiencing pre-mature aging. For example, Dolly suffers from juvenile onset arthritis, something that should NOT happen in your average sheep.

Much of the concern is centred around the loss of telomeric regions (anybody here who studies genetics will know about this). In rough terms, every time you replicate the DNA, you will lose some of the ends due to the fact DNA cannot be replicated continously on both strands. Since they're using adult cell lines, this could be an issue in premature aging.

Nobody knows what will happen to these children in 10 years, and that's a real tragedy.
 
Back
Top Bottom