I think I read recently, on this site in fact, that scientists have figured a way to artificially make stem cells.
I can see how cloning is going to become common for everything.
I am pro cloning and think if they can create a better stronger human threw dna that we should. I think it is the destiny of our species to make and clone "perfect" versions of ourselves.
That said, because our spirits are tied to our bodies, I wonder how that would alter our consciousness as a species.
Are we just some puddle of math and science that you can toy and tinker with? Or are we crossing some invisible line?
If we are crossing the line so what? Isn't that our thing? Humans are all about crossing lines. After all didn't we create those lines?
Why do we perceive those lines to be there? I think because we are cognitive, maybe at some level, we don't want to give up a big part of what we are.
Humans feel a deep connection to their heritage. It's taken countless years threw hardships for us to get here.
What are we if we create ourselves? Where did all that hard gritty life history go? Are we still those people, humans, or are we then something different?
Edited: Oliron on 29th Sep, 2010 - 8:24am
International Level: Junior Politician / Political Participation: 70 7%
If we create ourselves by cloning ourself are we going to set ourselves up to be wiped out by our better selfs? Where DO we draw the line in all of this. What if we do make a more perfect human race. How are we going to tell who is who? Are we going to live in a society like the movie Galattica? Where blood samples are taken and those that are not perfect are considered sub humans? People who can only do the hard labor while the elite perfect class gets all the plush jobs that only they deem they can handle. We need to be careful as we advance in human cloning and human development. I can see the near future parents being able to pre-order what their baby looks like and the sex of their baby.
No, I am pretty sure if we hand crafted a "master" race that would be the end of humans as we know it. There would be a lot of resistance at first but I'm sure they would die out or exist only in small pockets. Then they to would eventually fade into the history books.
I too see this happening in the near future. Maybe not in the next 100 years or 200 even, but I think it's inevitable.
I think it kind of like the cold war. We have to make nukes because other countries are. Other countries don't have the laws we have and it won't surprise me if they start this process. I also would not be shocked to find out America has already been up to this sort of thing, and that the process has already begun.
It's not really a question of if. To me it's more a question of how far has this already gone without our knowledge. How long before it is a reality.
Edited: Oliron on 30th Sep, 2010 - 6:30am
International Level: Junior Politician / Political Participation: 70 7%
Direct Conversion May Make Embryonic Stem Cell Research Obsolete
Scientists made a major step towards making embryonic stem cell research obsolete when they used direct reprogramming to convert adult stem cells to an embryonic-like state. Now direct conversion is moving the ball forward.
The process of direct conversion involves changing one kind of specialized stem cell into another kind - and it eliminates the need for controversial embryonic stem cells, which some scientists promote because they can change into most any kind of cells.
It is also an improvement on the direct reprogramming technique pro-life advocates applauded because it moved the debate in a more ethical direction.
"I think everyone believes this is really the future of so-called stem-cell biology," John Gearhart of the University of Pennsylvania, who is engaging in direct conversion research, told the Associated Press.
"This is something that's really caught fire because it's an easy strategy to use," Gearhart said. "Everyone's out there trying their different combinations (of chemical signals) to see if they can succeed."
Gearhart also says direct conversion is helpful because embryonic stem cells are producing immature cells and the new process would produce mature cells that provide better prospects for patients and cures. Ref. Source 1
Obama Admin Suggests More Embryonic Stem Cell Funding
Taking advantage of an appeals court ruling striking down an injunction against his forcing Americans to pay for embryonic stem cell research, the Obama administration is looking at more funding.
President Barack Obama, last year, issued an executive order forcing taxpayers to finance embryonic stem cell research that doesn't yet work in animals and has never helped a single human patient.
Two adult stem cell scientists filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn the order, saying it hurts the efforts of researchers working with adult stem cells - the ethical kind that doesn't require the destruction of unborn human life to use to help patients.
A federal judge issued an injunction stopping federal funding, but the Obama administration appealed and an appeals court stopped the injunction while considering the merits of the lawsuit.
Now, an advisory panel to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has recommended that four additional embryonic stem cell lines - derived from obtaining stem cells from human embryos killed for their stem cells - receive federal funding. Ref. Source 8
Court: Obama Can Force Taxpayers to Fund Embryonic Research
A federal appeals court ruled today that President Barack Obama can force taxpayers to finance embryonic stem cell research that involves the destruction of human life and has never helped any patients.
Just months after he took over the White House, Obama overturned the protections President George W. Bush put into place that prevented taxpayer funding of new embryonic stem cell research but pushed millions of dollars into research associated with adult stem cells, which have already helped patients with more than 100 diseases and medical conditions. Bush also pumped money into finding embryonic stem cell research alternatives that don't involve destroying human embryos for their stem cells, and Obama overturned that executive order as well.
In lawsuits challenging the Obama executive order, plaintiffs contended the order violated the 1996 law known as the Dickey-Wicker amendment that prohibits the federal government from using taxpayer finds to destroy human embryos in scientific research. Last August, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth ruled that Obama executive order likely violates that law against federal funding of embryo destruction.
James Sherley of the Boston Biomedical Research Institute and Theresa Deisher of AVM Biotechnology had also argued that Obama's order discriminates against adult stem cell researchers who are already helping patients now as opposed to the embryonic stem cell scientists who have yet to be able to use embryonic stem cells in patients because of problems in animals such as immune system rejection issues and the embryonic cells growing tumors after injection.
But a three judge panel of the U.S. Court of appeals in Washington overturned a judge's order and a 2-1 majority said the law was not violated.
In his initial ruling, Lamberth noted that the imposition of an injunction required that those challenging the government's funding demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits for their arguments. Apparently, they succeeded. Ref. Source 2
Second spinal cord injury patient in stem cell trial
(Reuters)
Biotechnology News
Reuters - Doctors have begun treating a second patient injected with human embryonic stem cells in the spine as part of a landmark Geron Corp clinical trial testing the cells in spinal cord injuries.
Source: Yahoo! News: Biotechnology News