Ian Wilmut and Cloning
Before Dolly the cloned sheep made news headlines, the same researchers had only the year before raised seven other sheep from oocytes whose nuclei had been replaced with nuclei from either fetal or embryonic tissue.1 This created a minor stir as this is the "first report to [their] knowledge, of live mammalian offspring following nuclear transfer from an established cell line."1 The implications of this is that they have provided techniques to analyze and modify gene functions in sheep (By providing clones of the same sheep).1 The key to their success is the "serum starvation" that the donor cell undergoes, to force the donor cell into a 'quiescent' state, so that it is not replicating its DNA or dividing. This possibly makes the nucleus more susceptible to re-programming by the recipient egg cell.
The researchers built on this knowledge, and carried out a nuclear transfer from cells from the mammary gland of a 6-year old ewe in the last trimester of pregnancy. (instead of fetal or embryonic stem cells). After 277 nuclear transfers, Dolly was born.2 Dolly shows morphological characteristics belonging to the breed (Finn Dorset)that donated the nucleus instead of the oocyte donor or the surrogate mother(Scottish Blackface). Thus erasing any possibility of the birth due to the mating of the surrogate mother with another sheep.
In 1975 Gurdon, Laskey & Reeves showed that nuclei transfer from keratinised skin cells of adult frogs supported growth to the tadpole stage 3. Wilmut's experiment took one step further and managed for the organism(Dolly) to grow to adulthood, thereby confirming that adult cells do in fact contain workable versions of all the genes necessary to produce an entire organism.
Previously there was widespread belief that cells from adult mammals cannot be persuaded to regenerate a whole organism. Now that Wilmut has proven once and for all that this is otherwise, many cloning experiments that were once fantasy could now be accomplished. For example, an organism of interest can be cloned from any living cells from it if it no longer can reproduce normally (perhaps due to defects in gametes formation) or if only cultured cells of the organism of interest remains (it has already died but complete cell death has not occurred).
However, it will take some time before Wilmut's technique is used as an important aid in all manner of biological and biomedical investigations. As forementioned, having to do 277 nuclear transfer just to obtain one living sheep is impractical for most experiments.
Carl Zimmer an evolution scientist wrote an article called” Bringing Them Back to Life”. In July 2003 a group of scientists brought back the bucardo to life. The bucardo is a wild goat that was found in the mountains of the Pyrenees. In 1989 it was found that there were only slightly over a dozen of the goats left. “Ten years later a single bucardo remained: a female nicknamed Celia.” (Zimmer, 445) Bucardos were officially extinct, however, Celia’s cells remained preserved in labs. For a few years a team of reproductive psychologists led by Jose Folch injected nuclei from Celia’s cells into goat eggs removed of their own DNA, they then implanted the eggs into surrogate mothers (Zimmer, 445) Over 57 implantations, only one was born. The clone was born with several problems and died quickly.
The scientists were hoping for the cells to divide into 100 or so cells called blastocysts. They wanted to take these blastocysts and have them grow to replace nerve, muscle and other tissues. But only one of them came to the Six-cell stage and by then it stopped dividing. They had done a similar procedure they had eggs grow without sperm to fertilize, to develop parthenogenetically into blastocysts they think that using these to procedures together they could achieve human cloning.
Today, we as a society world wide have a new issue to deal with. Science has discovered the means in which to clone animals, opening a whole new discussion. Many people are inclined to say why would science even wish to peruse this method of research. Lewis Thomas says in his essay "The Hazards of Science"
Trelease, Jim. "Book Banning Violates Children and Young Adult Freedoms." Book Banning. Ed. Ronnie D. Lankford. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2007. At Issue. Rpt. from "Censorship and Children's Books." Trelease-on-Reading.com. 2006.Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 31 Mar. 2014.
Many books have been questioned and challenged. Even as far as to banning them. But what exactly is a banned book and why are they banned? A banned book is a book that has been censored by an authority, a government body, a library, or a even school system. A book that has been banned is actually removed from a library or school system. The actual contextual reasons as to banning them is use of explicit violence, gore, sexuality, explicit language, religion, or dark times in history. On the non-contextual side of the reason why they are banned books are usually because with the best intentions to protect people, frequently children, from difficult philosophies and information. Teachers, or even more common adults, often censor books from children if they feel that the books have maniacal or controversial ideas in them. In some scenarios, those who are censoring books think that a book might be appropriate for a certain, or several groups in society. A book that might be perfectly fine for a ninth grader might easily be horrendous or confusing to a fourth grader. Thus having them exposed and influenced to thinking a certain way and act upon what they have just read. Well at least that’s what people think is going to happen anyways. But honestly, reading books of any genre gives us knowledge, entertainment, and imagination so therefore no books or novels should be banned and is ultimately dependent on the reader’s choice.
People should be allowed to read whatever they want to read, even if it is a touchy subject to someone else. Although some people mainly believe in the banning of books due to explicit content, it actually causes a negative effect on people and children. Not only does it take away the people’s first amendment rights, but it also shelters children from real life situations that might affect their future. Banning books is unconstitutional and shelters children.
As the Declaration of Independence states, everyone should be able to uphold the rights of “the enjoyment of life and liberty…and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety” (“Declaration of Independence”). A well organized government can ensure these rights.
In schools around the nation, many books have been banned from the teaching curriculum. Some of them deserve to be banned due to the explicit content only suited for adults. Some books like the Harry Potter series, The Catcher in the Rye, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and The Hunger Games. Granted, there are language issues in Catcher and Huckleberry Finn, but that language exists everywhere. The censorship should not be as strict as it is because many great books are being banned that students should be reading in order to gain an understanding on who some great writers were. Some of the banned books should be reconsidered on whether they should be censored or not.
...by the school board and library, as well as teachers that have their overall judgment on what can be appropriate, interesting, engaging and useful for the students, and that controversial issues are not something to be afraid of, but instead, a useful learning tool that will prepare children not only for college, but for life as well. Students are a lot more mature than they are given credit for, and when a material that involves subjects such as language or violence is introduced well to a class by the teacher, the class will be interested and motivated to discuss maturely, and not be impressed by the subject or start acting out of influence by it. If we ban every book that deals with considered “explicit,” or “uncomfortable” content, then we are denying students a great opportunity of being informed on real issues, and forming their own ideas of right and wrong.
What are books? Books are an excellent source of information and imagination, but not everyone considers it like that. More or less people tend to not agree and dislike the messages some books gives its readers. Books are banned for not taking in the same political and religious views, for its vulgar and obscene words, explicit sex scenes and sexual language, the community values or simply because it’s a little negative and a sedative.
All in all, throughout our society ideas, morals, and lessons are thought through books and if books are being banished from our schools, then we are all being deprived of our freedom as intellectuals that have the own opinions and ideas. In fact if books teach students lessons and if this books are abolished then lessons, ideas and real events of the real world are also banished from students. After all, who is the right person to censor book?
Spearmann thought of cloning as a way to study cell differentiation. Briggs and King used the technique of nuclear transfer on amphibians and it was successful (Campbell). “Subsequently John Gurdon demonstrated the potential to reprogram differentiated cells by producing adult Xenopus using epithelial cells from developing tadpole intestine as nuclear donors,” says Alberio Campbell. Unfortunately, later studies show that this method of cloning tadpoles didn’t allow them to develop to the adult stage of life (Campbell). “The use of enucleated metaphase II oocytes as recipient cytoplasts proved more successful and in 1986 resulted in the production of live lambs using blastomeres from 8 to 16-cell stage embryos as nuclear donors,” says Campbell. This success in sheep was also used on other mammals such as cattle and swine. There were limitations to the technology. First, the “frequency development was very low”...
Book banning has a long history and has made both positive and negative impact on readers. People have been trying to stop books from being banned, but there are also people that are trying to ban books to protect their children. Many books have been challenged and even banned because of the “inappropriate” content the books contain such as profanity. Books have started to get censored since the 1500’s and has threatened many cultures. The people who ban and censor books think that they are protecting the readers from the information, but it is secluding the readers from getting more ideas. This creates a negative impact on the readers, especially high school students. People don’t realize that book censorship limits the way they view the world. Many books have been banned in American high schools because of political, religious, sexual, and social reasons. Book banners and parents should be more lenient in what the book expresses because it teaches readers, such as high school students, many lessons that will help them in life.
The minds of children are the most impressionable. Children are not born with any predetermined judgments or ideas about controversial subjects. They do not know what racism, homophobia, or discrimination are, or how to practice them. They are not born knowing what religion they will practice, or even what religion is. This fact about children is among the reasons that children's literature is as important as it is. For as long as humans have been creating them, there have been books that have been considered controversial. Children's books are no different. There have been children's books that have been banned from various places or groups, such as religious groups, schools, and even entire countries. The reasons behind the banning of these books vary, and the criticism of censorship as a practice is an issue that is widely debated. One modern book series that has been censored in varies outlets is the Harry Potter series by J.K Rowling.
...out of jail Ophelia lets him stay at her apartment until he gets his job and house back. She trusts him to be there and not steal anything even when she’s not there. After awhile their connection grows and they begin to actually like each other. Ophelia does not care if he’s rich or poor she likes him for who he is unlike Penelope.