From: CurtAdams@aol.com
Date: Wed Sep 11 2002 - 21:13:46 MDT
In a message dated 9/11/02 17:55:08, weidai@eskimo.com writes:
>On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 12:01:22PM -0700, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
>> Unless you introduce a natural selection sieve to filter the damaged
>> programs -- reproductive cloning (as currently conducted) is a very
>> bad idea.
>
>How does reproduction work naturally? Do our bodies manage to keep our
>germ cells from being damaged, or is there an internal sieve to filter
>out
>the damaged germ cells? Can we make use of these natural mechanisms for
>reproductive cloning?
The problem does not seem to be cellular damage but that certain processes
called imprinting are supposed to happen in the germ lines. The processes
are different in male and female germ lines, and a healthy embryo requires
both male-imprinted and female-imprinted DNA. We could theoretically
get around this by engineering replacements for imprinted DNA or altering
cells to do both imprintings at once, but either is far beyond our current
capabilities.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:58 MST