It could be because it make the clone age much faster. New reacearch could solve this.
The impact of cloning organisms in America is unknown and there is no way to predict what kind of advantages and/or disadvantages there would be as a result of cloning.
Replacement cloning is a theoretical possibility, and would be a combination of therapeutic and reproductive cloning. Replacement cloning would entail the replacement of an extensively damaged, failed, or failing body through cloning followed by whole or partial brain transplant.
Cloning, to me, is making a total duplicate of someone's body. But with no spirit put there by God, then it would be without a mind, will or emotion.
It would be perfectly acceptable to say highly risky activities, however, the most common phrasing would be high risk activities.
I do not believe that anyone in the world has their own cloning cabbage, so the question makes no sense!
Cloning would be added as a distinct circle outside the existing categories in the Venn diagram to represent a separate concept or technology. This circle would not overlap with any of the existing categories to show that cloning is a unique entity on its own.
I believe cloning should be done, it would help the world a lot more. Also I wouldnt have to do as much for myself, because I would have a clone!
Nothing. Or maybe the large controversy over cloning.
The best candidate for that would be safe.
No
No, Cloning is an expensive means of reproduction. It would be much cheaper and easier to breed cannon fodder by the old fashion means.
NOOOOOOOOO!!! THis is same either way around. This is because cloning, not to mention the fact that we clone hundreds of times wrong before we clone right, but cloning gives the exact same genes to the receiver. This will decrease genetic diversity, and all of humans would be destroyed because we would get dumber after every clone, and a disease would kill much more because we didn't have enough genetic diversity