Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Cloning-genetic eng.

  1. Sep 20, 2003 #1
    cloning--genetic eng.

    i am wondering, if anyone knows anything about cloning, and weather partial cloning is leagal or not ( cloning an organ, instead of a whole body) i also want to know what other people think about it. i think that it should be used, and i believe that full clones of animals should be made to, so that animals can be experimented on, or special animals that are rare, and have special atributes don't have to be breed, but cloned.

    also i think that full clones should be made, if for no other reason than to do tests on, and to use as slaves (cruel yes, but they aren't the origanal so why should be care?), or the smarter one, could possibly have a use in the government, or other special area.

    i read that in 20yrs the oceans will not be able to be commercially fished, and i thought couldn't genetic eng. help to keep the oceans populated, or something i am not really sure what to think, i don't know tons about the subjects i am talking about, which is why i am posting these, because i think that somehow the kids at my high school would know what to say to these questions, so if i asked something that seems dumb, i am sorry, and could you tell me how i am being a retard, so i don't continue to make thse mistakes.

    -josh
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 21, 2003 #2

    LURCH

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Cloning of individual organs is legal, but so far noone has been able to do it. Cloning of animals is within our reach, as we all saw with Dolly, but the success rate is still very low. But I think you're right that it should be used for rare animals, esp. those that are in immediate danger of extinction. It might even be possible to bring back recently extinct species, if we have preserved samples of them somewhere. Like Dolly, the clones might tend to live short lives, but during that brief span they might be bred to establish a viable population.

    Using human clones as test subjects or slave labor would be no better than using any other kind of human for these purposes. Keep in mind that human clones do already exist; and identical twin is quite literally a clone in every sense. If you know any identical twins, you can imagine making one of them a slave or a test subjects, and it would be exactly the same thing.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2003
  4. Sep 27, 2003 #3

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Another use of cloning would be cloning for organs. You wouldn't try to grow an individual, but would take pluripotent cells and try to have them grow into a liver, or whatever organ was needed by the person you took the cells from.
     
  5. Sep 28, 2003 #4

    FZ+

    User Avatar

    I don't think cloning is a plausible solution to that. As yet, cloning is an insanely complicated, fallible and expensive process, and even with refinements, reliable mass-cloning is unlikely - even undesirable, as large numbers of unadaptive fish are unlikely to be very survivable. Genetic modification to create large breeding rates for fish? Maybe, but the release of such a gene, if it were possible, would be disastrous to the oceanic environment, especially due to changes in their habitat.

    It seems more plausible to invest instead in fish farming, or to simply lower demand until fish stocks recover, as fishing becomes less commercially viable.
     
  6. Nov 19, 2003 #5
    Cloning happens everyday - twins.

    The main problem we have with cloning today is aging. If you take a cell from a 40 year old, then the germ line will start off at that age. Now if we took a cell from a new born - that would be another story.

    Nautica
     
  7. Dec 6, 2003 #6
    Actually...ide hate to put it this way but your wrong..or atleast not uptodate with all of the current knowledge. In natural reproduction 3 things must happen inorder for everything to work. These are: reset the telomeres, reset the X-Inactivation, and reset the imprints.

    Telomeres. As we age our telomeres get shorter. the telomeres are the very tips of the chromosomes and are about 1500-15000(i cant remember exactly) nucleotides long. Essentially each time our cell divides these shorten and when they are depleted they turn cancerous. The intresting thing is that our DNA codes for an enzyme called telomerease and this will rebuild the telomers. Cancer for example finds a way to reactivate this (kinda spooky if you ask me). But when Adult DNA is transfered to a new neucleus and starts dividing this enzyme gets activated, hence aging isent the problem. (though people are looking into the possibility of reactivating telomerase in adults creating biological immortality)

    X-inactivation. This is simply the process in witch one of the X chromosomes in a female is inactivated. Cloaning usually dosent have to worry about this.

    Imprints. The 1 and seemingly only thing that stands in the way of "perfect" healthy cloans. Out of ~30000 genes only 50 have imprints (25 from mom and 25 from dad). These imprints are a special protein that is bonded to the DNA that prevents it from being transcribed (turned into a protein) Imprints are used primarily in embryo development. They prevent too much of a protein from being produced, such as cellular metabolism. The effects of one of these getting messed up can be seen in Angelman (AS) and Prader-Willi (PWS) syndromes. The problem is that after we are born our imprints begin to decay because they are nolonger needed. So if someone where to take a skin cell or something and try to make a cloan of it, it would be very unlikely that it would have all of its imprints still intact.


    This is very true... infact "normal reproduction" only succeeds 25% of the time... Now, this is mostly true. However the Ralians claim to have a sucess rate of 50%. Yes, thats right folks, using an unnatural process, having second hand equipment, and little experience they claim to have a sucess rate greater than that witch occures in nature. But im not going to go off about them too..lol...
     
  8. Dec 7, 2003 #7

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Of your three factors, the imprints seemed odd to me. Your description seemed like a description of fetal regulation, but that is a much more complex subject that cannot be reduced to this little one parameter imprints teechnology.

    Is imprints a Raelian term? AFAIK, the Raelians have produced press releases, but no clones to show the public.
     
  9. Dec 7, 2003 #8
    yeah, imprints are deffinately "odd". however, they where only discovered recently so much isent known about them. But it is of my understanding they work similar to the insulation stuff they use around wires. But yes, they are used in fetal regulation. But that really gets into embryology. Also, imprints isent a raelian term. I dont even think they have the right to coin scientific terms, that is, they dont even follow the correct process of reporting break throughs. common, a press release? Argh, i have know idea why people follow them (im not trying to offend anyone out there, but really)

    on another note, nautica stated that taking them from a newbourn would be diffrent. And it would. Most likely it would greatly increase the sucess rate, but it would most likely not surpass the "natural way".
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Cloning-genetic eng.
  1. Dog Cloning (Replies: 42)

  2. Cloning Coral (Replies: 2)

  3. Cloning question (Replies: 4)

Loading...