Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 17 January 2008 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2007.350
News
Human embryos cloned from adult cells
Researchers are eager to see whether patient-matched stem-cell lines can be produced.
A California company has brought human cloning research to a new level with efficient production of cloned human blastocysts — an early stage of embryos.
The company, Stemagen in La Jolla in California, hopes that its achievement will be the first step towards using cloning techniques for biomedical research and, potentially, therapy.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email redesign@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
Comment On Human Cloning Research It is about time that science make the Life Evolution mental leap, that scientists swallow and digest the common-sense realization that it is not cells that are the organisms, that the outer cell membrane is an organ, a multi-functional organ, plain and simple, and that it is the genome that is a living complex organism, consisting of (by now) interdependent symbiotic living member genes. See http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLBbHgtjQjxG_Q--?cq=1&p=372 Therefore there is still a vast empty void of knowledge/experience which is a prerequisite for orderly progress of work on cloning. The still missing required knowledge is the assessment of effects-relationship of the age of the genome-genes on its-their constitution and functioning. Dov Henis
Open Invitation for wide-scope pre-publication peer review on my new criticism on a new iPS cell publication in Nature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dear iPS cell researchers and all people interested in learning iPS cells: I have written a criticisms entitled "Are iPS cells really induced from differentiated cells?" to further challenge the induction claim for the iPS cells as made in a recent Nature publication (451: 141-146, 2008). My criticism was just sent to Dr. George Q. Daley, the corresponding author of that paper for a formal response. However, in order to collect more opinions on my criticism, I am making this public announcement inviting other iPS cell researchers and all people interested in learning iPS cells to review my manuscript. I wish all reviewers will give their permission to publish their comments, ideally with a real name but anonymous reviews will also be welcomed and respected. My intention is to submit my criticism to Nature 10 days later from today (That is on Jan. 31, 2008). So I urge all interested people to contact me as soon as possible to request my criticism and then submit a solid review on it (solid review can be totally negative but should contain some reasons). Sincerely yours, Shi V. Liu MD PhD ------------------------ SVL@logibio.com
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: ----------------- Two of my previous comments on this News and one of another comment on another News were removed by the Moderator for the reasons that I will not disclose here. I will not re-post any different versions of those comments. However, I do wish to ask the opinion from the public: should a scientist be allowed to ignore PUBLISHED criticisms (http://im1.biz/Cloning.htm) and advance his research without performing the necessary CONTROLS that he agreed as IMPORTANT? ------------------- Shi V. Liu (SVL@logibio.com)
An open invitation for post-publication peer review and public comment on debate over the induction claim for iPS cells ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dear iPS cell researchers and all people interested in learning iPS cells: Nature has rejected to publish my Communications Arising <Are iPS cells really induced from differentiated cells?> which challenges the induction claim for the iPS cells as made in a recent Nature publication (451: 141-146, 2008). Now this paper has been published in Logical Biology (8: 1, 7, 2008) and is free in full-length to every one at:. http://im1.biz/albums/userpics/10001/LB2008V8N1A1_iPS4.htm Or http://im1.biz/albums/userpics/10001/LB2008V8N1A1_iPS4.pdf I welcome anyone to submit a review or comment on this publication. Negative review/comment will also be greatly appreciated. Sincerely yours, Shi V. Liu MD PhD ------------------------ SVL@logibio.com
The other side of iPS cells ------------------------------------- A paper entitled <Can Yamanaka explain his contradictory statements?> was rejected by Nature due to space limitation. It is now published in Logical Biology. It can be found free in two formats: //PDF (http://im1.biz/albums/userpics/10001/LB2008V8N1A3_Yamanaka.pdf) //HTM (http://im1.biz/albums/userpics/10001/LB2008V8N1A3_Yamanaka.htm) // In addition, more articles on iPS cells and cloning can be found at http://im1.biz/Cloning.htm ---------------- Shi V. Liu (SVL@logibio.com)
About the last comment, I really think that the articles that Yamanaka published about iPS cells are so clean, truth and others groups remake this experiment. Isn't good critic this group, this only retard humanity. Try to remake this experiment and see if are this true or not.