If I remember correctly, the problem with the sheep was that they had made a clone from adult cells, and it seems that the cells somehow have a kind of memory of their own age - so the sheep died very quickly, of old age, since its cells were waaay older than it was.</font>[/QUOTE]<font color="#ff6666">I think it is the telamerase or telemeres that cause this aging thing. I did some research on cell aging once. Each time a cell divides a bit of the telomere gets nipped off, and when the telomere gets too short then the cell cannot divide any more and dies or some such. Been a while and I am not even sure of the spelling.

I won't believe the Baby is actually a clone untill he/she is examined by outside researchers. This italian guy strikes me as a bit dodgey.</font>

That's the way I remember it M. The sheep was born with a cellular age based on the actual age of the animal from which it was cloned.

So for this to work it all, at this point at least, you'd have to clone a very young person, preferably a baby. A 90 year old millionaire who wanted a few more years with Anna Nicole wouldn't get much help from this technic. ;)

Is this the same doctor who, in the past couple of years, was trying to help a couple that lost their young child to some tragedy clone her?

pretty scary. If you believe in that stuff, what happens to a cloned soul?

Heh, yeah, well you really do have to "believe in that stuff" for that question to be a problem [img]smile.gif[/img] Unfortunately, many people do believe in that stuff, and this could hinder the speed at which the bugs get ironed out :D

<font color = lightgreen>Even if this doctor's claims are true, there are no ethical, moral, or moral questions that I can see here.

Should we clone humans? Well, we'd better not ban it in America, because someone else will do it somewhere else. Honestly, I think the benefits will outweigh the risks.

Do cloned humans have souls? What kind of question is that? Is the clone of a human not a human? Of course they have souls. [img]graemlins/dontknowaboutyou.gif[/img]

Are some people going to "pervert" cloning to create particular traits such as hair color or intelligence? The complex interaction of genetic sequences make such exact fine-tuning of human traits impossible; at best, it would be 50 years in the future before anything like that would be possible for even the simplest traits.

I say continue with cloning research. Push the boundaries of human knowledge! [img]graemlins/awesomework.gif[/img] </font>

As a professed Christian and a biologist, I have to confess that I do not have problems with cloning. Come the bodies whence they may, God is the authority on whether they have souls. We have cloned several species, and if it is "all right" to clone humans, Nature, (or God Himself) will let us know. So, like Azred, I would say that knowledge is morally neutral. It is how you use it that counts. [img]smile.gif[/img]

The way I see it, is cloning science is an amazing thing. I can see the way people can see it as wrong or playing god, but I think it is great. Couples who can't have children, people who need transplants etc.
I mean, if you followed it you could grow whole bodies for people. It is kind of strange GROWING people, but I think that the upsides to it far outweigh the downside.

I agree in principle, but Id prefer to see some better success rates. And theres that cellular ageing thing - condemning a child to die young dosent seem right.

I dunno, but it seems to me that I would be kind of depressed if my parents one day decided to tell me, "Oh yeah, by the way, you were an experiment and you're probably going to die in a few years." Seems kind of unethical to me.

Whats the point of the cloning where talking about here? Cloning would be more interesting if it really was the Cliche'. (Not the one where if you step into a machine and you and a copy of your self stand out!)
But the ethical dillemma of "I'm a copy of another person! :( " May get to great. I say if they don't die of being sick, they'll commit suicide.