Remember Dolly the cloned sheep? She was a breakthrough and all, but the method used to create her, apparently, was inefficient. Scientists have now developed an easier method to clone animals (mice so far), and it only requires is some skin cells and an early embryo. Get ready for an ethics debate!
When carried out, the technique makes it possible to create partial and complete clones out of adult skin cells. Scientists merely place the skin cells in an early embryo—in-vitro fertilization doctors would be able to do this, no problem, it seems—and wait for the skin cells to develop. That’s obviously a simplification of the process, but more or less the idea.
The big dilemma out of all of this is that, since the method is relatively easy to accomplish, it’s likely that unscrupulous scientists may use it to clone humans left and right. Even worse (I suppose) is that this particular method could be the first step toward designer babies, that is, babies with features you request. “We’d like a baby with blue eyes, please.” One scientist put it:
So for instance if we had a few skin cells from Albert Einstein, or anyone else in the world, you could have a child that is say 10 per cent or 70 per cent Albert Einstein by just injecting a few of their cells into an embryo.
Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Epsilon?
via Drudge Report
I consider CrunchGear a reputable source of technology information. If CrunchGear is reputable, then why are they sourcing from Drudge Report?
I can appreciate CGs desire to be out front with tech info, but Drudge is like that little brat at the horse stable – constantly throwing crap against the side of the barn. Sure, some of it sticks, but for the most part he just makes a huge, stinking mess.
If using Drudge, I’d recommend finding a second source as confirmation.
The story is actually from The Independent (the linked “developed an easier method” phrase), a British newspaper that won the British Press Award in 2004. Other winners include the Financial Times and The Guardian. “Real” newspapers, not tabloids. I just found it via Drudge, like you’d find a newspaper story on Google News or Yahoo.
-na
Sorry – should have known that you’d do that wonderful thing called “fact-checking”, and should not have assumed the worst.
I do get a fair amount of email from doorknobs who feel that “if they see it on the internet, it must be true”. Sadly, sometimes their source is Drudge. Although Drudge can be a convenient place due to its consolidation of many sources, Drudge throws crap out there, especially right-wing crap. (There’s a lot of generalization in this paragraph… If you want specifics, I can dig up instances where Drudge did propagate BS)
It was wrong of me to assume that you’d pick up a story without verifying it.
Tom, I have heard only positive reports of Drudge’s journalism. I would be VERY appreciative of ANY instances where Drudge made false claims or propagated misinformation. Thanks for your help!
Nice Brave New World reference, but you forgot Delta!