Snoweagle
22nd January 2013, 14:33
This must be the most perverse scientific experiment ever formulated exploiting public ignorance of the relationship between parent and child, in my opinion.
The article does not describe the intent on "ownership" of the child after birth. What kind of existence would the child be subjected to?
Neanderthal people grew in a natural environment and so their DNA would reflect that type of upbringing, so "manufacturing" a "test-tube" child(ren) and imposing technological restrictions on them will spoil ANY resultant analysis.
A further aside, during the Neanderthal period there was no electromagnetic smog as we have today, which we are currently being penalised by, so how would that impact such a child.
Whilst we can all agree the experiment has some interest at some level, just at what point do we justify this and in what manner?
Personally, I abhor the prospect of birthing such a child into ANY scientific community.
_____
Prehistoric men may soon be walking the earth again. One of the world’s leading geneticists is in search of a female volunteer to give birth to a Neanderthal – a species that went extinct more than 33,000 years ago.
Using DNA from Neanderthal bones, Harvard Medical School Professor George Church plans to resurrect the long-extinct relative of man by implanting a cloned embryo into the womb of a surrogate mother.
“We can clone all kinds of mammals, so it’s very likely that we could clone a human,” he told the German magazine, Der Spiegel. “Why shouldn’t we be able to do so?”
Church, a 58-year-old pioneer in synthetic biology, helped create the Human Genome Project in the 1980s and has been involved in instituting numerous biotech firms. He is working toward making humans resistant to all viruses, as well as recreating the Neanderthal. Church believes he has the Neanderthal genome and the technology to bring a prehistoric man to the earth. All he needs is an “extremely adventurous female human” and laws that would make cloning legal to begin his experiment . . .
http://rt.com/usa/news/birth-neanderthal-church-cloning-455/
The article does not describe the intent on "ownership" of the child after birth. What kind of existence would the child be subjected to?
Neanderthal people grew in a natural environment and so their DNA would reflect that type of upbringing, so "manufacturing" a "test-tube" child(ren) and imposing technological restrictions on them will spoil ANY resultant analysis.
A further aside, during the Neanderthal period there was no electromagnetic smog as we have today, which we are currently being penalised by, so how would that impact such a child.
Whilst we can all agree the experiment has some interest at some level, just at what point do we justify this and in what manner?
Personally, I abhor the prospect of birthing such a child into ANY scientific community.
_____
Prehistoric men may soon be walking the earth again. One of the world’s leading geneticists is in search of a female volunteer to give birth to a Neanderthal – a species that went extinct more than 33,000 years ago.
Using DNA from Neanderthal bones, Harvard Medical School Professor George Church plans to resurrect the long-extinct relative of man by implanting a cloned embryo into the womb of a surrogate mother.
“We can clone all kinds of mammals, so it’s very likely that we could clone a human,” he told the German magazine, Der Spiegel. “Why shouldn’t we be able to do so?”
Church, a 58-year-old pioneer in synthetic biology, helped create the Human Genome Project in the 1980s and has been involved in instituting numerous biotech firms. He is working toward making humans resistant to all viruses, as well as recreating the Neanderthal. Church believes he has the Neanderthal genome and the technology to bring a prehistoric man to the earth. All he needs is an “extremely adventurous female human” and laws that would make cloning legal to begin his experiment . . .
http://rt.com/usa/news/birth-neanderthal-church-cloning-455/