Is there anything that you have found shocking or intriguing in the process or your research?
Considering my paper is about dogs and humans mostly in comparison or what the dog has discovered to help human health/medications/treatments, or what the humans can help the dog with medications/treatments.
I would like to be able to compare the reproduction between the dog and the humans a little further into context, but it seems if you look any further then the actual way they bear children it turns into cloning. From what I have read they are saying that the dog gnome can replace some of the human gnomes, in order to clone people, or animals of various types.
I am not looking into cloning in any way shape of form, as I do not agree with it. Some say that it is basically the same as in-vitro (artificial insemination), HOW could they compare cloning with this. In my opinion cloning is a scientific method of developing humans or animals and there is so much that could go wrong with this. In-vitro is planting a human egg into a human body, not into a test tube for growing, into a human body. I just have moral and ethic standards that I live by and cloning is not one of them.
Just like cryo-genics, I don't agree with this either. I feel that when you die, then it is time for another healthy human being to take over in your place. Why would you want to freeze yourself until a cure for your illness, disease, or disorder is found. It might end up that it would be so far out of your time that you would be lost and what good would it be to be old, healthy and not know what is going on in the world. Most of the time people are old when they die, or they have done what their life expectancies was from the beginning of the natural life, over the artificial life.
I am disappointed like I said that there is nothing out there that can help with the dog/human reproduction issue. Not that I expected extraordinary findings, as humans and animals can not breed together. Wouldn't that be something to think about a dog/human baby? I can imagine or any other type of animal/human baby. Natural standards are set for a reason I believe, and to some extent the world of science has to let this natural balance work, and I do not believe cloning is holding the natural balance of the evolution tree.
I would appreciate any help that anyone has to offer on the reproduction comparison issue of the dog, verses human.
After writing this blog today, I have I don't know how found some information on infants/dogs. I think I might have found the answer to my own question, THOUGHTS PLEASE PEOPLE, THOUGHTS WOULD BE APPRECIATED.
Sherry W.
Sherry,
ReplyDeleteI always like reading your blog posts. I love the picture! I just wanted to throw my two cents in about your in-vetro/cloning comments... I agree with you that in-vetro is a medical assistance for someone who could not otherwise get pregnant for some reason and therefore is beneficial. From what I know, cloning is different because you are not causing a pregnancy with a new life, but recreating one that already exists. Cloning makes an identical replica of an animal or person or whatever they are making instead of simply medically aiding in beginning a new life. While I think that there may be some research benefits from being able to clone animals, I agree that there is too much that can go wrong when people start trying to play God. Anyway, that's just my thoughts... Good luck this week and I'll see you in seminar!