America: Human and Animal Reproductive Cloning
By Fox News,
Fox News
| 01. 21. 1998
As you may know, scientists have made advances in cloning, where they can reproduce a whole animal from a single cell. Do you think it is acceptable to use cloning to ...
| |
Acceptable |
Not acceptable |
Don't know |
| reintroduce extinct species? |
19
|
73
|
8
|
| reproduce endangered species? |
32
|
61
|
7
|
| reproduce livestock? |
28
|
65
|
7
|
| reproduce humans? |
6
|
89
|
5
|
Related Articles
By Evelina Johansson Wilén, Jacobin | 01.18.2026
In her book The Argonauts, Maggie Nelson describes pregnancy as an experience marked by a peculiar duality. On the one hand, it is deeply transformative, bodily alien, sometimes almost incomprehensible to the person undergoing it. On the other hand...
By Josie Ensor, The Times | 12.09.2025
A fertility start-up that promises to screen embryos to give would-be parents their “best baby” has come under fire for a “misuse of science”.
Nucleus Genomics describes its mission as “IVF for genetic optimisation”, offering advanced embryo testing that allows...
By Grace Won, KQED Forum [with CGS' Katie Hasson] | 12.02.2025
In the U.S., it’s illegal to edit genes in human embryos with the intention of creating a genetically engineered baby. But according to the Wall Street Journal, Bay Area startups are focused on just that. It wouldn’t be the first...
Several recent Biopolitical Times posts (1, 2, 3, 4) have called attention to the alarmingly rapid commercialization of “designer baby” technologies: polygenic embryo screening (especially its use to purportedly screen for traits like intelligence), in vitro gametogenesis (lab-made eggs and sperm), and heritable genome editing (also termed embryo editing or reproductive gene editing). Those three, together with artificial wombs, have been dubbed the “Gattaca stack” by Brian Armstrong, CEO of the cryptocurrency company...
