A-1 (imported) wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:15 am ...I suspect that few females will elect to have "artificial insemination" when the "real thing" is available. ... Of course, I imagine a few have experienced incompetence.

The big fear for men is that those women will just clone themselves and there will only be "Lesbian Women" on earth. They will not need men for anything.

Mac (imported) wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:25 am The big fear for men is that those women will just clone themselves and there will only be "Lesbian Women" on earth. They will not need men for anything.

Ha!

I don't think that will work.

...too many Muslims in the world...

A-1

ok, this will be a point, which will avoid cloning to become a general practice for a long time.

But perhaps there are some scientists who will change the written text of bible and other holy books into the female form: God -- > Godess, Jesus -- > Jessica, Maria -- > not necessary, holy ghost -- > Santa spirita etc. and the whole future is only in the female form allowed (rebirth...).

What you can do against it ...?

I'm fairly certain this is another "cold fusion." However, the Raielians have achieved cloning there are serious child abuse issues apart from the issues involved in a mature cloning technology.

1) Nothing has been done about the Hayflick limit. If the cell donener was thirty-five, and had a life expectancy of seventy-five, the clone's life expectency is FOURTY! Premature ageing is one of the major problems in manmalian cloning and a brutally cruel thing to do to an innocent.

2) Genetic damage is the norm in cloning. Nuclear transfer normally damages the chromosomes and the mismatch between the egg cell's RNS and the donated nucleus' DNA causes problems in and of itself. The main reason cloneing isn't revolutionizing animal husbandry today is the genetic damage factor. I can't see taking these risks with a child.

However, once the safety issue is resolved, I think that cloning humans would remain very rare. Why? If you can solve the problems of cloning, then nuclear fusion (cell nuculi not heavy metals) is simple. Why just clone one member of an infertile couple when you can blend their jeans. Thus if a eunuch and a nullo decided to have a baby, they could blend their DNA, just like a het couple.

In cloning the egg nuclei is removed from the cell and replaced by a nucleus from a donor cell that has the normal component of 46 chromosome. Then, the cell is stimulated to divide by electrical current.

In reply to your statement...

...

Astromancer (imported) wrote: Fri Jan 03, 2003 12:47 pm If you can solve the problems of cloning, then nuclear fusion (cell nuculi not heavy metals) is simple. Why just clone one member of an infertile couple when you can blend their jeans. Thus if a eunuch and a nullo decided to have a baby, they could blend their DNA, just like a het couple...

This has been tried by two different teams of researchers. One in Philadelphia and the other in Cambridge.

In a fertilized embryo the division does not begin immediately. Neither does the nucleus of the sperm fuse with the nucleus of the egg immediately. The two nuclei are referred to a "pronuclei"

It is possible to remove the sperm nucleus from a fertilized embryo and replace it with the egg nucleus from another fertilized embryo. Thus, this first embryo would have two mothers and no father and still retain the normal component of 46 chromosomes.

Likewise, if the first embryo were implanted with the sperm nucleus, then it would have two sperm pronuclei resulting in two fathers and no mother with the normal component of 46 chromosomes. (That's 23 pairs )

The sperm cell always determines sex. It will have either a "Y" chromosome or an "X" chromosome. Thus, the two mother embryo could only be female, and the two father embryo would have to be male or sexually defective with two "Y" chromosomes and no "X" chromosome.

When implanted into surrogate mothers both of them resulted in spontaneous abortion. (They mis-carried). In both the cases the embryos died in-uteri, both with defects as described below.

In the two-mother embryo a placenta fails to develop. In the two-father embryo the placenta develops but the embryo becomes a blob of undifferentiated cells with no discernable head.

Theory has it that the male sex chromosome has the instructions to form a placenta in an active condition. In the mother, the instructions on embryo development are in an active mode.

According to the theory this "imprinting" does not occur in lower animal forms that lay eggs.

I could go into more detail but it would serve no purpose.

Suffice it to say that before such a thing becomes even remotely possible we will have to know much, much more about the cellular chemistry of human cells and developing human embryos.

A-1

A-1 (imported) wrote: Fri Jan 03, 2003 3:45 pm When implanted into surrogate mothers both of them resulted in spontaneous abortion. (They mis-carried). In both the cases the embryos died in-uteri, both with defects as described below.

In the two-mother embryo a placenta fails to develop. In the two-father embryo the placenta develops but the embryo becomes a blob of undifferentiated cells with no discernable head.

These "spontaneous abortions" occur all the time in the human and mammals. Not every egg that is fertilized (conception) survives. In fact, many fertilized eggs are rejected by (as yet) unknown mechanisms. Doctors suspect that somehow the human body knows which are viable. On the other hand, if more than one egg is present when implantation takes place, the uterine wall changes chemical properties so that no extra eggs can attach. That's how the morning after pill works.

And one last thought - - If I really believed that raging, politically-active lesbians were going to take over the world through cloning, I would change my name to Rush Limbaugh and rant daily about Femi-nazi's on my radio show. Either that, or I would have my cock surgically lenghtened from its normal 2 inches to an average 5 inches.

Dave

"...

Dave (imported) wrote: Sat Jan 04, 2003 10:02 am Doctors suspect that somehow the human body knows which are viable. On the other hand, if more than one egg is present when implantation takes place, the uterine wall changes chemical properties so that no extra eggs can attach. That's how the morning after pill works. ...

"

Generally, the human female only forms one egg cell per menstrual cycle unless she has been on fertility drugs. So, only one fertilization is possible as a rule.

Twins (or multiple pregnancies) can result from...

1. The maturation of more than one ova in a single menstrual cycle.

2. The "splitting" of the zygote before implantation or the cleaving of the embryo after implantation.

Both of the #2 methods produce "identical" twins with identical DNA but the cleaving of the embryo is also responsible for most of the so-called phenomenon of "Siamese twins" of layman terminology.

Spontaneous abortion is a fancy name for miscarriage. It is not a failure of implantation, it is a natural pregnancy termination generally after the major organogenesis phase which is after 6 weeks.

The human body (mother) "knows" if the fetus is viable by way of chemicals, mostly protiens, in the mother's blood that have the ability to cross the placental barrier.

Since fertilization occurs in the fallopian tubes, the "morning after pill" does prevent zygote implantation in the uterine wall, but it also disrupts any implantation that has already occurred, unless the blood supply has become well established.

Because of the interference with the blood supply of the embryo, any use of this medication that does not result in miscarriage necessitates that a surgical abortion be performed to keep the mother from bleeding within the uterus. The fetus, if carried to term, is very likely to have significant birth defects including mental retardation if it is not stillborn. This is a result of the interference with the blood supply.

The zygote becomes an embyo at the time of implantation, and after the first 6 weeks passes the embryo becomes a fetus, with all the body systems and unique DNA (unless there is an indentical twin) and does nothing but grow until birth.

In my previous post I did not mention the fact that the placenta secretes a chemical that causes angiogenesis and that is what establishes the blood supply for the developing embryo. Apparently, in the female-female engineered zygote the mechanism that causes the secretion of the angiogenesis substance is not functioning properly.

Thus, the fetus has no way of parasiticitically establishing itself in the mother's uterus with sufficient blood supply to develop, and so it dies.

In my estimation it is a balance that we deal with here. If too much female influence is present, the fetus develops to a point where it finally "starves" from lack of external nutrient.

If too much male influence is present, however, the placenta develops at the expense of the fetus, hindering fetal development to the point that the fetus loses "viability".

Like I said, we do not understand the chemical processes. We probably never will because of the ethical concerns about human research.

Dave (imported) wrote: Sat Jan 04, 2003 10:02 am And one last thought - - If I really believed that raging, politically-active lesbians were going to take over the world through cloning, I would change my name to Rush Limbaugh and rant daily about Femi-nazi's on my radio show. Either that, or I would have my cock surgically lenghtened from its normal 2 inches to an average 5 inches.

Dave, I don't think that I would go that far, but I might just make a "cucumber" garden for all of the important females in my life...



A-1

I'll be first to criticize myself for such serious anwers.

(not that having the knowledge of how reproduction works is in any way bad, no, it's good to know about such matters)

BUT - - it looks more like a fake news story day by day.

I'm losing what little faith I had in the Raelian Cloning efforts!!!

Dave

...any middle-aged kook who runs around with a "fountain of youth" ponytail, an out of date "When the Earth Stood Still" surplus alien space suit and has only one name...well, let us just say that his dipstick isn't in his oil....



A-1

Somebody was able to obtain a picture of the first cloned baby. They suspect that it is a girl...

Here it is...

A-1