Scientist: Are you ready for human clones?
posted at 9:42 pm on April 21, 2009 by Allahpundit
What’s the problem? They’re no more genetically related than identical twins. In fact, they’re less related, since they’re being carried to term by a different mother, which means they have different mitochondrial DNA.
Panayiotis Zavos has broken the ultimate taboo of transferring cloned embryos into the human womb, a procedure that is a criminal offence in Britain and illegal in many other countries. He carried out the work at a secret lab-oratory, probably located in the Middle East where there is no cloning ban. Dr Zavos, a naturalised American, also has fertility clinics in Kentucky and Cyprus, where he was born. His patients – three married couples and a single woman – came from Britain, the United States and an unspecified country in the Middle East…
“There is absolutely no doubt about it, and I may not be the one that does it, but the cloned child is coming. There is absolutely no way that it will not happen,” Dr Zavos said in an interview yesterday with The Independent…
“In the future, when we get serious about executing things correctly, this thing will be very easy to do,” he said. “If we find out that this technique does not work, I don’t intend to step on dead bodies to achieve something because I don’t have that kind of ambition. My ambition is to help people.”
Dr Zavos also revealed that he has produced cloned embryos of three dead people, including a 10-year-old child called Cady, who died in a car crash. He did so after being asked by grieving relatives if he could create biological clones of their loved ones.
Seriously, what’s the objection here? If it’s a question of “ensoulment” of the cloned embryo, why doesn’t that objection also arise re: twins? If we can get Lincoln back to help address the financial crisis, shouldn’t we go for it?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Great more Liberal Zombies!!!
canopfor on April 21, 2009 at 9:44 PM
Here comes Gattaca
Defector01 on April 21, 2009 at 9:45 PM
Such beings will have “no souls”, just like my cats and dogs.
toliver on April 21, 2009 at 9:45 PM
Don’t need him.
He’s already in the White House, remember?
Obama’s Inauguration made that clear.
Hawkins1701 on April 21, 2009 at 9:46 PM
I don’t mind the idea of creating clones if they are actually going to be born. Creating them for spare parts, to be destroyed or kept on ice forever, seems unethical. Not because I’m sure they’re people in a spiritual sense, but because they might be.
joe_doufu on April 21, 2009 at 9:46 PM
what could possibly go wrong?
homesickamerican on April 21, 2009 at 9:46 PM
That sounds like a joke.
Repurblican on April 21, 2009 at 9:47 PM
Its not like we can stop it. All ill say is immortality need not be all that cruel a process…karmically we should be alright. ;-)
ernesto on April 21, 2009 at 9:47 PM
no
AbaddonsReign on April 21, 2009 at 9:48 PM
The Raelians perfected cloning almost a decade ago…yawn.
daesleeper on April 21, 2009 at 9:48 PM
I have trouble with this concept. (Or Ste. T. A. teaching.)
ericdijon on April 21, 2009 at 9:49 PM
This is amazing!
—-
If we can get Lincoln back to help address the financial crisis, shouldn’t we go for it?
Don’t need him.
He’s already in the White House, remember?
Obama’s Inauguration made that clear.
Hawkins1701 on April 21, 2009 at 9:46 PM
You got that right!
youngO on April 21, 2009 at 9:50 PM
Wait are people seriously entertaining the notion that cloned embryos/people may not be embryos/people with souls? Do you really think that an omnipotent God would have missed this step in human development and left clones to be unensouled mobile meat computers with no chance for salvation?
Seriously? I certainly hope you can’t be if you believe in a just God.
Repurblican on April 21, 2009 at 9:50 PM
I have no problems with the idea of human cloning. The thing is that we don’t know what the detailed effects are of doing things like just using egg shells to propagate certain genetic material. Cloning is inevitable, like in vitro, but now is not the time to start with humans. There are going to be some very strange and nasty problems that will have to be dealt with and it should be done with other species, first. We’ve only started this whole process.
These are not real clones, as people believe. These are just the closest we have to cloning, at the moment. We need to tread lightly in this area, and be doing the basic work with lower species.
progressoverpeace on April 21, 2009 at 9:50 PM
Lincoln? He did an income tax. Give me Andrew “Jacka**” Jackson or Grover Cleveland.
WashJeff on April 21, 2009 at 9:50 PM
No.
Weight of Glory on April 21, 2009 at 9:50 PM
Blogger devises plan to obtain KP’s DNA…
Karl on April 21, 2009 at 9:51 PM
Such hostility to the idea! Even though we need clones for space colonization… :-(
ernesto on April 21, 2009 at 9:51 PM
The shroud of the Dark Side has fallen. Begun, the Clone War has.
TheQuestion on April 21, 2009 at 9:52 PM
Why are they making more people when people are the problem of global warming?
deidre on April 21, 2009 at 9:53 PM
Wonder if the liberals, and those whacko Man-Made Climate Change (or whatever they are calling it today) nut jobs, don’t come out in open and clear opposition to this.
After all the press about too many people, too many fat people, too little food for the rest of the people, and all the rest of the pap…now we can roll people out on an assembly line?
No thanks.
Being a good Conservative, I much prefer the traditional, old fashioned, non-technical method…dinner, a movie, candle light, a bottle of 1959, maybe 1976, Auslese…
coldwarrior on April 21, 2009 at 9:53 PM
So we are killing fetuses ensouled at conception by the millions (allegedly), and now we are going to start artificially creating (soulless) humans in a test tube. I want to be frozen just so I can see how F’ed up we are going to be 100 years from now.
At least the beta males will have a chance with one of the million Christy Brinkley’s running around.
tommylotto on April 21, 2009 at 9:55 PM
Can’t we just develop all human embryos in jars? That would do away with breeders altogether. Then we could kindly wish each other a kindly decanting day annually. The ability to control all fetus development would allow us to predetermine the social class of certain fetuses to perform the lower functions that make life grander for the higher classes.
Gammas wear green. I don’t like gammas.
daesleeper on April 21, 2009 at 9:55 PM
Has no one seen the De Niro movie “Godsend”?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0335121/plotsummary
(Don’t worry, no actual spoilers there)
RightWinged on April 21, 2009 at 9:55 PM
madness
rob verdi on April 21, 2009 at 9:56 PM
But what about Same Clone Marriage?
ronsfi on April 21, 2009 at 9:57 PM
(Here’s the trailer)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUwWgr-cP5E
RightWinged on April 21, 2009 at 9:58 PM
Heck, we can clone Bea Arthur and finally find a woman for AP.
She is dead?
If not, well……I’m not saying..but…
SteveMG on April 21, 2009 at 10:01 PM
That sword cuts both ways. They could clone Carter and Obama then too…..
Hog Wild on April 21, 2009 at 10:02 PM
If one wants to consider ensoulment, then consider that these are people who will be as human as we are. As to the ethics involved in creating one, consider that another human being died so the clone could be created. Cloning usually starts (as the article does state) with a fertilized egg, whose internal contents are removed and then replaced by a different genetic payload derived from the individual to be cloned.
There’s the moral problem for us pro-lifers. Someone had to die by dismemberment for a clone to happen.
unclesmrgol on April 21, 2009 at 10:03 PM
The female clones will reject you as well Allah.
Looks like Big Mac is readying the restraining order.
omnipotent on April 21, 2009 at 10:03 PM
Hmm…. the libs will kill the babies born through natural mechanism but they’ll fight for a world of cloned human beings. Interesting.
For the record, I am an agnostic on this issue. I have no particular objection to it but I can’t shake the weird feeling either.
promachus on April 21, 2009 at 10:03 PM
Didn’t someone once say about the development of the Atomic bomb that the Scientists involved were so wrapped up with whether they could that they didn’t stop to think whether they should? I think the same thing applies here, I mean what are going to be the long term ramifications of human cloning? What rights will clones have if any? especially if they’re being created for organ harvesting and if clones are created for that propose isn’t that akin to slavery? Also what are the long term social, Economic and public health consequences going to be?
There are a lot of questions that need to be asked and examined before we allow Science to play god in this fashion.
Dreadnought223 on April 21, 2009 at 10:03 PM
Four words, viz. “The Boys from Brazil”.
My collie says:
CyberCipher on April 21, 2009 at 10:05 PM
I think the issue is artificial selection, not “ensoulment”… the “ensoulment” stuff was carried over from Aristotle anyway… and I don’t think it was ever used to say that abortion before a certain time period was allowed… the body is the “soul”… to be anti-abortion as more to do with this…
IVF needs to be restricted though… limit the amount of embryos and only allow it for straight couples… make gays adopt… is seriously think it would be better to redistribute all children at child birth so that everyone is “equal” on that basis than to live in a euginic society… which IVF is bound to bring about…
ninjapirate on April 21, 2009 at 10:05 PM
“the Scientists involved were so wrapped up with whether they could that they didn’t stop to think whether they should?”
er, that’s a line from Jurassic Park …
[!!]
Buckaroo on April 21, 2009 at 10:07 PM
Cloned Fence Post Turtles!
canopfor on April 21, 2009 at 10:08 PM
@ D223
that’s not meant to minimize the myriad good points you bring up in your post, mind you …
Buckaroo on April 21, 2009 at 10:08 PM
It’s not. It’s the objection that scientists will risk killing human embryos for the sake of science. There’s also the issue of raising clones to harvest their organs. If you don’t think it’ll happen, you’re probably not only a believer, but think the Rapture’s gonna occur sometime tomorrow.
I took a history of science course in university and our professor asked us if we would have a problem with raising clones to harvest their organs. All of us did. She told us half her previous class had no problem with it. I have no faith in the humanity of mankind.
Darth Executor on April 21, 2009 at 10:09 PM
lol…I thought I remembered it from somewhere. Its still a valid point though.
Dreadnought223 on April 21, 2009 at 10:09 PM
I bet Chavez is really warm to this idea, after he got rid of term limits and all, now all the little cloned Chavez tyrants can rule 4-eva.
canditaylor68 on April 21, 2009 at 10:10 PM
Jsut think,Clones,
another Liberal Rights Group,
in the making!!
canopfor on April 21, 2009 at 10:10 PM
should be Just,not Jsut!
canopfor on April 21, 2009 at 10:11 PM
You’re joking, but it truly wouldn’t be surprising to see “genetically duplicated in a lab-Americans” in 50-100 years. And saying “clone” would be like the “n-word” to them.
RightWinged on April 21, 2009 at 10:13 PM
More Miss Californias?
blatantblue on April 21, 2009 at 10:15 PM
I wouldn’t want to live in a world with human clones.
Sometimes I scare myself, thinking about all the technological things coming.
Seriously though, if you think about it, what the hell will they do in 50 years?
HM?
I just hope I am Legend never comes true:
“Oh we found the cure for cancer!!!!
..oops”
blatantblue on April 21, 2009 at 10:16 PM
One very good reason why there should be NO human cloning…
Janeane Garofalo.
One pretty good reason why there should be, maybe, just a little…
Katrina Pierson.
coldwarrior on April 21, 2009 at 10:19 PM
So much heart-ache.
Allahpundit on April 21, 2009 at 10:21 PM
“blatantblue on April 21, 2009 at 10:15 PM”
SCORE!!!!!!
:-)
Buckaroo on April 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM
We’re gonna need a lot more taxpayers pretty quickly. Farrow to finish assembly line is the way to go. But,..they’ll need jobs.
a capella on April 21, 2009 at 10:29 PM
the deniro movie is pretty freaky. check it out…
homesickamerican on April 21, 2009 at 10:29 PM
Talk about your potential for unintended consequences.
anniekc on April 21, 2009 at 10:29 PM
One big thing to remember is these people would be completely different than the people they share genetics with. You could clone Obama 100 times and I doubt that any of them would go on to do anything even close to what Obama has done. Genetics plays a role in our personalities but it is mainly experience. I happen to be a behaviorist and there’s a lot of other theories out there but I don’t know of any that say personality is mostly a result of genetics.
As for them having souls… DUH they’d have them. They’re born in the same way as a normal human is they are simply conceived in a different way. Some people in this thread are talking like they come from a tube or something which is simply ridiculous.
And as a final point I’ll say that none of these attempts lead to a viable pregnancy and even if they had no one can say if they’d be born. Even if they were it’s highly likely they’d have horrible genetic defects. And even if they didn’t and they were born completely normal this doctor is giving these people false hope of reviving loved ones. They’d have close genetics but they’d be totally different. This man is a monster who is playing with the hearts of innocent families just so he can get some publicity. Truly despicable.
Kronos on April 21, 2009 at 10:30 PM
Eh, small question for big dilemma (or what have you). The Catholic Church still doesn’t condone forms of IVF – this is my understanding as a non-Catholic.
It’s not too far a leap to assume that clones will be manufactured solely for bone marrow harvesting or other “cures” to our ailments. Some people already do this the natural way to cure the first child…
Upstater85 on April 21, 2009 at 10:35 PM
Hot Air trolls are helping prepare us.
Loxodonta on April 21, 2009 at 10:35 PM
Less humans, more dogs, thank you.
fogw on April 21, 2009 at 10:38 PM
strangelet on April 21, 2009 at 10:38 PM
I think this is great! We could clone Walter Mondale and have him run again! Michael Dukakis? Barry Goldwater?
C’mon, any of the above would be better than Obuttlick
fumpbump on April 21, 2009 at 10:39 PM
Oh the “clones” wouldn’t be sentient. They would be brainstemmed organ sacks.
The neocortex, cerebellum and frontal lobes would not be allowed to develop.
strangelet on April 21, 2009 at 10:43 PM
I’m only for it if I can have a clone so I can harvest its organs when I need them. Oh, and then when its dead I want it turned into Soylent Green. The future is now, everyone.
Rightwingguy on April 21, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Thus, resembling a liberal?
coldwarrior on April 21, 2009 at 10:45 PM
Star Trek flashback in 3 . . . 2 . . .
Ryan Gandy on April 21, 2009 at 10:45 PM
I know… Granted it’s not Taxi Driver, Godfather II, Casino, etc… But it’s like pizza or sex, ya know? “It’s still De Niro!”
Seriously though, I’m truly surprised that it doesn’t seem that anyone else here saw the movie about this very subject… Taking a dead child and making him a newborn again. Now, as I recall (and it’s been a while since I’ve seen it) the storyline is unrealistic as it relates to the “real world”, but I’m just stunned that more people here haven’t seen Godsend.
RightWinged on April 21, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Whoa, how did I get hung up in moderation? Or did some other monster eat my comment?
RightWinged on April 21, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Close, liberals consume more than “just” brainstem organ sacks. They also talk waaaay more too.
Rightwingguy on April 21, 2009 at 10:48 PM
You guys are missing the truly important question: will the gay clones be allowed to marry?
austinnelly on April 21, 2009 at 11:00 PM
That reminds me of a recent question I’ve had for gay marriage advocates. Setting aside the equal protection we’d need to give to polygamists, and the whole illogicality of “gay”… In states where gay marriage is legalized, can 2 brothers or 2 sisters marry each other? I mean, the incest = retarded children issue isn’t there anymore, right? So why not?
RightWinged on April 21, 2009 at 11:02 PM
I think it’s more likely we would have had a super-Lincoln by now if we hadn’t killed millions of unborn children.
Daggett on April 21, 2009 at 11:03 PM
Looks like a Pet Sematary rip-off.
omnipotent on April 21, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Zombie Lincoln will be happy as a clam at high tide when he finds out how much $$$ Barry is sending to his state.
omnipotent on April 21, 2009 at 11:20 PM
The only time to worry about clones is when they are created to form a dictatorial army. Otherwise, it’s just a fad.
m064404 on April 21, 2009 at 11:20 PM
As disturbing as this may be ethically to some, you might want to check your facts better.
Where they are carried to term should have nothing to do with the mitochondrial DNA. While it comes from the mothers egg in mammals, it is conception not gestation that is the defining moment for it. I seem to remember that it would be affected by the method and source of the cloning material. No reason to think that they would use eggs from each separate host.
But if there are any Molecular Biologists handle, please correct me.
OBQuiet on April 21, 2009 at 11:21 PM
Haha, good call. Seriously though, it’s more about modern science than 80s horror nonsense… though again, the outcome (if I recall) is far from “the real world” as well. Again, it’s not “classic De Niro”… but it’s still De Niro, and worth a viewing, IMO. Regardless, I’m just still shocked that virtually no one here has seen it.
RightWinged on April 21, 2009 at 11:21 PM
The question is not ensoulment.
There is no question. There are the facts…
1) Life begins at conception, unless you actually believe it magically begins at birth. The scientific definition of life is met at conception.
2) This process destroys lives when trying to accomplish it. 3) If it’s ok to kill unborn children to try to clone someone, then there is no logical reason why we shouldn’t kill anyone else for whatever reason we seem fit… Need a new liver, just find someone with your blood type and shoot them in the head then harvest their liver… human cloning: same concept.
ironmonk on April 21, 2009 at 11:26 PM
Because twins fall under the purview of God? Besides, isn’t there always one good twin and one evil soulless twin?
Sorry, twins. If you’re a twin and reading this, don’t worry, you’re the good one.
LibTired on April 21, 2009 at 11:27 PM
It looks interesting and I’ve added it to my Netflix queue. Thanks.
I remember the trailer and it’s creepy as Karl Rove following my twitter.
omnipotent on April 21, 2009 at 11:30 PM
I wouldn’t worry too much about that. They are making rapid advances growing organs from non-embryonic stem cells. They have already successfully grown bladders and trachea. In 20 years I bet they’ll be able to grow fully functioning human hearts, kidneys, etc.
Ethics aside, in practical terms it’ll be much easier to grow a full-sized organ from your own stem cells than waiting for a clone to grow up. Plus if you harvest a vital organ from a clone, you lose all the other potential donor organs.
ZenDraken on April 21, 2009 at 11:37 PM
Cloned KP? Maybe… just maybe this one will go out with you Allah?
FontanaConservative on April 21, 2009 at 11:39 PM
Identical twins )from the same egg, split) often are documented (for what that’s worth) as having metaphysical oddities about them, but nothing as startling as a “split awareness” feared from cloning a human that is currently alive.
There is no issue with the “soul”. You can make 100 of the same physical person and each will have it’s own identity, it doesn’t matter what religion you want to hail from, the result will be the same. A new, unique person with some common behavioral traits.
Nobody will “go to hell” for creating life. If you want to go that route, only the embryo killers would get that.
Spiritk9 on April 21, 2009 at 11:45 PM
such a creepy movie
blatantblue on April 21, 2009 at 11:52 PM
We won’t get Lincoln.
spmat on April 22, 2009 at 12:01 AM
There’s one of the problems right there: the clone is being created for dubious reasons, namely, to relieve the grief of the parents. A Cady clone will live in the shadow of the original Cady as a Cady-substitute. I suspect that this is going to be a general problem for clones, that is, that their individuality will be compromised right from the start, given that they are being created for some purpose other than their own existence.
Bill Ramey on April 22, 2009 at 12:08 AM
I see, we are already splitting hairs about whether these are people or not. I am sure the left will have their usual double standard. They will be full-fledged people right up until the moment that somebody wants their organs for a transplant. Then we will find a reason to revoke their humanity.
Hawthorne on April 22, 2009 at 12:25 AM
The fallacy of your point AP is that the clone will not be the original. It will be like an identical twin as you said. But contrary to what the left might have us believe, our personality and world view is shaped by our experiences.
Unless we could faithfully and exactly reproduce the entire life of Lincoln in addition to the cloning, we would not get Lincoln. We would get Lincoln’s modernized and thoroughly corrupted (from the original) twin.
Hawthorne on April 22, 2009 at 12:36 AM
To date, we’ve cloned animals, with mixed success. Many cloned animals have had a higher than average mortality rate, etc.
There is no present need to clone humans, so why create a baby under risky circumstances, when safer alternatives exist? Human lives aren’t playthings. At this point in time, cloning a human means creating a baby which is more likely than others to have health problems. And for what?
If and when cloning has a solid safety record with animals, then I’ll be less likely to object. But we’re not there yet. Today, there is no reason or excuse for cloning human beings. It’s too risky.
sandberg on April 22, 2009 at 1:46 AM
Sure, let’s create and destroy human life at will for our litte scientific experiments, hec lets create and destroy hybrid human life at will (we can get all precious about it by not implanting those embryos until we can be reasonably sure we can further our science careers), let’s use women as egg factories and wombs for hire (and then complain about the objectification of women by Eminem), let’s turn kids into commodities to be bought and sold and manufactured to order (hec they’re not people like we are)…what’s the problem ay?
No wonder you chase after Meaghan McCain on twitter Allah. The exit question is who of you two are the bigger twits.
saint on April 22, 2009 at 2:50 AM
Actually I’ve worked out which of you two is the biggest twit. It’s you Allah. With cloning, you, a man become unecessary. Enjoy your path to self-oblivion.
saint on April 22, 2009 at 2:58 AM
There was a show on MTV called “Clone High” that (humorously) dealt with clones of famous corpses, including Abe.
Got canceled because of how it portrayed Ghandi (but not Jesus, naturally).
TMK on April 22, 2009 at 3:37 AM
The bad mortality rate in cloned animals comes from (I read this in some science article a while back) when cells split to make new ones the cap on the dna strand is reduced by a percentage. It can only split so many times before it isn’t replaced again. This is programmed mortality. If you clone someone halfway through their life that means you’re getting a clone with an abbreviated life span depending on how many times that dna you seeded the egg with has reproduced.
Animals don’t live as long as we do, so it showed up a lot faster…Dolly took a dirt nap after only a couple years. You want kids dying all over the place because of this? You want to replace your rotten liver with one that’s only going to last a couple years?
Meh, I’ll take my chances with what I have, and make babies the old fashioned way (if I still wanted to make em anyway, my mission is accomplished, 2 out of 3 of my kids are conservative, so there libtards!)
Spiritk9 on April 22, 2009 at 3:50 AM
I’m not so sure about human cloning, I never had the Brave New World, Gattica fears. Man has to be able to police himself initially.
The issue really doesn’t freak me out that much. What I would like to see is different organs of the body cloned so we don’t have to rely heavily on matching organ donors. This should be the focus.
Daemonocracy on April 22, 2009 at 4:24 AM
This will come to blood, I think, as will so much else.
Kralizec on April 22, 2009 at 4:36 AM
Adults² in charge.
Shy Guy on April 22, 2009 at 5:47 AM
The time is fast approaching when we all will have to stand up to be counted on where we stand.
Benjamin9 on April 22, 2009 at 6:27 AM
I hope Dear Leader’s lips don’t get crushed by a steamroller some day in the future.
That would be tragic.
Dr. ZhivBlago on April 22, 2009 at 6:30 AM
If he could do that, he wouldn’t need to clone her.
mikeyboss on April 22, 2009 at 7:30 AM
My daughter was a kidney donor recipient 3 years ago. The transplanted organ is expected to serve about 15 years and then she’ll get to go through it again. The body slowly rejects anything foreign. Cloning your own organ would be a wonderful accomplishment I think.
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 7:58 AM
I guess you have to believe in God to know it’s not right to play God. Just because you can do something, it does not automatically follow that you should. Unintended consequences lie in wait.
SKYFOX on April 22, 2009 at 8:07 AM
This kind of technology can lead to stuff like organ regrowing and the like. Having the ability to manufacture body parts and vital organs may lead us to super-long life spans.
Quite happy with the notion of near immortality. I might see my beloved Raiders win another Super Bowl with a fully reconstituted Marcus Allen at RB.
Krydor on April 22, 2009 at 9:29 AM
Agreed. How a human thinks is based on experience and knowledge. One would have to duplicate exactly the circumstances of the life of the clone to get “the same person”. And even that is no guarantee. The clone could still make other choices.
I am surprised this point was dropped. hmmm…
Perhaps. If clone parts could be cloned separately and not in a “host body” that would be “harvested” ( or multiple host bodies ).
The next phase would be … full replacement clones and finding a way to “record experiences and reflexive skills”. But, even this would not be the “same person”. The original human would be dead and the clone a mere false echo. Now if one could figure out a way to “transfer a soul” … ;)
Cadian on April 22, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Engineer longer telomeres.
daesleeper on April 22, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »