In response to the old post above that in fact was quoting me I will add that I was suggesting cloning the child with the disorder in order to study its development genetically in vitro and prenatally.
I was never suggesting that we take such a child to term, only part of the first trimester should be sufficient to offer enormously important data. I am explaining in a cold calculating manner why such a technique may offer valuable data and why the issues of therapeutic and reproductive can be rightly argued to have a "gray zone".
That said I am in general agreement that it is not politically viable at this time to make this the central issue and the reason I came to this thread today was to list two articles that are important to the topic and one overlaps reproductive cloning and the other GM foods and cloning. The subject even overlaps the looming global trade war and certainly the contradictory politics surround emerging tech in the food chain, third world economics and first world politics.
Also China launched a man successfully into space yesterday and also did a "triparent" fertilization with respect bioengineering. So in response to Caliban's criticism so long ago I think the evidence is mounting that they are becoming a serious contender in this field.
LL/kxs
Wired Magazine:
{excerpts}
http://image73.eguar...ent18897-0.html(visit the links on the page)
Cloning Remains a Meaty Issue By Kristen Philipkoski
02:00 AM Oct. 15, 2003 PT
The Food and Drug Administration soon will decide whether the meat in your Philly cheese steak or your barbecue spareribs could come from a cloned animal.
Because of safety concerns, the FDA has barred the handful of companies that clone farm animals from selling them for meat. But since early this year, those companies have been submitting data -- generated by independent research firms -- to the FDA.
The specifics of the data will remain confidential until Oct. 20 when the FDA plans to post the research online for public review. But the majority of companies say that, in general, the research shows no significant difference between regular and cloned animals, suggesting that cloned meat would be perfectly safe for human consumption. Consumer watchdog groups are skeptical, and say cloned meat should at least be labeled.
The FDA will hold a public meeting on the topic Nov. 4 at its Center for Veterinary Medicine in Rockville, Maryland.
*****
"It's up to the FDA to determine (whether cloned meat is safe), but our research shows no material difference between non-cloned animals and cloned animals," said Ray Page, chief scientific officer of Cyagra, an agricultural cloning company and a recent spinoff of Advanced Cell Technology.
"All of the clones we have looked at, at ViaGen and Prolinia (a subsidy of ViaGen), have appeared to be just like normal animals," said Scott Davis, president of ViaGen, an animal genetics company.
A 2002 National Academy of Sciences report said there was no evidence that cloned meat was dangerous to eat, but more data was needed to be certain.
********
Public reaction to genetically modified foods in the United States is significantly milder than in Europe, where protests, some violent, are much more prevalent. But Mendelson said that's because most Americans are unaware that they're already eating genetically modified organisms.
One FDA focus group found that when Americans learned this fact, they were amazed and outraged.
But whether consumers want the information isn't the FDA's main concern. Rather, the agency must determine what risks exist and then decide how to manage them. Matheson said he hopes to achieve the first part of that goal at the Nov. 4 meeting, and the management part by January 2004.
Animal welfare is another concern. In cattle, from 10 percent to 50 percent of cloned embryos become healthy cows. The numbers can be much lower in other animals, and animal rights groups protest the fact that many clones that don't survive to adulthood are born sick and malformed.
The 2002 National Academy of Sciences report was more concerned about the environmental impact of cloned animals than the potential health effects upon people who might eat clones. The scientists said the potential for cloned or genetically engineered animals to escape into the wild is worrisome.
__________________________
http://news.bbc.co.u...lth/3189718.stm{BBC Scinece excerpts}
Tuesday, 14 October, 2003
Foetus with three parents createdThe technique is banned in Britain A controversial IVF technique could see babies being born with three parents, scientists have suggested.
Experts in China say they have created embryos using eggs from two women and sperm from one man. The embryos were implanted into a 30-year-old Chinese women with fertility problems.
While she suffered a miscarriage, scientists believe the technique could help other women. It is the first time scientists have used the technique since it was outlawed in the United States in 1998. The procedure is also banned in the UK.
The woman had previously undergone two IVF cycles. However, these failed because of problems with her eggs.
Eggs fused Scientists at Sun Yat-Sen University, in Guangzhou, tried to overcome this problem by fusing the woman's egg with one from another woman.
Eggs consist of a nucleus which holds most of their DNA and surrounding material called the cytoplasm. This type of experiment couldn't be carried out in the UK said a HFEA spokeswoman
Scientists removed the DNA material from the donor egg leaving just the cytoplasm. They then put the nucleus of the patient's egg into the donor egg, in a process called human nuclear transfer.
These fused eggs were then fertilised with the man's sperm. In all, the scientists transferred five of the three-parent embryos into the woman. She subsequently became pregnant with triplets. One month into the pregnancy, doctors aborted one foetus to give the remaining two a better chance of survival.
However, the remaining two were both delivered prematurely and died at four and five months into the pregnancy respectively. The scientists said the deaths were not related to the IVF technique they used, but rather due to complications as a result of a multiple pregnancy.
They believe the technique could be invaluable to women whose eggs are not healthy enough to support a normal pregnancy. However, critics have attacked the experiment and accused the scientists of taking a major step towards human cloning.
"The potential for abuse of this type of technique could be mind-blowing," a spokesman for pro-life group Life said.
The technology behind the Chinese experiment was developed in the United States. *****
