Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scientists Clone Human Embryos To Make Stem Cells

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the me-an-the-other-me dept.

Biotech 92

cyachallenge writes "Scientists say they have, for the first time, cloned human embryos capable of producing embryonic stem cells. 'We had to find the perfect combination,' Mitalipov says. As it turned out, that perfect combination included something surprising: caffeine. That ingredient, plus other tweaks in the process, including using fresh eggs and determining the optimal stage of each egg's development, Mitalipov says."

cancel ×

92 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Coffee Cloning (1, Funny)

cyachallenge (2521604) | about a year ago | (#43736293)

Starbucks is now offering the Frappeblast(tocyst) (c).

c8h10n4o2 (1)

Cyrjax (2015836) | about a year ago | (#43736303)

Makes everything EVEN BETTER!!!

Eggs and caffeine are a bad combination (1)

locopuyo (1433631) | about a year ago | (#43736329)

Whenever I have eggs and caffeine it upsets my bowels.

Re:Eggs and caffeine are a bad combination (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736819)

And now you know why, there's cloning going on in there!

Breakfast? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736339)

"using fresh eggs and caffeine"

Sounds more like making breakfast than human cloning.

Re:Breakfast? (1)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about a year ago | (#43736495)

I prefer green eggs and ham.

Re:Breakfast? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43737919)

I prefer soylent green eggs and ham.

Re:Breakfast? (1)

quenda (644621) | about a year ago | (#43739013)

I do not like green eggs and ham. I do not like them J F Davisam.

Re:Breakfast? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43739041)

Pigs are disgusting creatures. You people are disgusting for eating pig meat everyday.

Re:Breakfast? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43740903)

And you're a f-ing weirdo that's missing out on bacon, the most delicious of all meats. Have fun with that.

Re:Breakfast? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43742637)

And sewer rat might taste like pumpkin pie, I don't know 'cause I won't eat the filthy mf. I just don't dig on swine, that's all.

Re:Breakfast? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43741301)

Your food restrictions are arbitrary and were probably handed down to you by your parents or religion. That's effectively letting other people think for you. No one is listening to your judgement anyway, your argument will change precisely zero persons' behaviors.

Bacon is delicious. Even if you refuse to do so yourself, let us enjoy life.

http://youtu.be/c0zJSgHDnpw [youtu.be]

Re:Breakfast? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736515)

Nah, it's not breakfast unless someone is makin' bacon.

Re:Breakfast? (1)

markkezner (1209776) | about a year ago | (#43741153)

Bacon acts as a catalyst in this process

Re:Breakfast? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43741607)

Mmmmm . . . breakfast!!

D'oh!!!

Re:Breakfast? (1)

markkezner (1209776) | about a year ago | (#43744721)

I have this vision of the scientists keeping the cell cultures separate by placing them into separate waffle holes. Square waffles make more sense because they form a simple grid, which makes recording the data easier.

Clearly I'm thinking about this too much.

Not so surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736385)

I too am useless without my morning dose of caffeine.

As we always suspected: (1)

QilessQi (2044624) | about a year ago | (#43736397)

caffeine == life

Re:As we always suspected: (2)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#43736489)

unless you're an incest, then caffeine == death

Re:As we always suspected: (5, Funny)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#43736499)

insect...
I've been watching too much game of thrones.

Finally (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736423)

Good to see at least a little forward progress in my life.

It is by caffeine alone I set my cells in motion (3, Funny)

sehlat (180760) | about a year ago | (#43736427)

It is by the juice of java that cells acquire speed
The body begins to grow
The growth becomes a forming.
It is by caffeine alone I set my cells in motion

Re:It is by caffeine alone I set my cells in motio (2)

cyachallenge (2521604) | about a year ago | (#43736493)

The java must flow!

Re: It is by caffeine alone I set my cells in moti (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736627)

The house of Starbucks agrees.

Re:It is by caffeine alone I set my cells in motio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43738931)

glorious! :)

Re:It is by caffeine alone I set my cells in motio (1)

fritsd (924429) | about a year ago | (#43740435)

I have to keep clipping my eyebrows though...

Re:It is by caffeine alone I set my cells in motio (1)

kermidge (2221646) | about a year ago | (#43748945)

I regard coffee as WD-40 for the brain.

abort! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736507)

oh noes :-O

Adult human skin cells (5, Informative)

harlequinn (909271) | about a year ago | (#43736523)

The Slashdot headline neglected to mention that they synthesised an embryo from adult human skin cells - so it's 100% genetically compatible with the donor.

Re:Adult human skin cells (1)

DiegoBravo (324012) | about a year ago | (#43736937)

Maybe it's time to appoint new editors by clonning several Maldas..

Re:Adult human skin cells (2)

Rich0 (548339) | about a year ago | (#43737013)

That would be a major omission. I was wondering how cloning an embryo would be news.

I'm sure it isn't done every day of the week due to the ethical concerns, but I couldn't see how cloning embryos would present any difficulty at all. You basically just have to pluck a cell off of it and you're done as long as it is done before differentiation. if you chop an embryo in two you end up with identical twins, which is exactly how it happens naturally.

Cloning an embryo from an adult cell (especially a skin cell) is DEFINITELY news. I figured it was just a matter of time - again the ethical issues are the biggest obstacle to doing it considering that we can already clone other mammals.

Re:Adult human skin cells (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#43738827)

Mostly. There is still an issue with yield - almost all of the embryos cloned will die soon after. Everyone remembers Dolly, no-one really notices the hundreds of other sheep clones that didn't survive. Primate yields are a lot lower - for some yet-unknown reason their embryos are exceptionally delicate. It's a problem with human cloneing, because human eggs are expensive - the only way to get them is to pump a woman full of hormones to induce many ovulations at once. A very unpleasant experience for the woman.

Re:Adult human skin cells (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43737865)

I wonder what doors that will open for crime scene investigations based on scavenged DNA samples.
Sure, any [true] v1.0 process is rarely replete with functions, but like someone said about GGlasses in today's Google I/O comments, you can be sure 10 years will bring in something cool. And just like a particle-antiparticle pair, we're bound to see evil parallels also.

Re:Adult human skin cells (2)

Big Hairy Ian (1155547) | about a year ago | (#43738855)

What the summary also neglected to point out is that we've been cloning Embryonic Stem Cells for over five years all they are doing is making it more reliable and retaining 100% compatibility with the donor (Something they had issues with previously)

Oh so they're doing SCNT (2)

NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) | about a year ago | (#43740345)

Somatic Cell Nuclear transfer. Actually the nice thing about this is that if you had some genetic disease(like cystic fibrosis) you could take the genetic material out of one of your skin cells, correct it, and then use that with this process to make an embryo. If at some point humanity figured out how to grow an organ from this embryo then you could try to make a lung with this that didn't have cystic fibrosis but you wouldn't reject either.

Re:Adult human skin cells (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43740423)

I'm not sure what that means but I'm pretty sure it pisses God off somehow!

Re:Adult human skin cells (1)

RicardoKAlmeida (2790435) | about a year ago | (#43742361)

I beg to differ. It's 99% genetically compatible. 1% is mitochondrial DNA, which can still prompt an immune response rejecting a transplant. Unless the donor oocyte has the same mitochondria as the recipient -- like a mother, sister or maternal grandma's oocyte.

Boffins: Query (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736531)

Why does this planet spin? What drives it to?

Re:Boffins: Query (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year ago | (#43736655)

The planet is not moving at all. It's the rest of the universe that is spinning around us.

Wonder how they figured to use caffeine? (3, Funny)

Nyder (754090) | about a year ago | (#43736559)

Was it a "oops" moment when one of the scientist knocked some of his coffee into a sample?

Re:Wonder how they figured to use caffeine? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43737143)

Reminds me of how the power puff girls were made.

Re:Wonder how they figured to use caffeine? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43738623)

Was it a "oops" moment when one of the scientist knocked some of his coffee into a sample?

We reported previously that the exposure of monkey oocytes to caffeine, a protein phosphatase inhibitor, was effective in protecting the cytoplast from premature activation and improved development of SCNT embryos (Mitalipov et al., 2007).

A friend of mine did a cancer related PhD and said that caffiene is known to have a range of effects on DNA transcription/translation machinery as well. Protein phosphorylation is important for a massive range of functions, so if you've a high enough concentration in your cells it's no wonder it messes with biochemistry.

Boink (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43741633)

An "oops" moment?. No.

Scientific progress goes "boink".

No need to stop there... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736651)

"On the day you were one, you became two. But when you become two, what will you do?"

Re:No need to stop there... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43742149)

Are you asking me or him?

Great (1)

FuzzNugget (2840687) | about a year ago | (#43736723)

Now they'll have the anti stem cell AND anti cloning nutjobs to deal with.

Re:Great (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736901)

Now they'll have the anti stem cell AND anti cloning nutjobs to deal with.

Most reasonable people in either of those camps share something in common: they don't want to kill a (potential) human being (eg. embryo).

There is no ethical problems with using stem cells derived from adults; it's only when an embryo is destroyed to harvest its cells.

My qualm with cloning is that it involves wiping the genetic from the egg (thus destroying that potential individual) and populating it with the desired genetic code.

Re:Great (3, Insightful)

Musc (10581) | about a year ago | (#43737213)

> My qualm with cloning is that it involves wiping the genetic from the egg (thus destroying that potential individual) and populating it with the desired genetic code.

Your qualm is that the genetic material from an egg is destroyed?
But doesn't this happen every month in a woman who isn't pregnant?

Re:Great (1)

mjwx (966435) | about a year ago | (#43738523)

> My qualm with cloning is that it involves wiping the genetic from the egg (thus destroying that potential individual) and populating it with the desired genetic code.

Your qualm is that the genetic material from an egg is destroyed?
But doesn't this happen every month in a woman who isn't pregnant?

He may also be a misogynist for all you know.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43741043)

The egg does not contain a potential individual. The egg is a gamete - half of a cell basically. An egg on it's own can never become a human being. They're eliminating the half-cell and inserting the nucleus of a full cell (a potential human), eliminating the step where two gametes combine to share traits and create a unique individual.

Re:Great (2)

N0Man74 (1620447) | about a year ago | (#43741985)

My qualm with cloning is that it involves wiping the genetic from the egg (thus destroying that potential individual) and populating it with the desired genetic code.

Won't someone think of the sperm? Millions of those guys die even when there is a successful pregnancy!

Surely you must be upset about the million of potential individuals being destroyed there!

A cloned embryo is... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43736739)

... just as much of a person as an embryo is.

So if one has any sort of ethical dilemma with harvesting stem cells from embryos under the notion that such willful destruction of embryos is equivalent to premeditated homicide, this particular technique shouldn't make those people breathe any easier, and in fact, may be cause for them to scream even more outrage at the notion that, to use words they might throw around, "they are creating even more people to deliberately murder".

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43737287)

there comes a point in the development of a fetus, where he or she can experience and react to pain or drastic change to surrounding environment. I'd like people to consider that at that time the person is a human being and needs to have rights recognized. I am not opposing an abortion of a mass of cells that don't have such ability.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#43738895)

There are two problems with that standard:

1. Rodents react to pain too. For you standard to work you need to declare that humans are 'special' without specifying exactly why this is the case. That, or declare rat poison a weapon of mess destruction.

2. It's subjective enough that the definition can be twisted for political ends.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43740309)

3. What about disorders which greatly dull or block a person's ability to feel pain?

4. Would continually injuring a fetus until you detected a pain response be considered torture?

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

riverat1 (1048260) | about a year ago | (#43742557)

My standard is the point the fetus is able to live independently of the mother. Up to that point it's just a parasite of the mother and nobodies business but hers.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43743275)

So that's, what, like 2 years after birth?

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43746873)

premature babies two months old have survived with care. without care a toddler would die.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

riverat1 (1048260) | about a year ago | (#43747865)

Yes, when I say independent of the mother I mean they are able to survive once they leave the womb. Yes, after birth the baby still needs care but the biological mother isn't required after that point.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (2, Insightful)

ideadman (952695) | about a year ago | (#43737413)

The Slashdot headline neglected to mention that they synthesized an embryo from adult human skin cells........

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43737685)

Are you suggesting that an embryo made from human skin cells is less of an embryo than one made by combining sperm with an egg cell? Christians don't consider Adam to be any less of a man just because he was made from dirt, and not birthed from a woman. Billy Peltzer didn't seem to consider Gizmo's offspring to be less mogwai just because they came into being by spilling water on him, and weren't the result of Gizmo getting freaky with another mogwai.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43737787)

Christianity and Gremlins as a theological argument....

K then.

Seems appropriate and that both are schlock fiction then.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43738071)

It just goes to show that people are passionate about defining life, but they don't really care how it formed. In vitro fertilization may have been big deal at one time, but now, not so much.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

riverat1 (1048260) | about a year ago | (#43742547)

These embryos are essentially just carbon copies of the donor they got the skin cells from. As such I think all that matters is the feelings of the skin cell donor.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

pevans (44803) | about a year ago | (#43737875)

Exactly. Well said.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43737991)

Your grandma's ashes aren't a person either, but most people would say it would be in bad taste to calibrate carbon dating equipment using them.

I think we can generally agree that it's a good thing to be empathetic toward other human beings over the span of their lives. That is to say, your concern for them should be greater than zero. Now, given that, do you think that concern should drop off to zero at arbitrary points or should it taper gradually toward zero? Should it be binary or shades of gray?

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#43739965)

Your grandma's ashes aren't a person either, but most people would say it would be in bad taste to calibrate carbon dating equipment using them.

Not sure about the bad taste thing (why would you taste someone's ashes?) but it would be very inefficient (inaccurate) in the first place because of all the extra C13 we've put into the atmosphere in the past 150 years or so. I'd suggest using your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandmother ashes at least; however, proper wood samples are even better, because their carbon contents has been sealed inside the bulk mass AND you can date them precisely using dendrochronology. Together with sampling from a limited region of the wood (a few rings at most), this gives you very accurate calibration samples.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#43739995)

(TL;DR: Don't use your greatmother's ashes to calibrate your C14 daring equipment unless she was very old AND made of wood.)

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43740521)

And therefore witch?

Re:A cloned embryo is... AND another ethical qu (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43738163)

question...

The artical mentions that some have ethical concerns that the egg donors were/are paid for their contributions. This has always struck me as odd. Why should these women NOT be paid? They are undergoing significant discomfort and inconvenience, and I would guess at least some risk to their health, since the procedure is probably performed under sedation if not anesthesia. The researchers themselves are paid, almost certainly so are the 'ethics professionals' who are wringing their hands over the implications. Why not the women who are providing a vital, irreplacable resource? Note that we are discussing UNFERTILIZED eggs, most of which are 'wasted'; we are not talking about -say- kidneys or livers where the possibility or even probability economic coersion is clearly of concern. Monty Python aside, even fundamentalist stereotypes are unlikely to be able to credibly campaign for the Rights of the Unfertilized.

There may be good reason for the idea that the only one who should not -dare i say- profit from tissue donation is the donor, but that reason has never been made clear to me.

Note FWIW that I (the AC commenter) am male.

Note also that the dual* of the egg donor is often paid.

*"look it up" see also Big Bang Theory, episode 1

Re:A cloned embryo is... AND another ethical qu (2)

pnutjam (523990) | about a year ago | (#43740805)

Here's a questions someone might be able to answer. If a woman has all her eggs when she is born, why are we harvesting them from living women, why aren't cadaverous eggs a viable solution? One body donated to science could yield thousands of eggs?

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

rocket rancher (447670) | about a year ago | (#43739167)

... just as much of a person as an embryo is.

So if one has any sort of ethical dilemma with harvesting stem cells from embryos under the notion that such willful destruction of embryos is equivalent to premeditated homicide, this particular technique shouldn't make those people breathe any easier, and in fact, may be cause for them to scream even more outrage at the notion that, to use words they might throw around, "they are creating even more people to deliberately murder".

Well, biologically, yes, a clone could be identical to an embryo, but biological definitions aren't the issue, are they? Leaving aside for the moment the simple fact that, unlike in the case of a human embryo, harvesting stem cells from a clone doesn't result in the destruction of the cell donor, you seem to be ignoring the social, cultural, and political definitions of a person that create the ethical dilemmas you are alluding to. Personhood is an extremely arbitrary and shifting concept, with thousands of years of social, cultural, and legal criteria that are still being refined today. In a bucket, the definition of a person is whatever the culture wants it to be. In the US, for example, it wasn't so long ago that a slave was defined as being 3/5 of a person, and women had no legal status at all, except relative to a spouse, or in the absence of a spouse, male members of her immediate family. Killing a slave was not homicide, because slaves were property, not people, and women couldn't vote or own property in their own name. Case in point, since you brought it up: as a result of Roe V. Wade, human embryos can and are being destroyed on a daily basis without triggering a homicide investigation -- until that definition of personhood is changed, pro-lifers can weep and gnash their teeth all they like. The social, legal, and cultural status of a human clone will have to be established via social, cultural, and legal precedent. Until that happens, debating the ethics or morality of harvesting stem cells from human clones is kinda pointless. Any controversy surrounding the issue will be generated for its entertainment value alone.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#43739919)

You're wrong! Cloned embryos don't have souls, God only gives souls to embryos that from from an egg and a sperm cell!

(This was sarcasm, BTW FYI FTW.)

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

Dayze!Confused (717774) | about a year ago | (#43744645)

Does this mean that all cloned embryos would grow up to be gingers?

Re:A cloned embryo is... (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43741173)

So if one has any sort of ethical dilemma with harvesting stem cells from embryos under the notion that such willful destruction of embryos is equivalent to premeditated homicide, this particular technique shouldn't make those people breathe any easier, and in fact, may be cause for them to scream even more outrage at the notion that, to use words they might throw around, "they are creating even more people to deliberately murder".

Yes, but you're talking about people who think the Earth is 6000 years old and are conceptually unable to differentiate between an acorn and a tree, a brick and a bulding, or an egg and a chicken, and therefor cannot differentiate between an embryo and a human being. The opinions of those who cannot think critically, and cannot differentiate between that which has the potential to become a person and an actual person, should have absolutely no bearing on the direction if science, or indeed on any scientific discussion. Fuck them, in other words.

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

SillyHamster (538384) | about a year ago | (#43741717)

So if one has any sort of ethical dilemma with harvesting stem cells from embryos under the notion that such willful destruction of embryos is equivalent to premeditated homicide, this particular technique shouldn't make those people breathe any easier, and in fact, may be cause for them to scream even more outrage at the notion that, to use words they might throw around, "they are creating even more people to deliberately murder".

Oddly, from reading the article on what's actually done, I'm not sure calling the result an embryonic stem cell is accurate. Digging to the actual study excerpt, they use an oocyte, which if I'm parsing the relevant wiki article correctly, is an unfertilized egg.

The definition of an embyro is that it's the first stage of life, which eventually grows into a mature lifeform. An unfertilized egg is not an embryo, and I don't think the process of inserting a skin cell results in a cell capable of growing into a human being. If it's not an embryo, calling its resulting stem cell "embryonic" seems like false advertising.

In other words, the process doesn't sound objectionable, but the label seems to be deliberately controversial. What purpose does that serve?

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

irenaeous (898337) | about a year ago | (#43742425)

You are quite right. I have always regarded myself as pro-life because I believe that an unborn human with an operating brain and beating heart is a human being and has an inherit right to life. But I parted ways with much of the pro-life community on defining the start of life at conception. My problem is how can we regard a zygote prior to forming a blastocyst as a individual human life when life is so fungible at that stage. I mean, we can split the zygote and get more than one individual in the form of identical twins or triplets. Or two zygotes and become fused and form one individual who is a chimera. The logic of regarding zygotes as humans has other pitfalls as well. Since 50% of zygotes fail to implant, then the very act of having a child implicitly involves the slaughter of just as many other humans as are produced by having a child. Does this make all natural birth parents murderers? And now that we know, are they all now premeditated murderers?

Re:A cloned embryo is... (1)

Specter (11099) | about a year ago | (#43743547)

An embryo that dies due to natural causes hasn't been murdered. Murder requires both knowledge and intent: I knew my action was going to result in death and I specifically took that action in order to cause death.

As for when life begins, conception is the logical point to choose because it is the least arbitrary. You've specified operating brain as a criteria for your definition of the start of a human life. Define operating. I'm going to assume that you mean a brain that's autonomously controlling at least some of the autonomic functions of the child but that's just an arbitrary point you picked. Is that any more or less valid than the point of recognizable self-awareness; a point which it might argued doesn't come until well after birth?

Re:A cloned embryo is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43749683)

Well.. there's a difference between this embryo and the one from an old fashioned conception.. what is the "moment of conception" (supposedly the time when a soul enters it) in a cloned embryo ? Does this cloned embryo have a soul at all ? An even more interesting question is if we take the egg from a chimp, then genetically engineer it is match a human's DNA (a certain president with a "W" for a middle initial might be the best specimen), then clone it.. what about that cloned W ? Does it lack a soul like the original ?

Meh. (1)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about a year ago | (#43736909)

Didn't Hwang Woo-suk do this 9 years ago? ;-)

I think I'll wait a little while before I get too excited.

Bacon. (2)

m1ndcrash (2158084) | about a year ago | (#43737089)

I bet if they added bacon the cloning process would go better!

Re:Bacon. (1)

codepigeon (1202896) | about a year ago | (#43737225)

Is there anything that bacon doesn't make better?.....mmm bacon...

Re:Bacon. (1)

Shirogitsune (1810950) | about a year ago | (#43740063)

Sunny D?

Though there's nothing that can make Sunny D better (or good, for that matter).

If you have seen what caffeine... (1)

Bartles (1198017) | about a year ago | (#43737091)

...does to a spider's web weaving ability, this does not sound like a good idea.

mod 0p (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43737545)

just yet, but I'm asshole to others When I stood for DistenDed. All I gloves, condoms BitTorrent) Second, asshole about.' One

I wouldn't mind being cloned.. (1)

houbou (1097327) | about a year ago | (#43737933)

I would send it to work in my place, except, he would more than likely do the same, and so on, and so forth.. :)

All those involved... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43738695)

... should be arrested and imprisoned for life for their disgusting crimes.

Do any of you Slashdot idiots think they actually stop at a certain age of development? They will carry on and will create human babies in the laboratory - obviously all of these Frankensteins support abortion, as do most of the Slashdot sociopaths...

Re: All those involved... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43739097)

Of course, creating babies in the lab out of skincells for no apparent reason, i'm sure that will pass the ethics comittee in a breeze.

Do you live in a fantasy world or something?

*sigh*

Obvious (1)

internerdj (1319281) | about a year ago | (#43739745)

I could have told you that. All of my processes are horrible without the addition of caffeine.

Bob (2)

NotFamous (827147) | about a year ago | (#43741267)

Bobby was right, "Evrahbahdy muss git clohhned!"

Long Pig, anyone (1)

argStyopa (232550) | about a year ago | (#43741321)

As long as we've perfected this, why not just grow them a little more, for meat?

I Want a Clone (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43741427)

I want a clone of me so it can work and I can troll on /. all day :)

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>