Mass Production of Humans - New Technology

[Stormin Norman]

Could I get your thoughts and comments on this new development in the world of cloning? This article was taken from New Scientist Online News 19:00 30 January 02.

Chip could create mass-produced clones

A chip that will automatically create hundreds of cloned embryos at a time is being developed by a Californian biotech company, New Scientist has learned.

If it lives up to its promise, the chip should help make cloning cheap and easy enough for companies to mass-produce identical copies of the best milk or meat producing animals for farmers. It might even be used for cloning human embryos.

The chip automates the laborious process of nuclear transfer, the key step in cloning. At present it takes hours of painstaking work with a microscope to remove the nucleus of an egg cell and replace it by fusing the denucleated egg with another cell.

"If somebody's got something like that, obviously it would make everybody's life easier," says Tanja Dominko of Advanced Cell Technology, the Massachusetts company that caused a stir late last year when it announced that it had created cloned human embryos.

Urchin eggs
In animals, cloning is still very wasteful. At best, around half of cloned embryos develop to the point where they can be implanted, and only a tenth of these survive to birth. Often more than a hundred nuclear transfers must be carried out to create a single clone.

Scientists usually start with a batch of 150 eggs, and denucleate them one at a time before moving on to the next step. That means eggs can be left sitting around for several hours, a delay that may reduce success rates.

But the nuclear transfer array developed at Aegen Biosciences, by the company's founders Richard Kuo and Gregory Baxter, could handle hundreds or even thousands of eggs at once. Kuo says they can routinely denucleate 30 to 50 sea urchin eggs at a time. They plan to start testing cow eggs in the next few weeks.

The prototype is a thin silicon slice a few centimetres across etched with hundreds of tiny wells, one for each egg. The trick is to spin the chip in a centrifuge, forcing the eggs' dense nuclei through a small hole at the bottom of each well. About 90 per cent of the eggs can be successfully denucleated this way, Kuo says.

Kuo and Baxter are now working on the next step, which is to fuse a donor cell with the denucleated egg. A lid with appropriately positioned donor cells will be placed on top of the eggs. "Then they're ready to fuse," says Kuo, although he won't reveal details of the method. After fusion, eggs that develop far enough could be implanted manually into an animal's womb as normal.

Too expensive
"If it works with cow [eggs], that would be very neat," says Rudolph Jaenisch of MIT, who studies problems with cloning. But just because it works with sea urchins doesn't guarantee that it will work with the eggs of other species, he warns.

And Randall Prather of the University of Missouri, whose team recently announced the cloning of miniature pigs, says the chip won't help solve other problems, such as ensuring that the eggs you use have been kept in the right conditions. He thinks it might also be too expensive for many labs.

Kuo admits there is much work still to be done on the chip, but he believes it's worth the effort. One could submit different batches of eggs to various treatments, to find out which conditions improve success rates in cloning, he says. Such studies could also help researchers identify the factors in eggs that reprogram the added nucleus.

If the chip does improve success rates in animals, it is likely to be used to create cloned human embryos, where the problem is not dealing with many eggs at a time but getting hold of sufficient numbers of eggs. Companies such as Advanced Cell Technology hope to obtain embryonic stem cells from cloned embryos but have had only limited success.

The chips might also appeal to the mavericks who want to carry out human reproductive cloning despite all the warnings about the risks. The warnings are based on the health problems seen in the few clones that do survive, which have also prompted the FDA to ask companies not to sell food from clones until it has been proved to be safe.





(Edited by Stormin Norman at 3:24 am on July 15, 2002)


(Edited by Stormin Norman at 3:26 am on July 15, 2002)

[Anonymous]

Im in favour of cloning where it is not used for cloning humans, i feel that it is a step forward and would make it a lot easier to acchieve great advances in the field of medicine.
I cant even see much of a problem with cloning sheep because whatever has been done to a sheep before it has been born it is still an individual from the moment it takes its first breath.

[Thine Stalin]

I still believe that if we clone, it might aswell be more useful than cloning some animals, cloning people, taking their vital organs and donating them, seems more useful, even if our first few clones botch up, we'd still get the organs.

I just don't understand why everyone is so obsessed with ethics, clones could be used to create super-humans, taking the best genes from our greatest people and creating a perfect being. People could become tools for the state if we clone, we could make muscular people for certain jobs, and intelligent people for others.

Like an ant colony, everyone would be born into their role, and with human intelligence, size, strength and ability to do more than just the minimum requirements for life, we could really get somewhere.

Cloning animals is a waste of time unless you're gonna use it to make more panda's because they never fuck anyway.

[Anonymous]

Have you never seen the film Antz? it isnt nice to be just a member of the hill!

[Stormin Norman]

I am not even going to respond to that Thine. It is obvious what kind of a person you are and I am not about to discuss anything of significance with a complete doofas.

[Xvall]

Thine. LOL. You sound like Hitler. No offence. Just not with racism. Still. I'm not sure about clonings. It would be pretty rude for a person to be raised just to be killed and have their organs donated.

[Moskitto]

Doctors can already grow human organs from DNA without the need for cloning a new person. They have been able to for some time.

[Mazdak]

Cloning is fine however, it to some extent halts evolution. If you keep reproducing the same person (regardless of personality), the uman race will stay the same and evolution stops. This is a problem because humans will be unable to adapt to conditions in the environment.

This is unless, we use technology to help us adapt(like SCUBA gear, astronaut suits, and so on)

[Anonymous]

I am 100% agains cloning, Hitler wanted to make mass cloning to make super Arian soldiers, but his scientist failed, like they failed in producing the nazi bomb (A bomb) like they failled in producing at time jact planes, all this gave the world today new guns new ways of destruction, cloning maby one of the futures weapon! imagin in some years a devoted army! selected individuals! and dont come say "it can be used for good!" cause it wont like the atomic power, it could be used to produce energy! but it created the most deadly weapon! so is genetic engeeniring! who ever played return to Castle wolfenstein? well all of that is today possible! and who knows if it is alredy a hidden possibility? Playing God? carefull the Armaggedon can Come!

[Mac OS Revolutionary]

The thing is, when do the clones stop being human and become a product of humanity?

[Thine Stalin]

I played that stupid game, I still can't get passed the 3rd or 4th level where they have the scientist throwing needles at you.

Besides humans aren't meant to adapt, our intelligence helps us change the enviroment to suit us. And the Nazi's did have a jet plane.

How am I a complete doofas when YOU are a self-proclaimed right winger, who are notorious for never accepting new idea's, if it were up to you we'd all still be in the stone age only with nuclear warheads. I say your political alignment shows your intelligence as it is, with your arguements which are used over and over even though, none of us really listen to them, so you just waste your time. All we're looking for is one minor mistake we can take and exploit, and while you merely have history to say 'communism is bad!' we have alot more to say why capitalism is bad besides your history. Take a look at your pathetic disgusting ethics, and then call me a doofus, look at the shit you are defending.

[Anonymous]

Thine Stalin: are you talking to me?

[Thine Stalin]

No, stormin norman.

[Anonymous]

Got to agree in some way with Thine, Humans have reached a state where they needn't worry about adaptation. We are the dominant species on the planet and to a certain amount we have the right to alter our surroundings. I still think nothing good will come out of human cloning, too much opportunity for it to be abused. I know this is going to rise to the arguament that it should be manipulated by the communists first becuase otherwise nazis would take advantage of it but i still dont like it.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Cloning should be allowed only for Kobe beef and Pam Anderson

[Anonymous]

can you clone silicon?

[Lardlad95]

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 7:30 pm on July 15, 2002
Cloning should be allowed only for Kobe beef and Pam Anderson


Pam Anderson (laughs hystericaly) you can pick abetter women than that...and a better actor

[Moskitto]

I think i'd like a clone of myself which I can summon when needed.

Or i'd like to become, "Electricity Man." Where I can fire lightning out of my hands. That would be cool, but i'd be getting way to carried away.

[Brian]

Quote: from Thine Stalin on 5:21 pm on July 14, 2002
I still believe that if we clone, it might aswell be more useful than cloning some animals, cloning people, taking their vital organs and donating them, seems more useful, even if our first few clones botch up, we'd still get the organs.

I just don't understand why everyone is so obsessed with ethics, clones could be used to create super-humans, taking the best genes from our greatest people and creating a perfect being. People could become tools for the state if we clone, we could make muscular people for certain jobs, and intelligent people for others.

Like an ant colony, everyone would be born into their role, and with human intelligence, size, strength and ability to do more than just the minimum requirements for life, we could really get somewhere.

Cloning animals is a waste of time unless you're gonna use it to make more panda's because they never fuck anyway.
Why don't clone some people with Blond hair and Blue eyes while were at it.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Lardlad95 on 8:18 pm on July 15, 2002

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 7:30 pm on July 15, 2002
Cloning should be allowed only for Kobe beef and Pam Anderson


Pam Anderson (laughs hystericaly) you can pick abetter women than that...and a better actor


I'm not worried about the acting, dude.

[Brian]

Cloning is not that bad,with cloning now every man will have his own copy of a hot sexy women.


(Edited by Brian at 10:38 am on Aug. 13, 2002)

[Lardlad95]

still a better looking woman

[RGacky3]

Personally I am against cloning. I think if science continues we will eventually destroy our selves. I see TS's point, only already every one is good at something and has a place in society. I think that technology only screws things up. I think things would be much nicer if we regressed a little in some areas, (not medical).

[Brian]

Quite your *****ing!

(Edited by Brian at 4:46 pm on July 15, 2002)

[Anonymous]

Why to clone when we can make humans by the natural way? Fucking is bether than cloning!

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from RGacky3 on 9:42 pm on July 15, 2002
Personally I am against cloning. I think if science continues we will eventually destroy our selves. I see TS's point, only already every one is good at something and has a place in society. I think that technology only screws things up. I think things would be much nicer if we regressed a little in some areas, (not medical).


I would like to believe that our technological proficience will eventually yield a world in which technologies that clean up the earth and contribute to the advancement of man outpace the technologies that tend to diminish or destroy man.

[Moskitto]

I would like to believe that our technological proficience will eventually yield a world in which technologies that clean up the earth and contribute to the advancement of man outpace the technologies that tend to diminish or destroy man.

How much "Call to Power II" have you been playing?

[marxistdisciple]

Technology is great....saves lives, makes living better and stuff usually. What's the great thing about a "super race?"

Who decides which people to clone?

It would end up a dull world, with armies of people who looked identical, no differing opinions, and people in the same jobs with exactly the same inteligence levels. Because they all thought the same way, they could never think of different ideas to each other. That sounds like robots to me. Terribly efficient, not terribly interesting though. It would really suck after you had gone out with three girls who looked almost identical.

How would you tell who was who? lol

[Hattori Hanzo]

fuck cloning of embryos for growing
up with embryo research, just don't fuck the workers

[RGacky3]

fuck technology, why can't we live in little vilages and pick blueberrys together like the smurfs. some technology may save lives, thats good. but the majority destroys lives, destroys the enviroment, makes people lazy, destroys simple pleasures, most are used as a tool to exploit, they make are lives more complicated, and they suck. Why can't we all pick blueberrys damn it!!!!

[Brian]

You say fuck technology,but your using technology right now(your computer dumbass).

[marxistdisciple]

Gacky, we'd all be dying of the diseases they now have cures for. (TB, malaria, smallpox, polio,rubella etc etc.) Technology does bring bad things. But not inherantly.

It's the people that don't think about it's use, just create it for the sake of. What moron really thought the nuclear bomb would be "beneficial" to mankind? What business goons used computers as an excuse to sack people? (who invented the bloody button pushing things when you call banks?!?!)

What about the person who invented the gun? It's not the knowledge itself, it's what people do with the knowledge. Unfortuately we will always have people who think they are superior to the rest of the human race. They are the ones who need to be retrained.

I am an avid socialist, I also programme Access Databases for a job. I get badly paid for my efforts, but I take pleasure in doing something that can reduce the menial tasks in people's jobs, and give them more time to do more interesting things (like actually talking to people instead of working on figures.) (okay that was slightly opinionated.)

I think technology is useful if it removes dullness from peoples lives, but not when it takes over peoples lives.

[Brian]

Atomic Bomb got us to Nuclear Power.Using the power of the atom could be in use in the future.


(Edited by Brian at 10:40 am on Aug. 13, 2002)

[Hattori Hanzo]

Quote: from RGacky3 on 8:24 pm on July 17, 2002
fuck technology, why can't we live in little vilages and pick blueberrys together like the smurfs. some technology may save lives, thats good. but the majority destroys lives, destroys the enviroment, makes people lazy, destroys simple pleasures, most are used as a tool to exploit, they make are lives more complicated, and they suck. Why can't we all pick blueberrys damn it!!!!

haha
i just love that image of you- "i want to fucking pick blueberries!"

[Anonymous]

But even the Smurfs lacked a perfectly equal society. Papa Smurf was a despot.

[marxistdisciple]

I found a funny site on the smurfs;

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1709/

lol pretty funny

Yeah I'm sure fision power will be the main source of energy in the future, however that doesn't have the dangers of nuclear meltdown, and can't be used to kill thousands of people. How was the H-Bomb beneficial? How was C4 beneficial? these are wonderful weapons man created, technology is great....but when it is designed to kill people, I think the people who design it must have some kind of different moral plane to everyone else.

Like britain and america exporting arms to countries in turmoil, and then going...oh dear, didn't realise they'd use them to kill people....is that what weapons are for? duh. It's clearly some weird kind of logic I can't grasp.....What's it called? Oh yeah, it's business.

[Guest]

Quote: from marxistdisciple on 8:01 pm on July 17, 2002
Technology is great....saves lives, makes living better and stuff usually. What's the great thing about a "super race?"

Who decides which people to clone?

It would end up a dull world, with armies of people who looked identical, no differing opinions, and people in the same jobs with exactly the same inteligence levels. Because they all thought the same way, they could never think of different ideas to each other. That sounds like robots to me. Terribly efficient, not terribly interesting though. It would really suck after you had gone out with three girls who looked almost identical.

How would you tell who was who? lol




We should make clones for our mars colonialization, which should happen someday, maybe see how succesful it works. Set 'em up with their own goverment and everything.

[marxistdisciple]

Sex is far more fun.