Want this question answered?
fat cells have reapable stem cells that can be transformed into neurons.
Because it cheek cells don't have the right DNA/BACTERIA
Some people are worried that cloning technology might eventually be used for immoral purposes. People might, in theory, be mass-produced as slaves or soldiers. People could be cloned as a source of spare organs for the wealthy.
This is not a question that can be answered with a simple 'yes' or 'no'. Embryonic stem cell research has the potential to cure a range of degenerative disorders from Alzheimer's to ALS, as well as supply organ transplants without the risk of immune rejection. To harvest functional stem cells, they must be extracted from a fertilized egg before the cells differentiate, or 12-14 days maximum. Fertilized eggs from in vitro fertilization clinics have been used only after fertilization attempts have ended. These fertilized eggs are notguaranteed to implant or be able to develop into a baby, and neither of these if a prerequisite for harvesting ES cells. Only 24% of attempted IVF pregnancies yielded a live and healthy baby in 2005 (mdwebsite.com). On the one hand, these fertilized eggs will never be used for anything yet hold such a promising therapy for so many individuals alive today. The ethical parallel for this situation is, "is it ethically wrong to use functional organs as transplants from a deceased individual, or wouldn't it be a waste?" On the other hand, we realize that society has created these fertilized eggs, and a small percentage of them have the potential to develop into healthy babies if given to correct situation. ES harvesting as of yet, does not differentiate between these two, and must destroy the embryo in order to retrieve the ES cells. This is destroying the potentialfor life in certain embryos. Though they are not alive yet, they do contain the ability to develop into an organism, a human, and they were intentionally created to do just that. In regards to were the promise and statistics lie, it seems unethical to allow an intentionally manufactured collection of multipotent cells to go to waste when so many people in pain and nearing pre-mature death could benefit from them.This is true but one fact always seems to be overloooked. An embryo is not the only place that stem cells can be taken from. Umbilical cord stem cells have the capability of changing into almost just as many cells as embryonic stem cells. Just a few weeks ago an autstic boy was cured with umbilical cord stem cells.
Liver cells
punnett square
Your body might develop 75 cells while you are as an embryo. People have billions-trillions cells.
A man might be attracted to a woman who is racist against his people because he finds other traits in her that he likes.
fat cells have reapable stem cells that can be transformed into neurons.
people might go against
Because it cheek cells don't have the right DNA/BACTERIA
Unless you tell more about the embryos, there is no way of knowing because we don't know what the first one might be.
Overthrow them with superior military might.
There are people that are for space exploration because there might be life on other planets somewhere. Other people are against it because they feel the money can be spent somewhere else.
Liver cells
Some are, some are not. Don't lump them all together.Those that ARE against DNA testing might have a general mistrust of newfangled science, or might think that it is interfering in God's business.
Some people are worried that cloning technology might eventually be used for immoral purposes. People might, in theory, be mass-produced as slaves or soldiers. People could be cloned as a source of spare organs for the wealthy.