What's New Commentary

Should animals be cloned to increase food production? To pursue human disease treatments?

Sorry this discussion area is now closed. Below are comments by visitors.

Future Needs, Anonymous UserSaturday, March 15, 1997 - 03:42:27 pm:

The very real need of providing food for a growing human population is a reality. Doesn't it make sense to try any new techniques which will help provide for the billions of human inhabitants on this planet? I am concerned however, with reducing the genetic diversity of food sources-- which are important to their long term survival. I would agree with regulation cloning of animals for production but I would not agree with limiting research at this stage.

Food for Thought, Dennis GouldSaturday, March 15, 1997 - 05:43:45 pm:

Cloning for the purpose of producing food is a viable partial solution to the world food shortage. Strick world regulations must be in place before mass cloning occurs to prevent profiteering and over production. I know this answer belongs to the other question about human cloning, but I forgot to include it in my response for that question. Other mistakes in the cloning of humans would be: How would the world like to have more than 1 Hitler, Charles Manson, Lee Oswald, Son of Sam all the other sick perverts running around in triplicate. The world has to many sicko's now, let's not diliberately make more. To pursue human disease treatments with animals is fine with me, as long as the animal is not injured, mis-treated or killed for the sake of killing!! I'm not a left wing bleeding heart, but to physically hurt any living thing puts us lower than animals, at least animals injure in their own defense, or kill only for food. I hope we never become morally lower than the animals.

Re; Food for Thought, Ron HipschmanSaturday, March 15, 1997 - 11:23:21 pm:

Dennis, remember that we would also be producing more Einsteins, more Mother Theresas, more poets, artists, scientists, etc. I doubt that we would intentionally clone more Hitlers, etc. Also, since humankind already kills for killing sake, mistreats and tortures its own, and lets suffering continue to further political ends, by your definition, we are already lower than animals. However, I agree with your sentiments. We should always try to treat both animals and humans as "humanely" as possible

Paranoia Will Disappear, James Henry CarrSunday, March 16, 1997 - 06:46:31 am:

If indeed there is a need for increased food production, yes, I feel cloning is a viable solution. To me there is no difference to that of natural reproduction. I feel that the paranoia felt with coloning will disappear the same way that it did for "test tube babies",etc.

Wholly, Wholistic, Holy!, Gerald FosterMonday, March 17, 1997 - 07:28:30 am:

It would not be right thinking to curtail any process which a wholistic universe allows, but that same universe waits in suspended anticipation of the degree of wisdom which we exert in proceeding. President Clinton was thinking correctly when he suspended federal processes, but only until our wisest people can do their work in guiding the effort. Human beings have a significant role to play in the song of the cosmos, and I would not like to see it muted unwisely.

DEACUERDO, MANUEL URREAMonday, March 17, 1997 - 12:36:18 am:

SHOULD ANIMALS CLONED TO INCREASE FOOD PRODUCTION.._ YES

go on with clon humans!, Sal AtxondoWednesday, March 19, 1997 - 02:22:14 am:

I completly agree with the option of clon human. We are not very human in deed. That it's just an option for the people who want to have achild and there no moral in the world to avoid it. The lawer or the politicals are not free of charges in the moral statement. Go on with the science!

From a 9 year old, Carmel TanakaWednesday, March 19, 1997 - 11:26:16 am:

Cloning would be great for humans in great need. On the other hand, what if cloning goes too far and a bad situation is created. Also, I am not so sure, I would like more like myslef running around. Maybe, my mom would like more of me to help her with the dishes!!!!

Cloning plants and animals, Deborah LeslieWednesday, March 19, 1997 - 11:57:37 am:

Cloning can be very beneficial to humankind when used for farming and animal husbandry as the best of the best would be produced, making farming more profitable as there would be less disease and birth defects to deal with. However, policies would clearly need to be established to assure that only certain animals and plants be bred. In the pursuit of treating human diseases, I am not sure that animals should be used at all.

Be cautious to clone, David ZhouWednesday, March 19, 1997 - 11:44:30 pm:

Are we have the right to change the genetic way of other animals just because we want more food or pursue human disease treatments? The answer must be negative. In the ethics way, we,human beings, and other kinds of beings, are a part of nature. Noboby empower us to clone other species. Every kind beings has its own way to generate,boom and fade. We have interrupt the nature process too much. Leave the last Eden to these species. In the science way, the diversity of the genetic material is also a very important resource of the Earth. If we use the clone widely,it is sure that most of the gene will be extinct. The result will be what,no one knows.So, in a very limited scope,the clone research can be done.But,please do not use the technology as a copying machine.

Cloning to be or not to be, Anonymous UserThursday, March 20, 1997 - 04:53:57 am:

Cloned animals are a breakthrough in human disease research as they allow work to continue on animals after they've been pumped with a certain amount of chemicals. I have no rational reason why I don't agree with cloning but there does seem something wrong with it and I wouldn't be surprised if some sort of side affect will make itself known in future. The other issue is ofcourse for every good use of cloned animals there will be a less altruistic use of cloning. At a very basic level there will probably be an increase in fraud as the identity of a particular animal will be difficult to define.

Hunger, AnonymousThursday, March 20, 1997 - 07:38:40 am:

Hunger is a big problem in the Third World countries . I think that cloning is dengerous but only when cloning is use by army or privat organizations which want to clone people .Coning of Animals isn't rather dengerous . Cloning is chance for many people to survive.

Science vs. morality, HabukuThursday, March 20, 1997 - 09:15:43 am:

Yes,if it was used to help those countries where starvation is a problem. It would be ok to have these organs available for patients who are desparetly waiting for organ donors to prolong their life. No, there is no acceptable way if one believes in the sovreignty of God!

monoculture, Ron RitaThursday, March 20, 1997 - 09:37:35 am:

Thursday, March 20, 1997 In reviewing the letters submitted thus far, I feel one of the things overlooked in previous submissions is the problem we have faced in the past and contuniue to be faced with today; monoculture. Monoculture is a problem resulting from the lack of genetic variation in plants that we as humas have indirectly selected for. In the persuit of larger ears of corn, seedless watermelon, and freestone nectarines we have eliminated, in many instances made extinct, genteic varieties that we do not desire. In doing so we have also lost genetic variation that naturally provides immunity or resistence to disease. Past experience has shown that single varieties of corn resulted in the devastating loss of corn crops in the midwest due to a single disease. The great Irish potato famine was the result of a single fungal attack on potatoes, none of which were retistent because they were only selected for mass production. It is only within the past few years that we have realized the need for wild genetic varieties of edible plants and have begun to store their seed germ. With this history in mind I think it would be a mistake to clone for human food production. Selection for larger cattle, leaner cattle is inevitable and would certainly result in a lack of genetic variation.

Animal Cloning, DebThursday, March 20, 1997 - 12:22:54 am:

Yes,but only selctively for medial research.

Big hope for the "third world", Filip StefaniakFriday, March 21, 1997 - 05:20:21 am:

Cloning of animals is the big chance for the countries which aren't prosperous. The countries copeing with the problem of hunger (like many of african and asian states) probably look with hope at possibilites of cloning. I think that the utilization of cloning in the nutritive purposes (food industry) will become our future reality.

Let's take a step back. . ., Anonymous User :)Friday, March 21, 1997 - 05:53:37 am:

Starving countries will not solve all of their problems with the advent of animal cloning. These countries will also need land and facilities to raise animals and food to feed those animals. Further, won't cloning interfere with the process of natural selection?--how will this affect our world's populations in the "big picture." I think humans need to realize that there's a lot we don't know and we're stepping into dangerous, unchartered waters when we interfere with a powerful process like evolution.

it's good for food bad for humans, E.J. Friday, March 21, 1997 - 09:32:31 pm:

I think that cloning is allright for animals but not for people because you cant replace a human it's wrong there are other reasons too like if someone got in truble and he had a clone and the clone did it he might get in troble and I think that that stinkes.

I think cloning is only appropriate for increasing food production and research in the prevention of disease in humans., Connie SemlerSaturday, March 22, 1997 - 10:49:53 am:

Clonning, Jennifer BurkeSaturday, March 22, 1997 - 06:54:07 pm:

NO! For every action there is a reaction! We would be setting off the balance of nature, how do we know what kind of an environment this would cause for our grandchildren and great grandchildren? And last but not least, ethically it is 100% WRONG!!!!

Snell.exploratorium.edu, MelissaSunday, March 23, 1997 - 11:47:14 am:

No, it is not a good a idea. It opens up too many can of worms.

Yes!, Bob RollinsSunday, March 23, 1997 - 04:05:24 pm:

yes, I think that animals should be cloned in order to benefit humans.

the end is nigh, End time BelieverMonday, March 24, 1997 - 07:11:12 am:

Man has broken into God's lab, man has gone so wise that he has begun to aspire to be equal with God. Take heed, this is the sign of the end, Judgement is looming low and sure, watch out and let man consider his ways. It is the sign of the end.

just another exploitable resource, mike D.Monday, March 24, 1997 - 07:59:34 am:

Cloning for food: how is a third world country going to benefit from a sheep fetus, the animals will still need to be fed and raised. We should stick to cloning plants. Any grazing animal would need much more land and resources to survive than a plant. Are we trying to turn the rest of the world into a red meat eating land of consumption? CLONING HUMANS: I could see it now. In the back of your SEARS catalog, a variety of kids that could be yours. Then SUBURBIA goes crazy with their status symbol wants. "Honey, the Joneses have the new '97 FORD MICHAEL , let's get two." Then all these poor kids are running around the playground, getting confused about who's IT.

How could cloning help?, Stacy Braslau-SchneckMonday, March 24, 1997 - 10:27:22 am:

Exactly how would cloning increase food production? Cloning doesn't cause sheep to be born full-grown like Athena from Zeus! All it does is reduce the genetic variability. Sure, we could clone the animals that produce the most meat or other valuable product, but we'd be better off preserving genetic variability by selective breeding (which we humans have been doing for a few thousand years) or gene-slicing (which is a more recent variation on the selective-breeding theme). We've already "meddled" with other animals, driving some species extinct while causing a boom in others (our food and spice spices, as well as rats, cockroaches etc. who thrive in the environments we produce). I think Ron Rita's point about monoculture is the one to keep most strongly in mind, here.

, Qingxin ZhuMonday, March 24, 1997 - 10:43:54 pm:

I think any try on science on cloning should be accepted cautiously.

No!!!!!!, SylvesterTuesday, March 25, 1997 - 07:45:30 am:

I don't thing it would be moraly right to clone animals! We shouldn't interfere with the development of other species!!!

If Bred, o.k., J. FowbleTuesday, March 25, 1997 - 07:52:55 am:

AN INCREASE IN THE YIELD IS WELL WORTH THE CLONE. Yes, it's wrong to kill things just walking around, but if bred for the purpose, it's not problem.

why not?, Mary H.Tuesday, March 25, 1997 - 07:52:56 am:

We have hunger allover the world. why not try something to stop it. if we clone we will increase the food supply. We need to be careful though because what now seems great may one day turn on us.

Where is a victim here?, David Batten (UK)Tuesday, March 25, 1997 - 02:19:27 pm:

Why not? We use artificial insemination, factory farming, with-holding calves from cows to prolong milk-production. And where is the harm? Which animal is the victim? Not th edonor, who loses a few cells, nor the egg-donor, nor the new young animal, which neither knows nor cares that it is genetically identical to another animal.

I'am right, kyle kleinhenzWednesday, March 26, 1997 - 06:13:36 am:

animals are on the earth for the benefit of humans cloon all the animals you want

, Anonymous UserWednesday, March 26, 1997 - 06:17:14 am:

no, there is no need for increase food production

cloning/disease, kim Wednesday, March 26, 1997 - 06:18:08 am:

I think if cloning animals helps humans and does not hurt the animal then we should work hard to cure disease.

Use it all, D.CollinsWednesday, March 26, 1997 - 06:19:15 am:

I think if we clone animals to increase food production we should. But only under the circumstances that since we can clone animals to be organ doners for humans. Clone the animals so they can be used for their organs and their meat.

cloneing, Adrian PelchatWednesday, March 26, 1997 - 07:39:33 am:

Yes, I think animals should be cloned for the uses of man kind, we can't be afrade of progress. though everything should be in modration and we can't go over bourd with this cloneing, to do this would be immoral and consequences WILL occer.

p2.s209.c06.k12.wv.us, Joshua CaruthersWednesday, March 26, 1997 - 07:59:59 am:

I think cloning is God's job and should not be done by man. It also could cause diseases and other things by cloning. Ithink it is wrong and scientists should stop experimenting.

I agree not just for food, J AttardFriday, March 28, 1997 - 04:19:57 am:

Not just for food but it is a way that we can save endagered animals from disapearing from the world

yes we more food!!!, peachy3883Saturday, March 29, 1997 - 03:31:38 pm:

Address the real problem, Tiffany NoeckerSaturday, March 29, 1997 - 04:42:54 pm:

The ever-growing nutritional needs of the world will not be solved by increasing the number or productivity of animals, because animals are more costly in terms of resources (land, grain, water, time). In the pursuit of disease treatment, however, cloning could prove to be invaluable. The cost of producing a transgenic animal justifies the use of cloning: once a transgenic animal is proven to be a success for organ transplant purposes, it would be logical to make as many copies of that animal as needed (not doing so would be akin to killing the goose that laid the golden eggs) More immediately, the benefits of genetically identical lab animals are obvious, since genetic variation can be struck out as a variable in experiments. I am heartened by the increasing awareness of the monoculture dilemma. Lately I have heard of farms and other facilities dedicated to preserving genetic diversity through stock maintenance.

Clearly defined obejctives that benefit us humans, Dammika VitanageSunday, March 30, 1997 - 04:34:00 am:

It is an interesting idea that needs to be managed in a controlled envioronment. Benefits of such programmes need to be focused clearly towards humans. Outcomes and obejctives of such projects need to be developed with clarity and with an understanding of the risks. Management fo risks for the future and present is both important.

Never, Flower ChildSunday, March 30, 1997 - 11:12:46 am:

No! Animals should not be cloned. Life is a gift, a beautiful and majestic power, not to be mass produced like everything else in our commercial culture. To use animals for such atrocities is another low for humanity! Please open your eyes!

The Clones are Coming!!, ScottSunday, March 30, 1997 - 02:40:42 pm:

After reading several of the Pro and Con viewpoints concerning Human Cloning, I feel that no matter what anyone in this forum says yes or no to on this issue, Human Cloning is indeed on it way, and the world will just have to muddle through as best (and at its worst) as it usually does with any new major break thru. Rather than simply deny or say no to such partial, or whole human cloning, world governments/societies should face the truth and deal with this incredible issue as realistically and pragmatically as possible. To do anything less would simply allow "black market" cloning to flourish under the worst conditions/motivations possible. My view is to "get real" about this revolution, because it won't be denied by anyone or anything. Send in the clones, but do it right or suffer dire consequences in the process. How about all of the millions of starving/dying poor in this world who are not accorded any rights (to food, shelter, education, a proper life/future) now? Even though these unfortunate millions of have nots are true 1st generation human beings (not cloned), where are their rights? Do they only have the right to die and therefore lessen the world's overpopulation? Better to concentrate on our and their combined problems rather than run around screaming "the clones are coming"!

Alternative to 'Squash All Beef ', Edward J DwyerMonday, March 31, 1997 - 06:31:20 am:

Yes, I think it would be OK to clone animals. I am not a religion freak, but I believe animals were put here to serve humans. As long as they are used to provid smaller,stronger & healthier stocks and improve our health treatments (not, ie. experiments for cosmetics) then go for it. Ask yourself, if it wasn't right, would God have let those scientists find a way to do it? ('In God, all things are possible') If you're not sure how meat producers 'enhance' our beef production, ie. injecting the smaller animals with all kinds of drugs, that wes, in turn, ingest, listen to a song by KRS-1 called 'Squash All Beef' We first have to see how long Dolly survives.

Negative thoughts, Melinda CoomesMonday, March 31, 1997 - 11:42:01 am:

I don't think that animals or humans should be cloned. If we need more food then there has to be a nother way to get it. How about planting more food. People can grow some food of there own. If we were to clone people then killers,rapests and anyone else could clone there selfs and then the world would become even worse off then it already is.

Thomson.exploratorium.edu, Anonymous UserMonday, March 31, 1997 - 01:51:04 pm:

why should we clone animals for food?why can't we raise them as we heve been doing since forever? the ethical questions and problems raised with this cloning research are very important and should be dealt with before we decide to clone animals when we can just breed them.

Animal cloning? OKAY!, Kyle ArensWednesday, April 2, 1997 - 08:30:07 am:

God gave us animals for our use. If man chooses to clone animals for the purpose of medical research, who is really going to stop them.

These are our diseases, not the animals and it is our fault about the third world-not theirs., Sandrina BennsWednesday, April 2, 1997 - 09:31:01 am:

If humans are going to clone humans, that is our problem but what gives us a right to clone animals that are not of our species? How can it be at all ethical to clone any living being without its aproval? I do not think that animals should be cloned to increase food production because animals should not be eaten any way. Nor to produce human disease treatments because animals have enough diseases of their own without being given ours so we can treat them. Please write to comment on this.

People First, AlayneWednesday, April 2, 1997 - 03:57:51 pm:

Many people would probably argue with this, but the truth is that animals were put on the earth to benefit humans. They shouldn't be treated cruelly or anything, but if they can be put to a good, constructive use they should be. If they are needed for food purposes or to treat diseases and they can be provided through cloning why shouldn't they be? The truth is that animals just don't the souls that make humans human, so it's not neccessary to treat them like humans or to put their lives above ours.

save to world, Eric InoueThursday, April 3, 1997 - 06:41:36 am:

I think we should only clone endangered animals such as the elephant or the rino.

often hungry.

slip166-72-208-242.ca.us.ibm.net, HeatherThursday, April 3, 1997 - 11:14:46 am:

It is important to remember that as of yet, us humans have gotten on fine with the animals we have available. They are going to reproduce naturally, without our help. The only reason I can see to clone animals is if the particular animal is endangered. We can help them out so that they don't become extinct.

issfw.palomar.edu, Corrina LaughlinThursday, April 3, 1997 - 03:19:06 pm:

This breakthrough in genetic experiments should be put to good use. I think that cloning animals to increase food production is a good idea, but what about space? Farmers are cutting down the rainforest already. Population is growing. It is a difficult issue.

, BeckyFriday, April 4, 1997 - 11:47:57 am:

No. It's not necessary for humans to eat other animals. Yes. To pursue human disease treatments.

cloned Animals, Bradley WitenhaferFriday, April 4, 1997 - 04:03:48 pm:

Yes, I think so. Then there will be more food and healthy peoplein the world.

Fear, KristoferFriday, April 4, 1997 - 06:37:02 pm:

After having read most of the responses on this issue, I have to accept the fact that humans are never going to grow up. Anything can be done if you have basic morals and principles at hand with the first being, "Do No Harm". The very reason we have food shortages is because of the human condition. Fear rules everyone. Don't do this. Watch out for that. Must'nt go there.What nonsense. With a culture mature in it's wisdom, nothing would go wrong, because safeguards would be met out of a sense of rightness. Until the human race learns this, everyone will go screaming to some god begging for help that never comes, looking for solutions that we must come up with. Right is right and wrong is wrong. But then, who will watch the watcher?

Genetic Rambling, M AndersonFriday, April 4, 1997 - 09:00:39 pm:

I feel that the cloning of animals for food is unnecessary at least for the present however i could forsee its being needed at some point in the future. The use of a cloned animal for human disease treatments is no different than the use of true genetic animal use in experimentation. This points to the same question which will be faced on a moral and religious level when the first human is cloned because make no mistake we can say and government can try to block it all they want but the cat is out of the bag and it will eventually happen. Would the cloned human have the same rights as a normal genetic human. I think that there is a use for cloning which i have not heard anyone mention yet. An immediate program should be instigated to save endangered species worldwide. So long as "Dolly" is normal and shows regular development and no impairments then i think this program should be brought to immediate fruition. I would like my grandchildren to someday be able to see a real Panda, a Barn Owl or a Horned Frog. Cloning is a way for man to correct some of the mistakes which we are in the process of making Maybe this is the Noah Project to save the wildlife from Mankind.

Desicions we make, anonymous userSaturday, April 5, 1997 - 11:11:09 am:

I think that we as humans are given things by higher spirit we are not aware of. I think that as humans we should use this gift that has been given to us that gives us the opportunity to clone animals, we should have to be able to clone animal that are becoming exticnt because we are already losing the wonderful creatures of the world because of our stupid pollution and I don't see why we can't use cloning as an advantage to save the creatures. This may sound like I'm a freak or something but I really think we should think twice about the things we bring into this world. Who knows, maybe sometime in the futur they'll fink out that cloning was such a great idea. Alos is the world growing so fast in technology that we should be cloning? I really like that we are smart enough that we could be able to do this, but why don't we use our time to find cures for AIDS? Why are we so conserned about cloning when we should be conserned about the poor?

CLONING, NANCY RAMOSSaturday, April 5, 1997 - 06:18:24 pm:

I DONT THINK YOU SHOULD CLONE ANIMALS TO INCREASE THE FOOD PRODUCTION.I DONT THINK YOU SHOULD CLONE ANIMALS PERIOD

We might need this stuff some day, A PersonSunday, April 6, 1997 - 11:17:40 am:

I haven't really taken a lot of time to think about this cloning thing until now. I think that in the future, we might lose some of the important species of animals that are a part of out everyday lives. Many species become extinct every day, and we need some of them to survive. I think that cloning is a good thing for animals, but not humans. Somebody could start a lot of trouble with it and it could get out of hand. It's just like in the movie "Jurassic Park" where all of the people are trying to get the dinosaur DNA so they can use it for their own good.

Gtn3-net0-s15.eci.com, kwtSunday, April 6, 1997 - 11:39:12 am:

I see no problem with cloning animals for food production. If this enables more efficient production of food it would certainly be of benefit to the millions of people who are barely maintaining a subsistence diet or are starving. Pursuing treatment of human disease is appropriate if animals are being used. The use of human cloning of any type is an issue which I would like to see more discussion of the ethics involved.

Diseases to cure, Jane SheppardSunday, April 6, 1997 - 05:44:00 pm:

Because I have a disease that is not curable and my husband being a juvenile diabetic I would have to say if cloning csn be used to hel[ anyone with an incurable disease than go for it. However, I realize cloning could be abused as is so many things. close guard would hve to be applied.

, BrianneMonday, April 7, 1997 - 07:32:33 am:

I think that animals should not be cloned to increase food production. We kill enough animals as it is. However, if we are going to kill animals they should be used for the benefit of human health. So, yes, killing animals to pursue human disease treatments is okay.

, BOOSIEMonday, April 7, 1997 - 10:33:25 am:

No, we should leave nature alone.

medical reasons, melissaMonday, April 7, 1997 - 10:35:20 am:

Yes I do think that animals should be cloned to help people with medical problems because if they need help then they could go to the cow to help someone who needs the help.

, Anonymous UserMonday, April 7, 1997 - 10:39:06 am:

yes, they should be able to clone animals to increase food production. I am not sure about the human disease treatment thing though

CLONING, Anonymous UserMonday, April 7, 1997 - 10:43:27 am:

Yes I think it should bwcause humans are more important than most animals, besides dogs and cats. THANK YOU.

cloning stuff, matt tschirnerMonday, April 7, 1997 - 10:43:42 am:

no, because it cost too much and we can already treat the illnesses that we can treat by cloning.I think we should clone a human to see if it would be cool or not.Not a lot of them, but just one to see what it would be like.I think it would be cool and I would want to be cloned.

HI, RAYMonday, April 7, 1997 - 11:16:52 am:

I THINK THAT THIS IS VERY INTERESTING AND I ENJOY READING AND LEARNING ABOUT THIS.

a look into the future, sarahMonday, April 7, 1997 - 11:19:12 am:

I think it is good because we need to find cures and another food source. But they are also living creatures, and should be treated as such.

whatever, i am coolMonday, April 7, 1997 - 11:21:34 am:

I think that animals can be cloned to increase food production. I do not think that aninmals should ever be used for testing. It is unnecissary and cruel.

, Anonymous UserMonday, April 7, 1997 - 11:23:59 am:

Yes, would be helpful. As long as cloning could be kept in check.

, Dolly YearwoodMonday, April 7, 1997 - 11:25:00 am:

yes, it should be done to help human research.

Animal Cloning, Trisha PartonMonday, April 7, 1997 - 11:27:07 am:

Animals have been used to test other scientific theories, so why not use them to investigate this as well?

more meat, Nebula StarMonday, April 7, 1997 - 11:27:12 am:

I feel that we should clone animals because the more the better. If cloning animals can help other humans and it doesn't really hurt the animals then we should try our best to help out. If even one life could be spared from tragety of the unknown then we as a whole should try our best to help out in any way. In turn animals have rights even if they can't speak for themselves.

bla bla bla, shakermakerMonday, April 7, 1997 - 11:27:43 am:

cloning takes away the value of human life. A cloned person may feel inferior to humans made through sex.

The issue at hand, i am who i amMonday, April 7, 1997 - 11:31:48 am:

Yes, if it were needed I think it would prudent to use cloning. The hunger situation of the world at this time is very severe and this method could be used to help end it, if it were done non-commercially, and inexpensively. Personally, there is no real difference between cloning and breeding animals, or artificial insemination for that matter. The beings cloned would only be alike physically and in genetic makeup, not spiritually, emotionally, or mentally. Just my $.02

Our opinion, Kelli, Jen, Joey, and ErinTuesday, April 8, 1997 - 07:21:25 am:

Cloning will only lead to trouble. Today, animals tomorrow humans! Why start something which Mother Nature never intended to happen? Animals have feelings too. How would you feel if your dog decided to Clone you for tests and food? It just might suck. This is our opinion, We welcome yours.

The easiest way out isnt the best way oooout, Manuel RosaTuesday, April 8, 1997 - 08:34:51 am:

There are multiple problems wich are results of humans behavior. Measures should be take to balance the satisfaction of the different needs we all have vs natures limitations. It is not correct to avoid taking responsability and then attempt to solve our lack of responsability with remediative measures. By doing this we are not attacking the problem but creating a temporary solution wich in turn might create bigger problems in the future. Action should be take now to protect the environment, to appreciate our health and preserve it, to balance our economic standards of life with our spiritual and health standards. In the other hand banning will not help to stop the creation of temporary remedies. It is vital to keep educating and assigning responsabilies to people. We must understand that human beings are not cattle wich can be move to one place to other without considerations even when that might be the way that we might be living our daily live, compleating our daily routine without sttoping to think,search and express our uniqueness and individuality.

CLONING ANIMALS, DREW MATSONTuesday, April 8, 1997 - 11:48:54 am:

Ithink cloning animals is a bad idea, because if somthing goes wrong it could harm many people.

thinking of food, anonymous userTuesday, April 8, 1997 - 10:13:55 pm:

why should we need to clone animals, plants or humans at this stage, mabye in the futur but why now? Us humans must learn to protect our natural resorces and not use them unwisely. I truly think it is not nesesary.( At the moment) in a way we would be increasing animal population and i also think what Ron said was true.

In regards to cloning...., Sarah J StammWednesday, April 9, 1997 - 12:45:00 am:

In reading of these many articles about cloning, I feel animals should be used in these cloning experiments to benefit our race in the future, whether it may be food production or certain biopharmaceutical products deriving from these genetically altered animals. However, I think most of the media along with everyone else sidesteps these positive aspects and jumps right into the idea of cloning the human race. I think that is morally and ethically wrong and should be avoided at all costs. There would be nothing positive to come from the engeneering of humans. The one thing everyone is forgetting is the fact that reproducing an identical human still will not repoduce the same personality nor ration- ality of the parent.

no, uliWednesday, April 9, 1997 - 02:43:10 pm:

definetly not

Nominal Pro Cloning, "Skip" ShultzWednesday, April 9, 1997 - 05:34:09 pm:

I'm for cloning to increase food (meat, fruit & vegetables) and for human disease treatments (i.e. kidney, liver, heart etc.), but not the whole human being cloning.

Who's playing God?, JudyWednesday, April 9, 1997 - 08:46:10 pm:

What happened to genetic diversity? 1. Cloning is an expensive process. 2. Our future food supply would be dependent on commercial laboratory mass production of the same plant or animal. 3. How can we gurantee that we are producing the best of the best? What happens to natural selection? Do we take over as God?

Not a good idea., Mike CarlsonThursday, April 10, 1997 - 09:06:06 am:

Animals should be cloned for food, but not for expirments. Animals are bread for food, but not so they could be used to figure out how to cure our diseases.

Yes, within limitations, Bruce MaynardThursday, April 10, 1997 - 09:07:24 am:

Yes, but only to reproduce superior genes, and then only for no more than 2-3 generations; replicative errors would become a real problem after a bit. However, reproducing a champion racing-horse or a superior stud-bull would be a very good idea, to give their genes a wider base (they can impregnate females only so quickly alone)

www-at5.proxy.aol.com, Anonymous UserThursday, April 10, 1997 - 03:17:52 pm:

Is it really necessary? Is it possible to pursue human disease treatments by cloning, or is it just a waste?

www-ae5.proxy.aol.com, Anonymous UserThursday, April 10, 1997 - 03:54:05 pm:

Is it really necessary? Is it possible to pursue human disease treatments by cloning, or is it just a waste?

NO CLONING!!!, Becky BoxThursday, April 10, 1997 - 06:41:44 pm:

I think cloning should be left well enough alone. Nature meant animals (and humans) to be born unique. I don't think cloning should be used against sheep, monkeys, cows, or anything else. I say, just let Mother Nature to do it.

No Cloning!!!, XThursday, April 10, 1997 - 07:16:16 pm:

No, I think it is awful! You should leave things up to Mother Nature! The poor animals are to be left alone! It may be a "wonderful break-through" it is not. It's AWFUL! Just let them live without killing the lambs to get some more ewes and rams, then eat the lambs they have then do it all over again! The cures would probably be found in the Rainforest, if people like you stopped cutting it down!

Unnecessary Cloning, Paula WhetstineFriday, April 11, 1997 - 08:11:18 am:

I believe the cost of cloning would be higher than the process of growing an animal "the old fashioned way." By no way is the researching community needing more animals to experiment on. That would only add to the animal overpopulation we already have.

What is Natural?, Joe CthulhuFriday, April 11, 1997 - 10:01:47 pm:

Natural means anything created by nature. Since man is a product of nature. Anything he does is natural. If Nature did not intend us to do the things we do then Nature would not have provided us with the resources to do them. Cloning is a product of Nature. What is not natural is for people to try to hinder the natural development of man's ingenuity.

Effects on economy, ThinkerSaturday, April 12, 1997 - 05:32:05 am:

I respond to this question whith other ones: -Will this effect the economy in a good or a bad way? -Will this give more power to the powerfull or aid to the weak? -Will every body be able to clone or is it only for the rich and strong? -Will it enlarge the gap between the rich and the poor? -??????????????????????????????????????????????????????

ONLY IF, opertunity knocks Saturday, April 12, 1997 - 04:43:35 pm:

animals should olny be used if there is proof that cloning would not alter the item produced, in any way long or short term. I also think that cloning should be used in treating others if the same were true.I also believe that if you are going to create a life just to kill it for human needs is wrong. There should be some regulation on how and why the animals are cloned. Cloning is a delacate thing, and is in the begining, peopel will be scared of it because it is an unnatural process and used wrong, people will have a right to be scared. The point that I'm trying to make is that with the right regulations and rules clonnig will became a very good thing to humans. We must also think of the animals in terms of long time effects. Animals are bound to change. We MUST NOT allow ourselves to get to cought up in all the clonning, to forget about the way nature takes with the changes that go on through gentic mutations. It could mean the olny way for a species to ive in the future.

Yes and No, KateSunday, April 13, 1997 - 11:18:16 am:

I think we should clone animals for food production.Like all parents say "There are starving people in China." well, they wouldn't be starving anymore! But, I think there should be a certain extent to cloning animals. If there was an over-production of one certain animal it could mess up the food chain. Also the scientists might screw up and there could be a dangerous mutation and because of that mutation there could be new diseases and viruses. I don't think certain animals such as dogs and cats should be used for medical research. If the docters are trying a new medicane on the animal for a cure of a disease or something, well, that's diffrent. If it's just for some stupid study, I don't think harming the animal is necassary.

I Don't Think So!!, Heather GarsonMonday, April 14, 1997 - 06:02:36 pm:

I don't thunk it is right to clone animal to increase food production You create a animal and then eat it? With cloning it is oh so scientific that by eating the cloned animal you will be eating all of the chemicals that were used to make that animal. What is the point to that? To pursue human disease treatments is a little off. Have the cut Dolly open yet to see if everything is identical? And if they have how do you think Dolly felt about that. Just because science created her doesn't science can destroy her. doesn't

To Clone or Not To Clone, Robert DiLazzaroWednesday, May 7, 1997 - 05:27:25 pm:

If we clone animals to increase food production we will create another problem. How do we feed all the cloned animals? As the world 's pop- ulation increases land and crop farming decreases. There has to be a better solution. The only answer is wordwide population control. How it can be accomplished is beyond me...but there must be a way that will satisfy people in all countries. If the U.N. worked the way we all believed it would, we would have found a solution years ago. So I say clone animals when you can clone land and crops.

research FOR people, jnsSunday, May 11, 1997 - 12:59:29 am:

Research should definitely be allowed to continue with cloning for the benefit of all people. Imagine the people that die now waiting for transplants that would be able to be saved if we could clone the organs they need. There could be totally unexpected benefits from cloning that might be discovered (look at penicillin from mold, to mention only one) The people who are frightened of having people cloned forget to remember that two babies with exactly the same genes turn out differently. Twins. A clone of yourself would be raised entirely differently and have different experiences than you. That baby would not grow up to be you but an entirely different person.

overpopulation?, anonymousWednesday, May 21, 1997 - 03:29:10 pm:

with the advancements in medical and science knowledge that have been made, man has been able to create miracles never thought possible. We have brought people back to life, and saved people who should have died. However, we have ignored a very real problem that we were creating. As heartless as it sounds, the survival of a species depends on the death of other members of that species. Without this, the population will become too large for the habitat to hold. Overpopulation allows for insufficient food and body room. Thus, the whole population suffers, as no one can get sufficient supplies to survive. By cloning animals and/or humans we are creating a severe increase in population. We are not only creating more animals, but ways to keep weaker animals alive. This includes humans. Shall we continue these practices, and wait to see what happens when the Earth can no longer support the life that inhabits this planet? Or should we stop this research and put it off to an interesting discover that man made one day.

to clone, or not to clone, laurieFriday, June 6, 1997 - 04:32:18 pm:

No, we don't need to mess with cloning, it messes up the hole idea of creation, the idea of a mother, father, children family set up, next they will try to clone humans and i could tell you a million views on that, but i really do not think cloning is a very good idea

Clone or not to clone?, year 8 Rochester.s.c.Monday, July 28, 1997 - 04:47:34 pm:

Some of the class believe that it is a wonderful idea but others are not so sure that it is a good idea.

Beyond The Ethics, Tamyka BellSaturday, August 30, 1997 - 06:29:03 pm:

The problem with using animals in human disease treatment is the risk of inadvertantly introducing a new disease which can spread to anyone else. Pathogens from one species can mutate to suit human beings after being introduced via xenotransplantation and it is a risk that I don't think we're ready to take.

Cloning, ErinMonday, November 24, 1997 - 11:15:37 am:

There are many benefits to increasing food production and the quality of the food. I am especially interested in cloning for the sake of medical research and developments. Producing organs from your own genetic material would eliminate the need for costly and side-effectful medicines to prevent rejection of the organ. I don't think there is any need for cloned humans because Earth is overly populated as it is.

no cloning, chookaMonday, December 1, 1997 - 02:31:06 pm:

Cloning should not be used. No-one knows what the outcome will be like, therefore we should not use this., fredMonday, December 1, 1997 - 02:32:49 pm:

No Human cloning, D.A.P.Monday, December 1, 1997 - 02:44:28 pm:

Animals should be cloned to help people, but thats where it should stop. Under no circumstances should we resort to cloning humans.

Cloning and food, TimWednesday, December 3, 1997 - 05:47:57 pm:

Yes it should be used to increas food production because without cloning the animals would never have existed (spelling) in the first place. Besides humans are animals too and we need to survive just as much.