Sloppy Science Reporting and Cloning Research Update

The media has a long, long way to go in reporting science: “South Korea to resume human egg cloning“, trumpets the United Press International article.

Umm, guys, the idea is to clone humans using eggs, but not to clone the eggs (or ova) themselves. In the defense of UPI, though, while the title is wrong, the article itself seems to that much right, in that they talking about cloning embryos.

But whether or not one is talking about clones or eggs, the work can’t be said to “resume” since the previous work was a fraud. The article is incorrect when it states that South Korea is planning “…to resume experiments with cloned human embryos next year…” .

There are no clones as of now, people! They are presumably resuming their attempts to clone, and ultimate do what Dr. Hwang had fraudulently claimed to achieve.

There is an interesting, and presumably correct detail in the article about the source of ova to be used for these experiments: only the leftover eggs from IVF work will be used from these experiments. That may prove problematic in that they will not be as healthy as ones taken directly from the woman for use in research–IVF eggs will have had more time to degrade before being worked on by the researchers. It’ll make an already hard task even more difficult, but this safeguard is not surprising in the wake of Dr. Hwang’s abuse of power of female employees and their “voluntary” egg donations.

Comments 3

  1. Mark Larson wrote:

    Thought you might like this site: http://www.TheHopeWithin.org

    It is based on 1 Peter 3:15 and it is a very interesting way to share our faith without using too much of our time.

    Feel free to add the link to your blog if you want.

    Posted 01 Apr 2007 at 8:25 pm
  2. Laudemus wrote:

    Jerry, did you see last night’s episode of “House”?

    I was hoping you’d blog about that episode like you did the last abortion-related one….

    Posted 04 Apr 2007 at 4:21 pm
  3. Funky Dung wrote:

    I saw it and was impressed/surprised by its vaguely pro-life message.

    Posted 05 Apr 2007 at 12:18 pm

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *