Posts filed under ‘Uncategorized’

Buongiorno from Lago Maggiore

Hey everybody ! just a little post after one week of hollydays … I didn't have any access to internet so I didn't write my ultimate post, I'm going to do it in my next post, but before, a little picture from Italia, it will give you ideas for your next hollidays … 😀



April 30, 2006 at 12:42 pm Leave a comment

Final article …

Since the birth of humankind, men (and women that's obvious) tried to create new things, services to make their live easier.
Since the industrial revolution, a lot of things created are not useful (service on your mobile to now if **** loves you), or dangerous (H bomb). Human cloning is considered by a lot of people as a phenomenon not really controlled and which could be dangerous in its experimentation and consequences.
Human cloning is the fact to "copy" the DNA of somebody, to introduced it in an ovule in order to let it grow to be a baby. The baby born possess exactly the same DNA as the one of the person who gave its DNA.
Human cloning comports different aspects which depend on the goal purchased by cloning people, but should human cloning be legalized ?
First, we will see that cloning can be an important medical progress and then that too much consequences which are not controlled existed and prevent us from legalised human cloning.

first part: we should legalized human cloning
Human Cloning should be legalized, because Human cloning in therapeutic meanings could be a solution to a lot of diseases still uncured and be the first step to equality of couples in front of the creation of children. So we're going to see now the scientist arguments in favour of Human cloning and then biased arguments in favour of legalisation of Human Cloning.

1 Medical arguments:

a) Human cloning limited to the cloning of cells could be the answer to a lot of diseases still uncured. In fact, cloning cells of a person to create organs or material for himself is a guarantee of transplant without rejection, and if we know how replace failing organs by healthy organs, we should save a lot of live. This kind of cloning has no consequences in other persons nor in the environment and is a way to cure "more easily" very developed cancer or that kind of diseases. Forbidding Human cloning in scientist goals should have for consequence a lot of deaths which should have been prevented thanks to cloning.

b) Before being able to realize Human cloning, scientists have to understand how cells grows, and then Human Cloning would give them more explanations about this phenomenon. This kind of medical progress is important because we still don't know why some people's cells don't grow as the other, and what are their genetic problems. So Human cloning could be the answer to orphan diseases, mostly caused by genetic bad working.

c) Human cloning would permit to create a child with the same particularities than another sick child but totally healthy, thanks to the identification of the genetical problem, and this new child would be able to be a donor of organs so that it would increase a lot the chances of transplants without rejection

Example: some parents have already choose to select their embryos to "create" a child to help a precedent one, but they choose the genetically closer embryos to the first child. Cloning should be a surest way.

2 Subjective arguments
a) human cloning is an important step to lead to the equality of procreation. Nowadays, infertile couples or homosexual couples are discriminated against, because adoption is very complicated in states such as in France and medical procreation aid is expensive and difficult to bear for couples who are already considered as inferior than the others.
Example: homosexual or unfertilized couple could give birth to their children without require to another person.
b) some people have talents which are difficult to let disappearing because they are important for culture, sciences or politics… Some of these talents are contained in the DNA so clone people who own talents should be a way to permit to different arts or sciences to stay at the better level!
Example: In this period of troubles it should be interesting for all humankind to make some pacific people such as Gandhi or Martin Luther King re-appearing.

c) people who have lost a loved one, such as a young child, could have a "second chance". Instead of leaving a family tears apart because of the accidental death of a young child, cloning him should be a way to permit to these family to still live, even if they have to know that IT IS NOT the same child …

second part: we shouldn't legalized human cloning

1 scientist and economical arguments

a) the process of human cloning isn't sure enough for the moment, both for the child and the mother. In fact, we're just at the level of experimentation, so it is still dangerous to test cloning on animals. Humankind often employs animals to test on them all experiences it fears to text on itself, so that we could understand that it is still dangerous. As natural children grow in their own rythm, we don't know if all clone would have the same evolution and if it's not dangerous both for the child and the mother.
Example: we don't know how the child would grow and if it would have effects on the mother's health.

b) Extension of cloning for all people who can't create children naturally can be the reason and the source of trade of human cells, such as it already exist for human organs. Clones would only be the result of "manufacturies" specialised in clones' creation… It sounds as science-fiction movies but could be real because of the legalisation of human cloning.
Example: poor people, instead of selling their organs, can sell the possibiliy to have a clone, selling their cells…but it should lead to a lot of people with the same DNA, which is biologically dangerous.

c) Liberalisation of human cloning can lead to a problem concerning biodiversity: nowadays, children are the result of a mix of 2 persons, but tomorrow, it could be only the "same person" as their parents. This could put biodiversity in danger because of the reproduction of always the same DNA, without evolutions whereas species have evoluted to survive in their environment since the beginning of life.
Example: reproducing generation after generation the DNA of a person born in 2000 would lead to a lack of "modernisation" of the DNA and to the death of this person. If we thought that everybody choose to clone their-selves instead of having natural children, that's all the humankind which is in danger.

2 subjective arguments

a) Concerning the identity of the child: how could he found and create his own identity if he knows that he is a "copy" of somebody else ? These two people can't be considered as twins, because they have a difference of age but they have the same DNA…
Example: today, visas o enter in USA have to be electronics and they include some information about the health of the person. The clone of a person forbidden of residence in USA would be forbidden too because policemen couldn't see differences between the two person (biologically, if they don't care about the date of birth).

b) This argument leads us to the problem of the future relationship between parents and children cloned: if twins have a special relationship, it would be true too because the child would have to grow knowing hat he is his/her father/mother.
But it is obvious that relationship between parents and children are the source of the identity of children, which leads us back to my first argument …

c) Concerning human cloning in medical goals, we can wonder where is the limit to decide that a cell is "somebody" and until which time cells which are developed can be employ to be "grow up" in order to "manufacture" specific organs. If some parents decide to have a cloned-child in order to cure a first child (thanks to transplant for example), we can wonder if it's normal to have a child just on this goal, not create by love… And the evolution of the child will be "planned" because of the first goal of the creation of the second child.

To conclude I would say that in fact Human cloning is a subject in which it is difficult to have a strong opinion. In one hand, you've got all good medical discoveries that it can bring, but in the other hand we know that some problems exist and have no solution for the moment. In my mind, Human Cloning have to wait before being legalized. First, scientists have to be sure of the security concerning cloning and help has to be built to parents of future clones. Human cloning as 2 principal aspects which are cloning to produce children and cloning for medical reasons. I think that the 2 have to be seen separately. Human cloning to create cells, make them grow and then transform them in organs or skin for example is probably the next step of medical researches. That's interesting because they are no way to earn money by this way and I don't see important drawbacks: it would be only use to help people, but it would probably creates inequality (because of the price of such operations). Human cloning to create children has to be strongly controlled, because it can be the source of new traffics and misuses can be very numerous (utilisation of clone by states to create army…) So in fact I think that human cloning has to be controlled, and laws have to be strict to prevent from abuses.

April 10, 2006 at 9:52 am 2 comments

April, the first (yes I know today is the third but…)

Just felt in the same occupation of each year, trying to push fish in people's back … No chance, I've been touched myself, but it was for a good cause ! 😉

 Oh my god, a fish in my back !! (oh my god, a fish in my back !!)

Ps: I'm sorry no link between this and my subject, I don't know if some fishes have been cloned until today … BUT that's just to make passing by and smile … lol

April 3, 2006 at 4:06 pm 1 comment

Do you want to clone?

Okay, I’m speaking (writing) since the beginning of my blog about cloning, but do you know how to clone somebody ?
Let’s start with the cloning of a mouse, Mimi on this site :
That’s just great because every steps are explained, without too much details and you clone yourself the little mouse …
Do not try at home ! 😉

March 24, 2006 at 8:39 am 1 comment


Hello ! I’m sorry I would have post this picture at the beginning of my blog but I didn’t reach to post it (thanks Virginie for your help !)
So this is dolly, the first alive beeing “who” have been cloned. She lived until 6 years old, which is normal for a ewe, but some pessimist people think that her cells would not live more longer because they would get older faster than cells of “natural” ewe.dolly.jpg Now this is how they give birth to Dolly : (sorry the picture is probably too little to see something ….)cloning-sheep.gif

March 24, 2006 at 8:10 am Leave a comment

Some arguments from the 1st document

Morality of Human Cloning.
My point of view on these arguments are written in italic
Arguments against Human Cloning are really more numerous than those in favour of Human Cloning.
Arguments which say that Human C. is moral:
         Instead of leaving the talent of somebody die with him, we can clone him because some talents are contained in the DNA, so the majority of the population will benefit of H.C. In fact talents are just subjective. Everybody can think that he has a talent and wishes to have a clone. Without definition of “talents”, every person can deviate this argument to have a child. If somebody think that Hitler had the talent of being a leader, should we have to clone him ?? It is dangerous to leave the choose of cloning or not people to everybody. Clear reasons have to be defined.
         If a couple is sterile just because of the husband, both can participate in the creation of their child thanks to H.C. instead of using the sperm of another man. This argument can be removed to the case of couple of lesbians.It is an egalitarian argument. It permits to everybody to have a child, even if they can’t naturally. Having a child won't be a problem for many couples, but for the moment legislation hasn’t permit homosexuals to adopt children so it’s difficult to imagine that they could have cloned children.
Arguments against the morality of H.C.:
         for the moment, we have no guarantee about the medical aspect of cloning. Who knows how he will grow and if he won’t suffer from new diseases ?That’s true that in fact, humankind love doing experiences, but we oftently don’t know where they will lead us, such as the H. Bomb. Before permitting to everybody to have a cloned child, we have to be sure that his life won’t be in danger, but to know that, we need experiences and time…
         Relationship between parents and clones will be different than the one between parents and natural child because the clone will be as one  of his parents, instead of being a “mix” between the 2, so it can create some problems.That’s true again that it can be a little bit strange to know that “you are your father or your mother” … Children will probably have difficulties to find his own identity.
Contestable arguments:
         Clones are “built” thanks to a cell which have its own age. So maybe the baby will just born and his cells will already be aged of the year of the first cell. In fact this argument is contestable because Dolly grow up normally. Even if we saw that Dolly grown up normally, we don’t know how, in long term, will “live” the cells… Dolly lived 6 years, just as a lot of her racekind, but we don’t know how human cell will grow, maybe the life time of cloned cells is limited (more than the life of naturally created cells) and we don’t know it.
         If Clones can be “created” for every one, women won’t need men anymore… In fact this argument comes from a man’s essay…I think that’s just a macho argument. Reproduction is not the only reason of the existence of men, why would we delete them ?
         If people are cloned instead of created naturally, genetical diversity will decrease and the natural evolution of races will be in danger. But in fact, cloning will probably not be used for everybody and very oftently, even if it can be a solution to many couples so this argument is useless.This argument can be pertinent if cloning is a mass solution to create babies. If cloning just go on being an odd solution we won’t have to fear about biodiversity, but if cloning is used in all the cases, it will become a problem.
Religious arguments against H.C.:
         some religious people who are against abortion are against H.C. because they think that all fertilized ovule are already somebody, so wanting to take off the fertilized part to put the cell of somebody elses is a murder.I think that it is an extreme argument. How could we think that a cell, which is not formed at all, can be somebody?When the child's organes are formed, I consider that he is already somebody but considering that he is somebody before is extreme.
         A business can be created around the selling of embryos.This is an argument not only religious but economical. And it is serious I think, because we see nowadays traffic of human organes and some people just think that embryos are a way to earn easy money.
      –    Some people think that clones won’t born with a soul.I don’t know what to think about this argument. What is soul exactly ? Who can judge ? During slavery, white people thought that Black didn’t have souls, which is just stupid. If we extend this, we can think that everything that is alive have a soul … and plants too ? So I consider that clones would have a soul, but it can’t be prooved !!

March 13, 2006 at 4:48 pm Leave a comment


This category will be composed of posts for my vocabulary problems.

Each document will have his own vocabulary post, explaining meanings of new words…

February 18, 2006 at 10:50 am Leave a comment

Older Posts


June 2018
« Apr    

Posts by Month

Posts by Category