4 ms·

I'm not sure we know whether anybody has or not. Technically speaking if you can do sheep ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_(sheep) https://en.wikipedia.or

I'm not sure we know whether anybody has or not. Technically speaking if you can do sheep ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_(sheep) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_(sheep) ) , then it's probably just a matter of time before a human attempt would 'succeed'. Though bear in mind the clone is likely to have genetic problems due to the process. In a lot of countries it's deemed unacceptable to attempt/illegal to attempt it. So if you had succeeded you are unlikely to be trumpeting the fact. Also practically - why? What is the point? Perhaps a deluded billionaire thinks the world would be better off with an army of themselves? Dunno. Perhaps the most logical use would be as a walking spare parts bank for said billionaire - again you wouldn't advertise you are doing that.... Remember natural clones - identical twins and up, are not actually that rare - 1 in 65 births in the UK is a multiple one, with a 1/3 of those being identical. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/pregnancy-and-baby/what-causes-twins/ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/pregnancy-and-baby/what-causes...

perl4ever 7y ago
"why? What is the point?" A government or something with similar power wants to "improve" their society via eugenics. It's vastly more efficient with cloning.
- DrScientist 7y ago
  If you had a science driven eugenics programme then the scientist would say a population with identical genomes in all respects is an accident waiting to happen ( think everyone killed in a global pandemic for example because of identical immune systems.... ) - ie not 'genetically' fit. ( The scientist also might question whether the goal is actually achievable - nevermind ethical ). Also depends on what you mean by cloning - if you wanted to create lots more twins then actually you could probably trivially do it today by following the existing twin process - ie viable embryo and splitting at early stage. ( https://academic.oup.com/humupd/article/23/2/156/2527545 https://academic.oup.com/humupd/article/23/2/156/2527545 ) That would be 'cloning' and give you a identical base genetic background on which to start making changes. However most people consider cloning to be taking adult cell DNA and creating a new viable embryo from that - which is tricky to do without genetic damage. The reason people want to do the second nuclear transfer approach is they want to select the DNA to used based on adult characteristics - ie you only know Mozart was Mozart when he grew up not when he was an egg. However in my view that kind of eugenic thinking is deeply flawed.
  - perl4ever 7y ago
    "a population with identical genomes in all respects" I'm not advocating this sort of thing, but that's an extreme straw man and neither what I was describing nor what anyone would do. Some country with say, a billion people, could make a million clones of the smartest person in the country, and who knows what else, and still have 99% of the pre-existing diversity.
    - DrScientist 7y ago
      Assuming all the suppositions about these clones all being smart ( however you define that ) are true. Then do you really think these million people will be working for you???? :-) Or will it be the other way around....
      - perl4ever 7y ago
        I don't have any knowledge of how to brainwash smart people, but that doesn't mean it can't be done.

perl4ever 7y ago

"why? What is the point?" A government or something with similar power wants to "improve" their society via eugenics. It's vastly more efficient with cloning.

DrScientist 7y ago
If you had a science driven eugenics programme then the scientist would say a population with identical genomes in all respects is an accident waiting to happen ( think everyone killed in a global pandemic for example because of identical immune systems.... ) - ie not 'genetically' fit. ( The scientist also might question whether the goal is actually achievable - nevermind ethical ). Also depends on what you mean by cloning - if you wanted to create lots more twins then actually you could probably trivially do it today by following the existing twin process - ie viable embryo and splitting at early stage. ( https://academic.oup.com/humupd/article/23/2/156/2527545 https://academic.oup.com/humupd/article/23/2/156/2527545 ) That would be 'cloning' and give you a identical base genetic background on which to start making changes. However most people consider cloning to be taking adult cell DNA and creating a new viable embryo from that - which is tricky to do without genetic damage. The reason people want to do the second nuclear transfer approach is they want to select the DNA to used based on adult characteristics - ie you only know Mozart was Mozart when he grew up not when he was an egg. However in my view that kind of eugenic thinking is deeply flawed.
- perl4ever 7y ago
  "a population with identical genomes in all respects" I'm not advocating this sort of thing, but that's an extreme straw man and neither what I was describing nor what anyone would do. Some country with say, a billion people, could make a million clones of the smartest person in the country, and who knows what else, and still have 99% of the pre-existing diversity.
  - DrScientist 7y ago
    Assuming all the suppositions about these clones all being smart ( however you define that ) are true. Then do you really think these million people will be working for you???? :-) Or will it be the other way around....
    - perl4ever 7y ago
      I don't have any knowledge of how to brainwash smart people, but that doesn't mean it can't be done.