The New York Times just doesn't get it...
I have received this reply from the New York Times on my letter from Clone the Truth #4:
Dear Ms. Taylor:Thank you for your note about cloning, a word that is used in several different ways. Although its central meaning refers to making identical copies of some biological entity, it has now garnered more extensive meanings, as for instance in the well known phrase "therapeutic cloning." This procedure refers to treating a patient with tissues derived from his own cells, not to cloning him, but the word is used because the first steps in the procedure are the same as those used to clone an animal. It was in this same sense that we used the phrase "cloning human cells."
Best,
--
Science Desk
New York Times
Here is my scientifically correct reply:
Dear Science Desk,
You are correct that cloning does refer to many processes in science. Although, you are incorrect about therapeutic cloning.
Therapeutic cloning does not treat "a patient with tissues derived from his own cells" as you have stated. Therapeutic cloning creates a cloned embryo which is a separate organism from the patient. This new organism then provides stem cells to the patient. Please see this interview with James Thomson, embryonic stem cell pioneer:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8303756/page/3/
Thomson clearly states that therapeutic cloning by nuclear transfer creates an embryo that is indistinguishable from any other embryo like those created in IVF. Thompson states, "If you create an embryo by nuclear transfer, and you give it to somebody who didn’t know where it came from, there would be no test you could do on that embryo to say where it came from. It is what it is."
Your article was referring to cloning by nuclear transfer which creates a distinct organism separate from the patient. Therefore the pateint would not be treated with "his own cells." Therefore, I will ask again that you please print a correction.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Taylor
Lets see if they get it...
Both your letter and the Times's response are scientifically correct; this is a simple dispute over terminology.
Youur are correct that this is a dispute over terminology, the PROPER terminology, and it is far from simple. The Times refuses to acknowledge that an embryo is created in the cloning process. A cloned embryo is a distinct organism from the person who is cloned. (It has different mitochondria DNA.) Therefore, it is impossible that a patient would be treated with "his own cells" as the Times insists. Instead he would be treated with the cloned embryo's cells that are nearly genetically identical to his. The same could be said of cells from the patient's twin. The Times is misleading the public by omitting these facts.
Rebecca, I do not see where a SCNT embryo or ovasome of 128 undifferentiated microscopic cells is an "organism" - take a look. It is not a person either, that is why it is not called a person. The purpose of SCNT is to understand how cells, not people behave in order to learn the etiology of diseases. Cures and/or treatments are a long way off. Because of the Dickey-Wicker Amendment federal funding has been denied the Dept. of Health and Human Services every year since Newt Gingrich orchestrated the Republican revolution. If our government had taken the lead in this research rather than obstructing it we might have some progress by now, who knows?
Raylin,
Please see this definition from Medterms.com
http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=3225
It reads:
Embryo: The organism in the early stages of growth and differentiation from fertilization to, in humans, the beginning of the third month of pregnancy. After that point in time, it is termed a fetus.
South Korea has had plenty of government funding and an outpouring of support, with lots of collaboration from American scientists. They still have not produced a single cloned embryo, let alone any embryonic stem cells, or studied any diseases or produced any treatments. Neither has England.
I encourage you to visit www.stemcellresearch.org and get the facts on the advancements in adult stem cell research.
Many treatments use a patient's own stem cells with out the hassle or huge cost of cloning.