posted on February 13, 2004 10:24:07 AM new
In a thread awhile back I predicted that the United States restricting cloning science would result in other countries moving ahead of the United States in that arena-- well it's happening.
Why Cloning Didn't Happen in U.S.
02:00 AM Feb. 13, 2004 PT
SEATTLE -- The United States is supposed to be the most scientifically and technologically advanced country in the world. So why did South Korean scientists announce here Thursday that they were the first to develop cells that could lead to the biggest revolution medicine has ever seen?
The researchers, led by veterinary cloning expert Woo Suk Hwang and gynecologist Shin Yong Moon of Seoul National University in South Korea, were the first to create a cloned human embryo and derive stem cells from it -- a significant advance toward using the cells to replace those damaged by a wide range of diseases and disorders, from Alzheimer's to spinal cord injuries.
Researchers say there are many reasons why South Koreans -- and not Americans -- were standing at the podium Thursday at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in Seattle, not the least of which is the support of the federal government.
"Government support is key, absolutely," said Rudolf Jaenisch, a cloning expert and professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. "In the United States nobody could do this because the United States does not have government support."
President Bush placed a moratorium on spending federal funds to develop new embryonic stem-cell lines in August 2001. He also has said he supports a ban on all cloning research, including therapeutic cloning, which researchers hope can lead to important new treatments for diseases. BUSH = REPRESSED FUNDEMENTALIST CONSERVATIVE A$$HOLE
Because the embryo is destroyed when stem cells are extracted, some religious and anti-abortion groups contend the process is murder. A handful of bills seeking to ban cloning have made the rounds in Congress. Some bills aimed to ban reproductive cloning, others would ban both types. No legislation has passed, however, in part because some cloning opponents have drawn links between therapeutic and reproductive cloning, and will not support a bill that allows either type of cloning. Rogue scientists have threatened to use reproductive cloning to produce babies, although they offer no scientific proof that they're close to reaching that goal. Some opponents fear that if therapeutic cloning is permitted, rogue scientists will be enabled to pursue reproductive cloning.
Most researchers who support therapeutic cloning agree that legislation should be passed to ban reproductive cloning. However, they argue that the two types of cloning are vastly different and that therapeutic cloning should be permitted.
South Korea, for its part, has passed a law that prohibits reproductive cloning while providing funds for therapeutic stem-cell research.
"Our inspiration is to treat incurable diseases," Moon said Thursday at the meeting in Seattle. "As scientists, we believe that this study is our responsibility and moral obligation."
But it wasn't only government support that led Hwang and his colleagues to success. It also took significant technical know-how. The lab already was experienced in animal cloning, and researchers there honed those techniques to get the best possible results.
"Based on our experience on cloning cows and pigs, we have focused on optimizing the (protocol), and have been able to achieve a fairly high efficiency," Moon said.
One apparently crucial difference between the South Korean effort and other projects designed to clone human embryos was that instead of using a pipette to suck the nucleus out of the egg, the Koreans broke a small hole in the outer membrane of the egg and gently squeezed out the nucleus. That may have kept intact some key proteins that control cell division.
The South Korean researchers also systematically tested three protocols for developing embryos, then combined the best aspects of each in a fourth, which led to the stem-cell line. They placed the eggs and embryos in different versions of culture before finding the right recipe.
They also experimented with the amount of elapsed time between inserting cells into the donor egg and infusing them with calcium. The calcium activates the cells, inducing their development into an embryo.
Another key difference between past cloning attempts and the South Koreans' research is that Hwang and his colleagues used cells from the same woman who donated the egg to make the clone. They used cumulus cells, which are found only in close proximity to female eggs, because those cells worked well in previous cloning experiments in animals.
Taking cells from the egg donor also might be beneficial if stem cells are one day used therapeutically. There's less of a chance those cells, when injected into a patient, will be rejected.
The method has an immediate downside, however. Using cells from only one person makes it more difficult for researchers to determine whether they've actually cloned an embryo, or if the cells have spontaneously divided during a process called parthenogenesis. Parthenogenesis is a form of reproduction in lower life forms, including flies, ants and lizards, but it doesn't create embryos in humans.
In the South Korean experiment, the DNA from both the donor and the egg are the same, which makes it hard to tell if they've got a new organism with two sets of genes, or a parthenote.
Although tests showed the South Koreans probably created an embryo, MIT's Jaenisch said that wasn't certain. But at the conference Thursday, the Korean researchers said they were confident they had created human embryos.
"Our cell line was not derived from parthenogenetically activated (embryos)," Yoon said, "but from SCNT (somatic cell nuclear transfer)," or therapeutic cloning.
posted on February 13, 2004 12:12:25 PM new
Next step will be to make it a crime to travel to a country that offers treatment of disease by stem cells just as if you were traveling to a country to have sex with children or anything offensive to the religion of the administration in power.
posted on February 13, 2004 01:07:03 PM new
Religion is going to prevent people from moving ahead if we allow our leaders to make decisions based on their own beliefs. Would they feel differently if one of their own had a spinal cord injury or Parkinsons? Isn't it somewhat hypocritical to send thousands to war but not wanting to "hurt" an embryo casing?
posted on February 13, 2004 05:53:08 PM new
Would it help to know that adult human stem cells are FAR more effective in treating disease than those from an unborn baby. Plus you don't have to kill the adult to obtain the cells.
Funny....people were appalled at the "research" done on the Jews....they were going to die anyway and they weren't considered human so what harm did it do? Killing babies, who aren't considered human, is bad enough but to then use them for "parts" is no better than what Hitler did no matter how you try to justify it.
Don't worry you will have a President who has no moral fiber soon enough. Wait and see how bad things get. Without moral restraint our world would be total chaos. Our whole country was founded on Christianity and that is why we have had such a great country, the best in history. Take away the freedom and safety morals give us and we are just a group of selfish animals in a lawless land.
I need to stop coming into these "issue" threads, it just makes me sad.
posted on February 13, 2004 06:22:10 PM new
A fertilized egg is not a human. And if it were the case that "adult" stem cells worked better, no one would be researching with zygotic stem cells.
Even before Roe v Wade, a fetus was not considered a "human". Illegal abortions were never charged or sentenced as a murder -- even when we were a "godly" country.
In fact, when the christian factions did come here to steal land from the Indians, this colony did become a "group of selfish animals in a lawless land", and it was the christians that made it so.
If it wasn't for the sinful criminals that were forced to leave Europe to settle in the Carolinas and Georgia, this country wouldn't have any morals. There was more honor among the thieves than the christians.
posted on February 13, 2004 06:40:05 PM new
Reamond, I remember your prediction. I think even more will occur. Not only will the US fall behind in disease treatment, but with fewer of the top reseachers coming to work in the US, medical genetic study as a whole will slow down here, and increase elsewhere, taking specialized positions with them. Call it a brain drain.
Paws4god, you are wrong in saying adult stem cells are more useful in the potential treatments being considered. Adult stem cells don't have the potential to change into the different cells that embryonic stem cells have shown.
As for your holocaust theory, that assumes you believe life begins at conception. Are you going to make miscarraige illegal?
You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
posted on February 13, 2004 06:41:05 PM new
paws4God, I can’t see why morality can’t exist independently of religion.
To ‘smite’ seems immoral to me.
I don’t need anybody’s bible telling me what is or isn’t immoral.
Religion aside, breeding humans for spare parts is a worry to me- where is the limit?
1week, 2weeks, 2nd trimester: to remove certain deformities or degrees thereof; to ‘correct’ disproportionately greater female birth rate?
posted on February 13, 2004 07:19:12 PM new
The thing is this sort of law is passed in haste for what is simply a snapshot of the present. In a year it will probably be obsolete but still have a restraining effect. It is as stupid as the one time law that required someone operating an automobile to have an assistant walk ahead with a lantern and clear the way.
Several researchers have reported the ability to create completely undifferentiated stem cells from ADULT cells. No fetus or even germ cells involved.
So what happens in a year or two or three when the whole moral question that was the basis for the law no longer exists but the prohibition still stands because a bunch of politicians passed a law on behalf of a bunch of hand wringing old men in skirts who know all about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin but when it comes to bioethical questions have their heads jammed up their ass? Damn priests should be cited for practicing medicine without a license or a clue.
posted on February 13, 2004 07:23:45 PM new
Adult stem cells are better but most in the medical field don't want to admit it. They have other motives for cloning and this just opens the door to those.
Say you have a disease and you want to create a clone. It usually takes several tries to create a viable clone. Most clones have hideous deformities and must be killed though they don't live long anyway. They are killed after they are aware or "born". It took many tries before "Dolly" came along. Their cells die faster than normal thus they age quickly. You may think comparing the Holocaust with cloning bad taste but thats because it is the same thing. It is killing people either way. I can't imagine cloning yourself and they killing "yourself".....too weird.
A fertilized egg is a human it ain't a fish or a cat. Did you know that more babies have already died in the abortion Holocaust than in Hitler's hell? There are 4000 babies killed a day just in US alone.
As for wars. We have wars because of the lack of morals or at least a very different set of morals. We have to fight for freedom when evil men want to destroy our country. War is quite different than cloning to kill and abortion. War is terrible but when people like Hitler and Ben Laudin(sp?) come along what do you do, just say OK you can have our country and kill anyone you want. Most of the time people who don't believe in capital punishment for a murderer believe in abortion for the innocent....kind of mixed up isn't it?
I don't care what diease I had I couldn't and wouldn't clone myself for parts. It is terrible to suffer or see someone you love suffer but that doesn't justify cloning humans.
posted on February 13, 2004 07:27:07 PM new
A fertilized egg is a fertilized egg. It isn't a person. It is a glob of cells. All religions are equally right
posted on February 13, 2004 07:29:05 PM new
How about if you can have a liver grown in a vat from your own cells and installed as a seperate fully formed organ? 10 year - 100,000 mi warranty.
Would you do that or would you be like the Amish who won't put a lightning rod on the barn because it is presumptuous to turn aside the stroke of heaven? Fatalistic.
posted on February 13, 2004 08:34:33 PM new
paws4God - You know you are not alone in your beliefs. This board is slanted way to the left...and religious beliefs are always laughed at/shunned. Do not be sad nor discouraged. This board is not representative of the 'outside' real world.
------------------
KD Isn't it somewhat hypocritical to send thousands to war but not wanting to "hurt" an embryo casing? No more than those who don't want people who have VOLUNTEERED to serve their country going to war vs. those who support abortion. No more hypocritical than that.
posted on February 13, 2004 09:03:36 PM newA fertilized egg is a human it ain't a fish or a cat
You must have studied biology in a state that will not teach evolution.
If you look at the progress of the human embryo, you will see that there is a point where it does in fact have gills - these convert into our largnyx, there is also a tail, in fact we have unused muscles at the base of the spine that at one time in our evolution wagged that tail.
posted on February 13, 2004 09:04:29 PM new
I'm not laughing at anyones beliefs ,Linda.I just disagree with them.Am I not supposed to say so?
In the "outside world " I live in these opinions are absloutely representative. I do believe it depends on the part of the country you are from.
Wanted to add that , to me, you Linda, look as looney to the right as you think we are to the left. It is all a matter of perspective. You looney righty you.
All religions are equally right
[ edited by rawbunzel on Feb 13, 2004 09:05 PM ]
posted on February 13, 2004 09:23:13 PM new
The South Koreans are fools. They risk the wrath of God when they try to play God and clone humans. That's not very smart when there's a madman with nuclear weapons just across their border.
------------------------------
posted on February 14, 2004 12:17:23 AM new
I see - So if the whacko Kim launches a nuclear war across the border and incinerates millions in nuclear fire he will really be God's instrument of divine retribution.
Sounds to me about as stupid as a preacher man getting up and telling the family God had their little girl run over by a truck so he could have another angel.
Or that 9/11 was God's wrath on the US for - whatever.
More brilliant religeous reasoning. Really about as vindictive as the Muslims calling on Allah to destroy us.
In fact all of you get so worked up you have to help God along since he doesn't reach down from heaven and smite who you see needs smiting quick enough. Do you scold him in your prayers?
And all the ones caught in that nuclear war who were good Christians - well too bad - they should have tried harder to restrain their fellow Koreans. God apparently isn't any better at precision smitting than the Air Force. So much for all knowing and powerful.
Of course I know you probably don't believe funny little yellow men can really be Christians anyway. Wink - wink. After all you go look at the churches and they still are mostly segregated. Lot of hypocrites visible there before they even open their mouths.
posted on February 14, 2004 02:17:26 AM new
When God is angry, bad things happen. Like the destroyed city of Sodom and Gomorra. Or that time when the whole world, except Noah's Ark, was destroyed by a flood. Enslavement. First born children killed. See the Bible for more.
posted on February 14, 2004 05:16:47 AM new
Paws people here think killing children is a-ok... but an Adult that makes their own decisions and joins the military, whose sole purpose is WAR and death...
Let those other countries have it... they will see that it probably won't amount to much other than a waste of money.
posted on February 14, 2004 12:57:47 PM new
Reamond, you make a good point. I would imagine that in Sodom and Gamorah there were many pregnant women. A lot of pregnant women would have died in the flood too. So then God himself thought nothing of killing embryos and fetuses or he would have spared the vessel they were in.
If we are to follow in Gods footsteps it would seem that using even a vaible fetus would be okkie dokkie.
All religions are equally right
[ edited by rawbunzel on Feb 14, 2004 12:59 PM ]
posted on February 14, 2004 04:49:50 PM new
It seems to me that everyone except Reamond is missing the point he made earlier in this thread:
"THOSE COUNTRIES WILL BE SETTING THE MORAL STANDARDS BY VIRTUE OF HAVING PIONEERED THE TECHNOLOGY."
Which I read as, by not developing these biological procedures here in the U.S., we have forfeited our right (through patent, at least) to have any say in how this "technology" will be used. That alone oughtta scare the crap out of all of us -- far more than it seems to have done...
posted on February 14, 2004 05:03:48 PM new
No problem - they can just inform all these other countries they are subject to invasion if they don't curb their biological activities just like nuke weapons.
Part of the Pax Americana.
posted on February 14, 2004 05:56:32 PM new
Now why didn't I think of that?
Edited to add: Frankly, I have strong issues against cloning in any form, but I'm not naive enough to believe that just because I 'don't like it' that science will say, "Oh, okay Pat, we'll stop our research right now, just for you!" So, in my opinion, the way to march along with scientific discoveries responsibly is to have some oversight (probably in the form of International Law) march right alongside them.
Einstein wasn't thinking 'atomic bomb' when he announced "E=mc2". Similarly, scientists now giddy over their cloning achievements aren't focussed on how their discoveries will ultimately be used. Sadly, I know just enough about human nature and politics to realize that it won't be good...
