Genetics/The controversy of cloning
I'm doing a school paper on the controversy of cloning and I would like to know:
1. Do the benefits of cloning outweigh the risk?
2. Would it ever be possible to clone a human organ without having to clone the whole person?
3. Can cloning be useful for livestock owners and farmers, if so how would they use the technology?
Bearing in mind this is a paper for school
Let me answer the questions in order
Benefits and risks
An almost carbon copy of a subject with all its good and bad points
An opportunity to follow the development of any abnormalities again and again providing an aide to research
There could be a direct multiplication of any errors in the genes leading to unpredictability.
Shorter life span
Difficulty in separating the clone from the original. A clone only duplicates the physical copy not the literal copy, nor does it have the life experiences of the original.
Human organs are developed by the prudent extension of the genetic structure directing cellular division to follow a specific route for the organ concerned. So cells earmarked as a liver or kidney will develop into that organ. There are key proteins that code the cell to create structures that form into the organ. Is this possible from dna taken from an organ? Not at present, but will it be possible yes. However to reach that level of coding would require a complete sequence of every cell in the original specimen and the ability to influence each cell code to complete that sequence in order.
Consider the liver, it is made up of a number of separate parts each part having cells designed for that single part. In order to produce that organ stem cells would need to be directed to develop a certain way with constant monitoring at every stage. It would be easier to harvest a complete specimen and allow organs to be removed to suit.
Dolly the sheep
See the link http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2764039.stm