First cloned baby due January

[Lizzer]

Yes, just read that an Italian doctor has confirmed that the cloned baby is in its 33rd week of gestation. What do you all think? I'm totally against this, scared that the human race has offcially gone mad and let its ego rule its thoughts... We have to stop power hungry minds grabbing our lives and changing them, irreparably. There are advances in medical science which can help human life to thrive and then there's this. A totally pointless exercise with its foundings in personal gain and we are powerless to stop it. Its not the baby that is important in all this, its the glory....

Actually, it is the baby that is important in all this - there's very good evidence that the baby could have severe problems and a much shortened life by being a clone. Quite apart from the moral issues of whether we should clone humans or not, the technology is just too young and we know too little about the potential consequences to dabble at this early stage.

You're right though, they're in it for the glory

I feel its so morally wrong. One thing that freaks me out is a clone cant possibly have a soul since it wasnt a creation from God. To me this is hard to even think of.

How can parents explain to the child if it even works out where they came from or how they were created. It just isnt a normal thing to do. They would probally feel like a freak (that is if the parents dont choose to tell them something else of how they were born).

GeorginaA - sorry I meant that the baby wasn't important to the scientists in all this, not the rest of us who actually care about someone's quality of life. Can you believe that they have people out there being screened for all sorts during their pregnancy in case there is anything wrong yet some woman (I wonder how much she is being paid?) will go through all this, possibly for nothing...
I agree with your sentiments, threeangels - although I'm not Christian I totally believe we have souls and that there is more to us that tissue and organs...

threeangels: for what it's worth, God is so much bigger than all of us, and so much more powerful, he/she wouldn't spurn an innocent just because of human stupidity. The technology is such that life is encouraged to develop in a certain way - the invention of the life itself, the invention of how the cells develop into an embryo etc is still God's creation.

I'm a pagan not a christian, but I believe the above should hold true for all of us if there is a loving God who created this universe. If there isn't, then the whole thing is a moot point anyway.

hmm... invention isn't quite the right word, but I hope you understand what I mean.

anyone seen the film Gattacca? Interesting on this subject. Might come back to this.

Threeangels - I am sorry to say this, but I am really cross by your posting. You are entitled to your religious beliefs (I am an agnostic), but the inflexibilty of some religious people beggers belief sometimes. If there is a God (or whatever), how dare you suppose that you know what 'he' is thinking about this poor innocent child. I had a very interesting discussion with my dh the other day, where we were discussing what we thought the soul actually was. My personal view is that it is merely the brain, and that once it is no longer, the soul is gone. Of course, you will not agree with this, having been brainwashed by religion.

I don't want to turn this into a religious thread, and also disagree with cloning for other, non-religious reasons. I just wish that religious people could accept that there could be another truth to the whole 'what comes after death/who created life' debate, and stop being so black and white about things that they have no scientific reason to believe.

Sorry, this is not personal, I'm sure that you are a lovely person. I just object to people assuming they know everything about life because they have had it preached to them from a book written 2000 years ago. I know that all the church goers are now going to attack me, but I don't care......(blows raspberry)

So sorry if I offended anyone. Didnt intend for it to be a religious post. Rather then start anything neg everyone please ignore my post. Ive had bad experiences in the past in posts which made me feel very awful and Id hate to start to feel like that again. Thanks

Sorry too...In my angry response, I didn't think about toning down my comments about religion. I have said in the past that everyone has a right to their opinions, so should have stuck to that opinion and ignored your posting, as I have with done others that I have felt strongly about. I don't want to make you feel unhappy about posting, as I too felt that the previous situation was horrible.

NYR - To think for 5 minutes before posting controversial comments, so that they are sufficiently harmless!

Calm down Chinchilla, the same works both ways you know You're right, at the end of the day we can never "know" for sure, but I don't think there's any harm in speculating out loud (or in this case in print). Each to their own.

LOL ... sorry chinchilla, posted at the same time as you

But aren't twins just clones? Yes, I accept this particular Italian doctor may well be in it for the glory but not sure that the whole science of cloning should simply be abandoned in its infancy.

I wonder if the reason so many people do not believe in God anymore is because mankind thinks it is 'God'? To create something in this way simply takes the magic away. Creation, natures way, is beautiful and breathtaking, creation, mans way, is false, clinical and horrible.

What separates us from animals is our souls, our soul is what defines us as individuals, it is why we cry at old movies, why we are spontaneous, why we ponder so much about the universe, why we have irrational fears and why we can just laugh at anything! I truly believe that we are 'different' from animals in a way that cannot be explained by evolution. But sometimes I think animals have better sense than man, and sometimes I would rather be an animal than tarnished by being part of mankind. When I hear about cloning, that is definitely one of those times!

I think the vast majority of people are opposed to cloning for moral reasons. But what if this was your only chance to have a child? Would you take the risk then?

To my mind it is terribly, terribly wrong. Aside from all the moral implications, nobody yet knows the physical effects on the children concerned. It wasn't so long ago that they reported that I think all the animals which have been cloned so far have physical abnormalities, or have died very prematurely. Even without the moral arguments (which to me rule the whole thing out before you've even started) we have not even begun to have anything like enough information on the long-term effects for this thing to even be considered.

My own opinion is that we are trying to play 'god' (I'm an athiest, just for the record) and there are just some things which should be left well alone. I feel we are racing, very quickly towards self-destruction. We are messing around with things that we can't possibly control and sooner or later we are going to pay for it. It really, really upsets me that this has been allowed. I feel very strongly that it shouldn't.

I find all the genetic stuff really scary - medicine has gone so far, and treating humans for illnesses is fine, but when you start altering DNA, it is like you're altering the bricks that we're built of, and surely the scientists can't know the results.

The moral issues to do with cloning don't bother me at all (I think). The reality that clones have all sorts of health issues... to create a child just in the name of science knowing their high likelihood of birth defects & long term health problems.. in a world already overcrowded; that's very, very creepy.

Spot on, Zebra. (or should that be stripe on??) I totally agree with your POV. It seems bizarre that some doctors are busy cloning babies while others are aborting them. I'm not anti-abortion (would hate to go back to the bad old days) but it seems to be such a contradicion that surely there must be a better way forward for humankind?

Hmm, SueDomin, what I think we need then is the technology for baby transplants! "You don't want to carry the baby to term? Well this couple here is desperate for a child, mind if we implant it into her womb instead?"

Would solve a lot of problems!

Not sure what I feel about this really, but I do quite clearly remember my mum saying that IVF was a horrific thing to do and that all IVF babies would / could have problems. I was quite young at the time so can't really remember if there was a public outcry at such an artificial way of baby-making, and now we all (well, mostly) accept IVF as tried and tested method of allowing an infertile couple to have children.

Won't we all be thinking the same about cloning in a few years time once the technology has been improved to minimise the risk to the child?

You're right, Titchy, there was an outcry at the time of the first IVF baby. It was a year before I had a baby and there was all sorts of coverage. I think there was also a Royal Commission to set out guidelines, although my memory of that could be mistaken.

Baby transplants?? There's a thought, though you could say that adoption is a sort of baby transplant. Adopting babies is very common here in SE Asia because many middle-class women don't want to be pg because their bodies will be 'spoilt' for their husbands, so they buy babies. There are always babies available from prostitutes, beggars and others who cannot afford to keep their children. The price depends on the type of features the baby has. The more western-looking they are, the higher the price. Cost also varies according to supply and demand. Many illegal workers were deported from Malaysia earlier this year and a baby could be bought at the refugee camps for US$35. To say I was shocked to read about it is an understatement.

Anyway, this is off topic, sorry.

The chances of the baby having physical problems (as has happened in cloned animals) really worries me. It is too soon for us to be doing this.

Another thing that really worries me is psychological. My mum and her sister are identical twins; in effect clones of one another. And yet they are so different in personality. How will the parent(s) of the clone react if this new person doesn't turn out just like them? If the parent just wants a baby, and their infertile partner can't face using a donor, then maybe it's alright - but what about if the parent really wants a baby just the same as them? There's no guarantee they'll turn out that way, even if their genes are the same.

Baby transplants? Wouldn't this lead to all sorts of 'genetic heritage' type issues????

bah anais! I thought I'd come up with the perfect solution too :P

3angels, surely as God is all powerful then this new person could not exist without his permission and so will have a soul just the same as anyone. After all Jesus wasn't produced with egg and sperm (a clone of God?) yet was fully human, wasn't he? Do you think that there has to be egg and sperm to make a person human and therefore have a soul. What do you mean by saying this person isn't created by God? Surely that would equally apply to babies born by IVF or ICSI? I am not attacking you, just interested in how this theory works.

Hi all, I hope, as titchy says, that it will just be a case of medical advances still in their early stages and will go on to be ok and accepted in the future - but where does this end? The clone phenomenon has its roots in science fiction along with babies being gestated in a glass tank etc. Is it a case now of our future is a bad hollywood movie? Can we not side step this outcome and provide ourselves with a future that works WITH nature and not contriving against it? Obviously not, as the scientist will have his dream at the cost of whatever it takes. Unfortunately this thread will have to wait til Jan to see how the baby is doing, perhaps we should hope that everything isn't alright purely for the reason that then the program will be halted. But HOW can you wish that of a BABY?? Argh - drives me nuts just thinking about it...