Comments on: 20 Animals That Have Been Cloned

By: PennieLain

PennieLain — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:55:32 +0000

Ok, cloning is cool and cloning human body-parts is coming up quickly. I love the pigs, they are used to transplant organs to humans because they were cloned to have none of this special gene that makes humans reject the organs. Yay transplants. And Blufindr, you are right on the money, the rate at which cloning works is equiviolant or better than that of regular pregnancies. I hope we will eventaully clone smart people from the past, like Ben Franklin or some of them, they would have different experiences, but would probably be just as smart and that’d be cool, we need more smart people.

By: duece

duece — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:17:02 +0000

I, personally, commend everyone who has spoken out about the religious/ethical view-point of all this cloning. I do NOT at all believe that we should clone humans. I agree, partly, with one of the earlier posts, about how we should clone human cells and/or organs, but we shouldn’t go as far as to clone limbs. Maybe, just maybe, we could clone smaller parts, like fingers, eyes, or ears, and even hearts or lungs(etc.), but not large things like arms or legs. And with cloning animals, we could clone animals for better or more food, or preserving a species, or even pets (like
#11 “CopyCat”). We shouldn’t humans or even close pets, we should accept death as a natural thing. I am one for using the Bible as a good sturdy rock to fall back on or to use as proof, I believe it as real, and for those of you getting all over people for it, did you know that there is more evidence proving that Jesus Christ was born and lived during that same time period than there is of Julius Caesar and Pompeii? The same thing with the parting of the Red Sea. How could people who consider themselves “intellectuals” not believing in some kind of deity? That is true ignorance; ignorance of someone(or thing) greater, smarter, more creative than humans? Good job Dani, and any other Christians(I presume that was the god you were referring to dani) who aren’t afraid to stand up for what’s right. God bless you.

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:21:28 +0000

this is so wrong to use animals for our medical needs…when animals have their own medical needs to deal with…

By: Garrett

Garrett — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 02:46:11 +0000

What about all those people who are in need of a organ. This day in age we have more people that are in need of an organ then their are organ donors. The cloned animals could be cross-breed with human genes and their organs would be available for cross-species organ transplants. “Close to three thousand people die each year waiting for an organ.” -Wrote the Minnesota Daily. (The cloning debate by Debbie Stanley.) Also cloning doesn’t have to be within animals. We already have something called a cell line. A cell line is the creating of individual cells; this technique is already being used for diabetes, hemophilia, and cystic fibrosis. Imagine all the possible medical breakthroughs that could come from animal cloning.

Also Dani, your quote (Which who knows were you got from.)can only be implied to those people who believe in god cause what does

“only God can make life and we weren’t meant to create other living things. besides, it takes usually over 100 failures to make at least one successful cell, that usually ends up dying anyways.”

mean if you don’t believe in god.

By: kelly maire * & shelby marie *

kelly maire * & shelby marie * — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:28:46 +0000

i like the monkey (:
& the ferrets
& the wolves
& the pussy cats
& the piggys
& the roger rabbit
& thats all
PEACE OUT GIRL SCOUT!

By: blufindr

blufindr — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 01:21:37 +0000

@dani: "only God can make life and we weren’t meant to create other living things. besides, it takes usually over 100 failures to make at least one successful cell, that usually ends up dying anyways." Procreation, dear. We can make other living "creatures". It can take some people over 100 failures (due to infertility, spontaneous abortions, etc) to have a child -- which is going to die anyway, due to mortality. I'd like to know where you get your figures for cloning. Indeed, "there have been no records at all of a healed disease from harvesting eggs from women’s ovaries for stem cells". Initially, there was also no records at all of people being healed from receiving medication, vaccines, etc. All new scientific methods need to be broken in, to be refined until they reach a point where they can be used by the general public for their intended goal. "for every embryo that's used, a human life is destroyed" I direct you to this page. More specifically, this paragraph: "Miscarriage statistics can be dramatic. Miscarriage reportedly occurs in 20 percent of all pregnancies. However, according to some sources, this may be an inaccurate number. Many women, before realizing a life has begun forming within them, may miscarry without knowing it-assuming their miscarriage is merely a heavier period. Therefore, the miscarriage rate may be closer to 40 or 50 percent. Of the number of women who miscarry, 20 percent will suffer recurring miscarriages. " There you go. For every embryo that's carried to term, there's potentially a whole other embryo that's being "kill[ed]". It happens. At least with the cloned embryos' "deaths" (I don't consider them alive yet, but that's a separate issue), there's potential for another life to be saved.

By: dani

dani — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 02:17:21 +0000

WOW! so many people come on here saying “oh cool! cloning! fun!” when they don’t even know a thing about cloning. in my opinion, cloning is wrong…only God can make life and we weren’t meant to create other living things. besides, it takes usually over 100 failures to make at least one successful cell, that usually ends up dying anyways. this science is way to expensive to be using so much money on! therapeutic cloning is another joke. there have been no records at all of a healed disease from harvesting eggs from women’s ovaries for stem cells, and it’s killing life! for every embryo that’s used, a human life is destroyed! this has been going for years and it’s murder! how would you like it if instead of having a great chance at life, your fate was decided for you to use on some silly science that scientists are “hoping” or “expecting” will get some where one day? it’s all a load of baloney.

By: Ned

Ned — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:04:16 +0000

I don’t really see how cloning animals is good for a species, threatened or not. One of the main goals of any breeding programme is to encourage genetic diversity to avoid inbreeding and disease. It’s like bananas – you get a whole bunch of basically identical organisms, and one virus can wipe them all out. Why would we do this to our livestock? Or an endangered species?

By: karluh

karluh — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 14:19:15 +0000

this is people playing god!

By: TH

TH — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 09:15:08 +0000

“Repulsive? Wow… how about “Ignorant” for you?

Cloned animals do not have exactly the same DNA, however the percentage of difference is so minute as to be nearly untraceable.

The animals will not look exactly the same, and over the course of their lives their DNA will drift. Point source mutations may occur each time that a strand of DNA replicates; this is affected by minute changes in the organism’s environment. Did background radiation knock at ATGC segment out of whack? Did malnutrition hinder the clean encoding of new RNA strands?

The changes are very very small, but nothing is an *exact* clone of it’s source code once it’s cells have replicated just a few times.”
———————————————————–

Way to form an uneducated comment… there is 0 evidence to say whether or not cloning has a small or greater effect on the DNA of the cloned specimen. The mere fact that a slight change in DNA can produce a completely different, look, or intelligence is enough to say playing god might not be such a brilliant idea. Instead of being irresponsible with our consumption and re-growth, solve that problem, become responsible, and stop looking for ways to make a glutinous mess out of humanity.