Your opinion on human cloning?

[AlexMCS]

I'm against it.

 

[KingVamp]

Reminds me of this.

Maybe in the far future there will be more ethical concerns with it, but right now we don't have the know-how to "age up" clones like you see in Rick and Morty or other sci-fi. So nobody's gonna get away with replacing the president with a baby, for example.

Full grown clones would still have to be genetically perfect and act just like you enough, to not get noticed. So, even if aged up, they would probably have to pass regular and DNA test to successfully replace someone like the President. That is, if they don't get caught beforehand trying to replace them, in the first place.

If we are getting full on Sci-fi, what about a hive mind of ninja cyborgs?

 

[krakenx]

Human cloning is going to happen in the next 50 years. Even if all the major nations ban it, as long as the technology and desire exists, wealthy people and companies will do it wherever it's legal.

Another related issue is whether or not to genetically modify humans. If you had the option to make your child extra strong, extra smart and immune to disease, would you do it? How much would you pay given that it's also an investment that would pay dividends throughout the person's entire lifetime. What would the class struggle look like when rich people could be actually genetically superior?

 

[Deleted member 42501]

Its been happening. Did a sheep in the 80s, went radio silent and now we conveniently have all these celebs who were handily born in the 90s and look way too similar for it to be chance:



Haters will say its (insert implausible justification).

 

[Lacius]

The more organisms with my DNA, the better.

 

[jos010]

clone my wife together with some adjustments should be alright

 

[gnmmarechal]

Hell yeah, once I'm dead what do I care. Unless they can resurrect my consciousness into a badass ninja cyborg, in which case, go for it!

Watch out, they make you fight a buff senator and a meme lover.

 

[GoldenBullet]

There's not really a reason to create a human clone other than scientific interest. Creating cloned organs that could be used for transplants is very practical though.

 

[FAST6191]

There's not really a reason to create a human clone other than scientific interest.

If you find a particularly special human (harder, smarter, faster, more docile, combination of particular traits you like, immunity to various disease, lack of certain traits), one that is mostly genetic level nature rather than nurture, that basic mate selection is unlikely to replicate to terribly easily* (maybe the traits you like are recessive to a serious degree) then cloning to reproduce that provides a pretty decent reason.
If you can combine it with some serious genetic engineering, maybe some cybernetics and some memory implants you are well on the way to something truly fun.

*smart parents tend to produce smart kids ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5754247/ ), harder to produce geniuses though.

 

[KingVamp]

Well, cloning could give people children to people that don't want or can't do so the regular way.

 

[FAST6191]

Well, cloning could give people children to people that don't want or can't do so the regular way.

The can't aspect maybe. Don't want to is more in the surrogacy (existed for a long time now, 1986 being the first there for gestational where a fertilised embryo is carried to term, probably ancient times for the sperm donor approach) and artificial wombs (sheep back in 2017 https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/25/...uterus-lamb-sheep-birth-premie-preterm-infant which is complex mammalian life as far as I am concerned rather than some of the fun they were having with artificial bacteria and viruses), neither of which involves any cloning at all but might benefit any cloning efforts.

On can't then further to that
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...m-to-raise-hope-for-infertile-men-5fxt0x6qhtf
2008 saw mice produce human sperm.
2016 or so https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2016.20817 , but also more recent stuff https://www.natureasia.com/en/research/highlight/13547/ on making eggs, albeit for mice.
You can also have three genetic parents these days if you are so inclined
https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2018/mitochondrial-transfer-making-three-parent-babies/
Cloning is not necessarily involved in this, though many of the same people would move in the same circles.

 

[GoldenBullet]

If you find a particularly special human (harder, smarter, faster, more docile, combination of particular traits you like, immunity to various disease, lack of certain traits), one that is mostly genetic level nature rather than nurture, that basic mate selection is unlikely to replicate to terribly easily* (maybe the traits you like are recessive to a serious degree) then cloning to reproduce that provides a pretty decent reason.
If you can combine it with some serious genetic engineering, maybe some cybernetics and some memory implants you are well on the way to something truly fun.

*smart parents tend to produce smart kids ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5754247/ ), harder to produce geniuses though.

I’d say that instead of wanting to clone someone with those types of traits, you would want to isolate those genes and give that to any embryo without just making an identical twin. Though, we are definitely closer in technology to cloning than genetic modification.

 

[FAST6191]

I’d say that instead of wanting to clone someone with those types of traits, you would want to isolate those genes and give that to any embryo without just making an identical twin. Though, we are definitely closer in technology to cloning than genetic modification.

Isolating gets harder (very few traits are single expression, and that is before we contemplate recessive and dominant aspects. https://www.sidmartinbio.org/what-are-examples-of-single-gene-traits/ for a nice enough primer on it and closely related subjects) but the modification aspect seems reasonable enough


Some of those may also go for adults* rather than having to drop down to embryos which is a whole other kettle of fish.

There was a Chinese scientist that claimed to have done it for humans and brought them to term
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00673-1
Though there are potential issues beyond ethical ones https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01906-4 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7427626/

Plus the whole nature-nurture thing is still in play -- you might be genetically keyed to be a genius but if your mother/embryo bearer was a drunk meth smoker carrying you in her 40s and you grow up in abusive hole all malnourished (though epigenetics and developmental psychology is probably for another time) then life outcomes are likely not so hot as a more ideal setup.

*to say nothing of things like