Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Winterthorn" data-source="post: 558771" data-attributes="member: 1702">This is very important. (I was going to speak of DNA 'age' myself--but was beaten to it!)Here's a relevant 'tale': I know from my own laboratory experience that healthiest outcome for any population is full genetic 'mixing' that comes from sexual reproduction. The cladocerans daphnia magna and ceriodaphnia dubia are examples of organisms that reproduce parthenogenically (mothers producing daughters--no sex) during environmental 'good times'. The daughters are genetic copies of their mothers--clones in the most 'natural sense' one could think of--but there are only X many generations before the entire gene pool collapses and the population dies out! Basically the DNA in these small multicellular organisms 'wears out'... The population's gene pool ages. (Now think of the cell populations replicating mitotically in your body, 'carbon' copies one cell generation after the next...) Fortunately, more often than not there are environmental pressures on these organisms, and a generation of both males and females will emerge. They have one last frolic <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> and the females produce zoospores encased in a mantle that will slough off to lie dormant until environmental conditions improve--usualy this means over winter. Then we start all over again when the 'eggs hatch'.The moral of my story: genes get tired if you push your luck. Cloning a highly complex multicellular organism, such as a human being, is an extremely difficult endeavor right now. And even if we succeed in producing a new generation or two of ourselves--it really won't last... We are far better served by sexual reproduction and the assisting technologies that support it. Our survival, as a species, depends on  sexual reproduction. Over the next while there will be much talk about theraputic cloning verses reproductive cloning. Be careful, there is, as it stands today no technical difference with respect to generating a clone! The only differences lie in the intentions regarding what is being done to the cloned organism (harvest stem cells or allow the 'tampered' egg to 'come to term')... (I would be concerned about 'old DNA' in the stem cells for tissues grown to, say, replace a diseased liver. If that extends a person's life a few years that could be a worthwhile pursuit--but what are the costs? Consequences?) The distinction is subtle but important--watch how the media and the political "big-mouths" mess up the facts to swing our opinions one way or the other...Wow... That's a long post--please excuse the typos <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> While I did 8+ years in environmental lab work, my background facts are from memory--I may have erred on some small details. I hope the above offers 'food for thought'.-W. B.Sc. Biology (Ecology, Evolution & Animal Behaviour)PS: I grew up in Quebec... Those Raelians are just a sci-fi cult that attracts the sexually repressed... I wonder what the Scientology cult thinks of this? My GM mind reels at the possibilities... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

Verification