Human clones doable now.

[Exoscientist]

Chinese Firm Chief Executive Says Human Cloning Already Possible.
Xu thinks Boyalife could totally clone humans if everyone got suddenly cool about cloning humans.
Danielle Wiener-Bronner
Fusion 12/07/2015 07:51 am ET

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/china-human-cloning_5664ac88e4b08e945fefdf9f

Everyone has a visceral negative reaction but what are the pros and cons? One "pro" scenario is being able to clone replacement body parts without rejection. Oddly, a "con" scenario can be envisioned on that very same basis:

The Clonus Horror (Robert S. Fiveson, 1979).

http://www.veoh.com/watch/v93109918qyAN757Y

 

   Bob Clark

 

Edited December 10, 2015 by Exoscientist

[HoloYolo]

Cloning humans sounds like a bad idea. Ever heard of Vault 108?

[Darnok]

Quote

being able to clone replacement body parts without rejection

The island (2005)

 

In first place people should think about "what is difference between human being and sack of body parts?"

If you answered: sack of body parts is made in lab, then think about in-vitro

I am against both.

[Randazzo]

There's really way too may complications and moral implications of doing this and creating a person, and that's what they would be. It wouldn't be the person who was cloned, it would be a biologically identical copy with it's own consciousness (where can we see natural examples of this?), unless of course it was rendered a vegetable at some point during the process. That wouldn't go over well or last long. Cloning a person is an interesting concept, but ultimately too steeped in problems and controversy to be profitable.

Once they figure out how to clone people parts it'll become big business.

 

[Bill Phil]

Gary.......

I don't know about it... It's a good thing in that we may be able to make more humans fast if a lot die, but if we make another few billion right now it won't help.

[r4pt0r]

ha, ha, GARY!


well folks, welcome to "the Island"...
I am not against the idea of human cloning myself.

Edited December 8, 2015 by r4pt0r

[HoloYolo]

I said the same thing as the 2 up top and still people post it.

 

Ahh screw it! Gary.........

[adsii1970]

I just do not see this ending well. Would clones have "personhood" or would they be placed in a separate category as "fake people?" There are far too many moral and ethical issues we must settle before we even begin to allow this to happen. However, I have no qualms of growing organs, such as livers, hearts, and the like...

[Bill Phil]

15 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

I just do not see this ending well. Would clones have "personhood" or would they be placed in a separate category as "fake people?" There are far too many moral and ethical issues we must settle before we even begin to allow this to happen. However, I have no qualms of growing organs, such as livers, hearts, and the like...

A person has experiences. The experiences are part of what determines our personality. If the clones have experiences, then they are people.

Identical twins have similar extremely similar DNA, but different experiences. These experiences determine their differences more so than other factors.

23 minutes ago, HoloYolo said:

I said the same thing as the 2 up top and still people post it.

 

Ahh screw it! Gary.........

Well, you only mentioned the vault... Admittedly it reminded me of Gary.

[adsii1970]

6 minutes ago, Bill Phil said:

A person has experiences. The experiences are part of what determines our personality. If the clones have experiences, then they are people.

Identical twins have similar extremely similar DNA, but different experiences. These experiences determine their differences more so than other factors.

Well, you only mentioned the vault... Admittedly it reminded me of Gary.

The problem is that scientists and geneticists are now saying GENETIC memory is actually possible. If this is truly the case, then would not a clone then be totally human based on your definition since it would, through genetics, share in species-changing experiences that led to genetic adaptations? (See https://www.wisconsinmedicalsociety.org/professional/savant-syndrome/resources/articles/ancestral-or-genetic-memory-factory-installed-software/ ).

There have even been stories of those who have received donor organs being able to recall the experiences of the donors in startling detail (http://www.naturalnews.com/028537_organ_transplants_memories.html ) which can open up an entirely new debate on genetic research and human cloning.

So, with this in mind, I dare to ask again, if both of these things are real, would not a cloned human, even though it comes from cells of a donor, be human? Would it be able to assume the identity of its originator? Would it only be created for "spare parts" and if so, doesn't that demand a debate into what cloning should and should not be allowed. Do we want a situation where war becomes even cheaper through the use of (I cannot believe I am going to say this) clone armies? Until these issues are worked out, there must be restraint. If not, it will not end well. 

 

 

[Bill Phil]

A clone is a separate entity. And it is human if it can reproduce and produce fertile offspring.

[r4pt0r]

Yeah I think clones would have to be grown as sterile, maybe even lobotomized too. We would have to dehumanize them best we can to skirt any "ethical" problems people have, and get down to the brass tacks of getting viable replacement parts for those who can afford them.

[Vaporo]

37 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

 

There have even been stories of those who have received donor organs being able to recall the experiences of the donors in startling detail (http://www.naturalnews.com/028537_organ_transplants_memories.html ) which can open up an entirely new debate on genetic research and human cloning.

I would doubt these stories. The article contains links that make it look like it's referencing news stories, but in reality it just leads to a list of other articles on the same site. A quick google search didn't lead me to any actual news stories, so I'm betting that these stories are based purely on hearsay.

5 minutes ago, r4pt0r said:

Yeah I think clones would have to be grown as sterile, maybe even lobotomized too. We would have to dehumanize them best we can to skirt any "ethical" problems people have, and get down to the brass tacks of getting viable replacement parts for those who can afford them.

I think that dehumanizing something that would be a full human without our intervention would cause an even worse ethical dilemma.

Edited December 8, 2015 by Vaporo

[adsii1970]

25 minutes ago, Vaporo said:

I would doubt these stories. The article contains links that make it look like it's referencing news stories, but in reality it just leads to a list of other articles on the same site. A quick google search didn't lead me to any actual news stories, so I'm betting that these stories are based purely on hearsay.

I think that dehumanizing something that would be a full human without our intervention would cause an even worse ethical dilemma.

The one site, the first on genetic memory, is from a reputable medical journal (Wisconsin Medical Society). The second, although questionable by account, does not negate the fact this phenomenon does happen and has been reported on in other sources:

• http://www.namahjournal.com/doc/Actual/Memory-transference-in-organ-transplant-recipients-vol-19-iss-1.html
• http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1237998/Heart-transplant-patient-gets-craving-food-eaten-organ-donor.html

The problem I see with this is that if we create a clone from a living host and they, indeed, share the same basic memories, sensitivities, and inclinations, then in effect, would the clone not be human by the most rational standards? And if it is an exact clone, it would have the ability to reproduce. So then we would have the whole issue of hybrid offspring from genetic clones and biologically created humans. And I have not even mentioned the spiritual and mental issues of cloning. The way I see it, just because we have the technology or ability to do something does not mean we actually need to do it.

34 minutes ago, r4pt0r said:

Yeah I think clones would have to be grown as sterile, maybe even lobotomized too. We would have to dehumanize them best we can to skirt any "ethical" problems people have, and get down to the brass tacks of getting viable replacement parts for those who can afford them.

What I want to say about this would probably get me some of the points from the moderators that I DO NOT WANT, so instead of naming specific incidents as I could, I will use broad generalities. In the past, when society has chosen groups to dehumanize groups of people for various reasons, the end results have been mass murder, attempts of ethnic cleansing, and genocide. Growing an arm, a leg, or a liver in a solution, yes, because it cannot survive on its own nor does it have consciousness. Cloning an entire human then lobotomizing them for the sake of having spare parts? Sounds pretty inhumane, if you ask me. When we lose our humanity, what do we really have left?

[Wjolcz]

Not sure if it's a good idea or not. I'm no ethics expert, or whatever (tbh I just don't want to start an argument that has high chances of derailing towards religion topics) but I would have nothing against growing my own body organs in case one of them fails. That's kind of cloning, right?

 

Also, wasn't there an anonymous woman who agreed to give birth to her own clone, or something? Or was it just some sort of hoax? She was named Eve, I think.

 

EDIT: aaaand research done: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clonaid

Most likely a hoax. At least they have a cool logo

Edited December 8, 2015 by Veeltch

[SomeGuy123]

So, have they fixed the telomere and other issues?  It's been almost 20 years since the first cloned sheep, surely the techniques have gotten more reliable.

[adsii1970]

21 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

Not sure if it's a good idea or not. I'm no ethics expert, or whatever (tbh I just don't want to start an argument that has high chances of derailing towards religion topics) but I would have nothing against growing my own body organs in case one of them fails. That's kind of cloning, right?

--edited by adsii1970--

 

Yes, but cloning your liver, a pancreas, or even a foot of small intestine does not present the same moral and ethical issues as if you paid to have a complete head-to-toe clone created just for the purpose of spare parts (or any other purpose).

[Vaporo]

1 hour ago, adsii1970 said:

The one site, the first on genetic memory, is from a reputable medical journal (Wisconsin Medical Society). The second, although questionable by account, does not negate the fact this phenomenon does happen and has been reported on in other sources:

• http://www.namahjournal.com/doc/Actual/Memory-transference-in-organ-transplant-recipients-vol-19-iss-1.html
• http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1237998/Heart-transplant-patient-gets-craving-food-eaten-organ-donor.html

The problem I see with this is that if we create a clone from a living host and they, indeed, share the same basic memories, sensitivities, and inclinations, then in effect, would the clone not be human by the most rational standards? And if it is an exact clone, it would have the ability to reproduce. So then we would have the whole issue of hybrid offspring from genetic clones and biologically created humans. And I have not even mentioned the spiritual and mental issues of cloning. The way I see it, just because we have the technology or ability to do something does not mean we actually need to do it.

Well, the one from dailymail I saw. The first story was original, but the second really just seem to be repeating what the namah site said.

The stories about food cravings I can easily believe. You are moving vital organs that process materials around. I wouldn't be surprised if those organs became so used to processing nutrients found in that food that they could generate cravings. The ones where a person claims to "recall" another person's last moments can mostly be explained as psychological trauma. I'm still pretty skeptical about things like the girl who solved the case of her donor's murder, where they actually seem to recall specifics from the other person's life. I'd need to see a lot more studies confirming those before I believe it.

Again, though, I'm still extremely skeptical as many of the Namah site's sources seem to come from this Paul Pearsall, and one of the references listed is "Wikipedia."

 

EDIT: Also, could you show me how this Namah site connects to the Wisconson Medical Society. I could not find any link between the two.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Vaporo

[Mazon Del]

One of the options that has been bandied about in some circles is that you alter the genes of the clone such that it will never produce a viable brain. This has been used as a way around the ethical problems some have on harvesting stem cells, if they could never have formed a viable human then harvesting them doesn't kill a human.

I'm for cloning. Even if we do not necessarily use the tech, I want us to HAVE the tech.

[RainDreamer]

I think we have had the tech around for a while. It is just no one wants to use it, due to all the ethical problems that may occur. Also terrifying is, imagine human body parts being cloned, not just for medical problems, but for...consumption as food...

[r4pt0r]

23 minutes ago, RainDreamer said:

I think we have had the tech around for a while. It is just no one wants to use it, due to all the ethical problems that may occur. Also terrifying is, imagine human body parts being cloned, not just for medical problems, but for...consumption as food...

Clone some fava beans and throw in a nice chianti for good measure ehh?

 

On topic though, can a clone have a soul if they are man made and not created by the will of some deity? In the eyes of god would they be less than human?

Or if we play god, can we surpass him, creating a superior being, the next evolution of mankind?

 

As someone who is not religious these are interesting things to consider. How would the church react to cloned people? 

 

We are already on the threshold with these "designer babies". I cannot wait to see where science goes from here.

Edited December 9, 2015 by r4pt0r

[KSK]

9 hours ago, Bill Phil said:

Gary.......

I don't know about it... It's a good thing in that we may be able to make more humans fast if a lot die, but if we make another few billion right now it won't help.

I'm curious but short of 'lots of humans' being 'almost complete extinction', why would this be a good thing? Presumably whatever caused such a dramatic population crash wouldn't exactly be a conducive environment for suddenly throwing a lot more humans into, whether by cloning or more traditional methods.

[Wjolcz]

8 hours ago, adsii1970 said:

Yes, but cloning your liver, a pancreas, or even a foot of small intestine does not present the same moral and ethical issues as if you paid to have a complete head-to-toe clone created just for the purpose of spare parts (or any other purpose).

I am aware of that. I actually wanted to quote you about dehumanizing and say how much I understood what you were talking about there. I'm a Pole and I EXACTLY knew what you meant. I also meant cloning only organs, not a fully functional body.

 

But I fell asleep.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Veeltch

[adsii1970]

4 hours ago, Veeltch said:

I am aware of that. I actually wanted to quote you about dehumanizing and say how much I understood what you were talking about there. I'm a Pole and I EXACTLY knew what you meant. I also meant cloning only organs, not a fully functional body.

But I fell asleep.

Sleep is a vital part of life. I need between 5 and 6 a night to function the next day. All's good!

12 hours ago, Vaporo said:

Well, the one from dailymail I saw. The first story was original, but the second really just seem to be repeating what the namah site said.

EDIT: Also, could you show me how this Namah site connects to the Wisconson Medical Society. I could not find any link between the two.

I've never made a connection between the Namah site and WMS.

This site quotes from Pearsall but also includes others: http://beforeitsnews.com/beyond-science/2012/04/inherited-memories-in-organ-transplant-recipients-2006675.html Personally, I think there is a reason why his and other research like what he is doing is being kept out of the normal medical journals. There is a perceived fear that it would destroy the implant business. In reality, I do not think there has been enough research on this for the simple reason the medical community has labeled it "off limits" much the way academia has labeled UFO encounters off limits for authoritative academic research. While we do know a lot about the human body, there is still an awful lot that we do not know or do not even have a decent working theory about. Again, I believe this is such an area.

 

[Vaporo]

7 hours ago, r4pt0r said:

Clone some fava beans and throw in a nice chianti for good measure ehh?

 

On topic though, can a clone have a soul if they are man made and not created by the will of some deity? In the eyes of god would they be less than human?

Or if we play god, can we surpass him, creating a superior being, the next evolution of mankind?

 

As someone who is not religious these are interesting things to consider. How would the church react to cloned people? 

 

We are already on the threshold with these "designer babies". I cannot wait to see where science goes from here.

I'm almost certain that 99 percent of churches, and not just Christian churches, would react instantly with "YES! CLONES ARE HUMANS!" I know I certainly would.

 

EDIT: I think we're getting dangerously close to starting a religious debate, here. We should probably stop this particular line of conversation here and move back closer to the original topic.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Vaporo