What are some of the upsides and downsides of cloning, especially the cloning of endangered or extinct species
493684
Cloning has become a widely debated issue in the media since 1996, when a group of Scottish scientists led by Ian Wilmut cloned Dolly, a sheep that was the first clone of an adult mammal. The cloning process involves destroying the nucleus of an egg cell of the animal that will carry the clone and injecting a donor nucleus from the individual to be cloned into that egg cell. The resulting egg thus has a nucleus from the donor animal (which may be an endangered animal) and can develop into an animal that has the same genetic makeup as the donor, thus making the resulting offspring a clone.\n\nSince Dolly's appearance, a wide variety of uses for mammalian cloning have been proposed, including using cloned animals to produce superior livestock and to simplify the process of creating transgenic animals (genetically modified animals that can make human proteins in their milk, for example). Several groups have suggested cloning endangered or recently extinct species. A company called Advanced Cell Technology used a cow named Bessie to clone an Asian gaur, an endangered oxlike animal native to India and Burma (the cloned gaur died of an ordinary disease two days after his birth). Scientists also hope to move on to cloning extinct animals, perhaps starting with the cloning of the now-extinct bucardo mountain goat from Spain; scientists froze some tissue from the last living animal before the species became extinct.\n\nCloning endangered and extinct species has raised heated debate in the scientific community and beyond. On the one hand, many say it may offer us an opportunity to protect animals such as the giant panda from extinction so that our descendants will be able to see the beauty of these creatures. Some claim that cloning may help us bring back recently extinct species. Still others just want to have an opportunity to see a mammoth. (By the way, cloning mammoths from tissues frozen in Siberian permafrost is considered impossible with the current techniques because their DNA has become fragmented. In addition, scientists do not think that fossilized species such as dinosaurs can be cloned.) Indeed, if successful cloning of an endangered or recently extinct species is possible, we may be able to boost the populations of these animals.\n\nOn the other hand, cloned populations consist of genetically identical individuals, leading to high susceptibility to many diseases and slow adaptation to the environment. In addition, some argue that introducing extinct species back into the wild may upset the natural balance and have disastrous effects on the populations of other species. Such concerns are probably not as relevant with recently extinct species, where their extinction has usually been caused by human interventions, such as destruction of habitats and hunting. We do have to consider such issues when we start talking about bringing back mammoths, but the cloning of long-extinct species is still only a theoretical possibility. Concerns remain, however, that endangered and recently extinct species could be brought back to a world where their habitats no longer exist, and they will only be able to survive in zoos.\n\nAnother concern voiced by animal conservationists is that cloning endangered species would be viewed by the public (and governments) as an alternative to the breeding and habitat-protection programs already in place. Such possibilities are especially alarming as cloning techniques become cheaper and may be viewed as a less costly alternative to the more traditional means of protecting endangered species. Of course, cloning cannot serve as a substitute for such programs, because cloned animals lack the genetic diversity that is crucial to survival, and they still need habitats to live in.\n\nAs you can see, cloning is far from being able to serve as a Noah's Ark that would save all endangered species from extinction, but together with habitat protection and breeding programs, it may help some endangered and rece
143218
Dont mess with nature. \n\nScientists should respect nature more and work within the ethical guidelines.\n\nMany things can go wrong, just like first cloned sheep Dolly. (had immune system problems, and aged faster etc.)
1156545
In general changes to the DNA of a species poses a risk of unexpected results.  Nature is generally in more or less of an equilibrium.  When sudden changes occur that balance can be upset.  Like when new predators are introduced into an area and their prey is wiped out.  Or when a plant is introduced to a new area and spreads uncontrollably.\n\nCreating "new" plants can have the same kind of impact as moving plants around from one part of the world to another.\n\nAdditionally there is some concern that taking DNA from one plant and embedding it in another plant's DNA (e.g. to improve resistance to insects, drought, etc.) could have adverse effects (e.g. producing allergic reactions where none had existed).\n\nThere's no right answer.  As with any technology we have to weigh the total impact (on humans, the environment, etc.).
14531
at this point there are more pros to the research (currently being investigated) but we must be careful not to take away(OR create a market that takes away) a human life inorder to improve our life. thats what people are ultimately afraid of this research turning into.which would be you being cured of a desease by doctors injecting into you part of an unborn dead fetus or a cloned one.
1163027
It depends on the purpose the cloning is fulfilling. If we clone racehorses, we could have a bunch of Secretariats running against other Secretariats and their may be the demise of a great industry.\n\nHowever, if cloning, genetic engineering and selective reproduction have a well defined intent and the end result can benefit humankind, then let's do it. Not being a moralist, I would like to see science continue researching the distinct benefits all forms of reproduction have upon all of the species on the planet.\n\nThe protests that are being offered against artificial or any other form of selective reproduction, must be taken into consideration on a scientific basis and not offer up the old adage, "if God intended man to fly, He would have given him wings" in regards to reproduction.\n\nIn a day and age when it would be very wise to keep our religion and morals to ourselves, we should allow science to progress within reason and justification. In a nation that prides itself in a government 'of the people, by the people and for the people', I say, lets all be a part of the decision making process regarding sin and science and...\n\nGod help us toward that decision.
3240
Cloning is the process of creating an identical copy of an original. A clone in the biological sense, therefore, is a single cell (like bacteria, lymphocytes etc.) or multi-cellular organism that is genetically identical to another living organism. Sometimes this can refer to "natural" clones made either when an organism reproduces asexually or when two genetically identical individuals are produced by accident (as with identical twins), but in common parlance the clone is an identical copy by some conscious design.
110014
1)Cloning isn’t very successful. Currently scientists have to attempt to produce hundreds of clones just to get one success. The rest of the clones either resulting a spontaneous abortion or else are deformed deformed and die or are euthanased shortly after birth. Obviously we can’t ethically apply such a technique to human babies, even if we could find women willing to carry children with a high probability of miscarriage or being born deformed.\n\n2)It’s a worthless exercise. Genetics is only a small part of  what makes someone intelligent. Environmental effects such as diet, childhood stimulation, education and upbringing are far more important.  Even if we could clone Einstein we almost certainly wouldn’t end up with anyone of any great ability.\n\n3)It’s ethically and legally impossible. Einstein gave consent for organ harvesting, he never gave consent to being cloned. You simply can’t do this legally, which means it could only possibly be achieved by a Mad Doctor, possibly using a lightning rod. Possibly working a a castle on a high peak in Transylvania. Necessarily with an assistant named Igor.\n\n4)It’s physically impossible, at least with modern technology. Cloning requires live cells. Al has been dead for some time. Even if technology reaches appoint where we can clone animals form dead cells we still won’t be able to use remains that have been pickled in formaldehyde like Al because formaldehyde destroys DNA. Maybe in another 50 years or so we will have the technology tot allow use to reconstitute shattered DNA, but not today.
151379
Is this what cloning basically is? Asexual reproduction? And are we headed toward making a "perfect" species?  \n*** does this mean humans will become extinct in the not too distant future?
823360
Well....cloning is just making out a genetically identical individual from an individual. To begin cloning is of two types..natural and artificial...Natural is the one which happens in nature by mitosis in eukaryotes and binary fission in prokaryotes...you can give tonnes and tonnes of examples for this(anything identical to another thing is a clone of tht 'another' thing........i can even say that DNA replication is cloninf of the original DNA molecule....thus cloning can be a broad term but here i m jus tellin you about cloning of organisms or cells). Artificial cloning methods are the ones which humans use for various reasons(wich are not ethical) Artificial cloning would include tissue culture, embryo cloning, tranferring a diploid nucleus to an egg cell to get an identical organism(as in case of Dolly the sheep), etc., and etc.,  so you can devide cloning into many types....................................
122035
Cloning?\n\nScientists believe that we can cure many diseases and solve the transplant shortage by growing extra body parts or organs.\n\nHowever, there are serious moral and ethical reasons why human cloning is looked upon as negative.  Cloning is not a perfect technique and may result in many short lived, malformed babies before it becomes standardized.  Secondly, creating genetic twins still means someone has to (currently) give birth to the baby.
224688
People might have different views about cloning. But  if  organs are cloned for people who cant find any donors ,then its right and should be encouraged.But this technology should be handled with extra care, so that it may not get misused
473558
Cloning should not be legal. My reason is because God made each person unique in there own way, because he did not want people to be the same.Cloning makes an exact replica of a person or an animal, and god does not want that.
265671
Depends on what kind of cloning you are talking about.\n\nThe term "cloning" can be used to describe inserting a foreign gene into a bacteria... or creating a genetically identical copy of organism.\n\nTo create an identical copy... you would require an oocyte (an egg) and a somatic cell.  You'd need to remove all the DNA from the egg and the somatic cell... then inject the DNA into the egg.  Along with other factors and after growing... you will have an organism gentically identical to the orriginal.\n\nCloning genes into bacteria involves a plasmid (circular piece of non-chromosomal DNA).  You would need to open up the plasmid using restriction enzymes (DNA scissors basically) and cut the gene of interest out with the same enzyme.  Mix them then insert into your bacteria by your favorite method (electroporation, chemical method, heat/cold shock, micro-injection).  Let the bacteria grow (all bacteria in a colony are gentically identical to the parent... for the most part)
905254
Everything you need to know about stems cells can be found on this page:\n\nhttp://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics4.asp\n\nCloning is creating a viable embryo that is an exact genetic copy of another animal (or plant?).  In animals, cloning is usually done by harvesting unfertilized eggs from a female, extracting the DNA from an egg, and inserting the extracted DNA into another egg to substitute for fertilization.  Cells other than eggs may also be used, but eggs are easiest to work with.
469349
The cloning of animals, while promising, has many problems that would need to be adressed before the cloning process would be more effective than simply breeding the animals. A surprisingly low success rate of creating clones, along with the possibility of genetic defects being passed on and the expensive equipment required to perform these processes are large deterrents to cloning in today's world.\n   \n   The famous sheep, Dolly, was one out of numerous attempts to clone a single sheep.  Creating multiple clones would require either an enormous amount of equipment or an improvement on current methods to prevent only a small population of clones successfully being created.  In addition, any flaws in methods used could result in genetic defects.\n\n   Any unseen genetic defects in an animal to be cloned could ruin a large number (if not all) attempts to clone the animal.  Any animal to be cloned could possibly need extensive testing before the cloning process begins; again, slowing down the idea of mass-producing foods or medicines without the use of more equipment to attempt to create more clones.\n\n   Cloning equipment, in order to do its duty, needs to be precise.  Such equipment will not come cheaply.  While in the future, prices of this equipment may drop due to the aging of the technology or the possibility of mass production in the future, it is still expensive, as no kinds of grants or rebates by any government organization exist(as far as I know).\n   \n   If cloning equipment and techniques were improved upon, the cloning of animals would be very helpful to society.  As these techniques are now, however, it is not much more beneficial to clone animals as it is to simply breed them; a much more cost-effective solution for the present.
297180
The pros are being able to learn about the effects of different genetic patterning.  Perhaps solving some questions of nature vs. nurture.\n\nThe cons very from reducing genetic variety, which can lead to weakness of the cloned species because a certain stressor could knock out the whole bunch if they are genetically the same.  Every time something is copied usually something is lost.  Also cloned species can have unknown effect on other species. For example, some form of genetically engineered corn which is resistant to pests also kills off monarch butterflies that consume a portion of the plant.
366636
there are some efforts going on to bring mammoth to life by using its frozen sperm. with an african elephant. as far as cloning goes i dont have any idea.