[LMB] LMB science in real life

Dave Klecha dklecha at i2k.com
Mon, 11 Feb 2002 13:26:39 -0500 (EST)

On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Royce Day wrote:

> Dave Klecha wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Kristine Smith wrote:
> >
> > > I am very edgy about what would emerge from that first vat.  I am also
> > > concerned about how far the artificial environment would be tweaked to
> > > alter/develop personality.
> >
> > Why do I feel a series of bad horror movies coming on?  Seriously, though,
> > I wonder then if this isn't one of those alleged advancements that's still
> > several important steps away from any sort of viability.
> Well, they have managed to keep goat embryos alive for a while, IIRC, so it's
> not that far off.  Perhaps more along the stage of Dolly style cloning rather
> than that so-called teleportation stuff.

Well, yes, but "for a while" is still quite different from "we're churning
them out daily."  And I'd be interested as to the differences between the
two.  Is it merely a concept-execution thing or are they still working on
the concepts? 
> IMO I doubt a real world uterine replicator is going to affect the child's
> development one way or the other.  They were saying similar words of doom when
> the first test-tube baby was born, and last I checked she was doing just
> fine...

Hm.  But I do think that the difference in elapsed time and factors of
development increase significantly between fertilization and incubation.
On the one hand, you're talking about a thing that, essentially occurs
inside of a moment against something that, by definition, occurs over a
series of stages over forty weeks (give or take).  

It seems to me that the possibilities of divergence and variation increase
significantly over this kind of duration.  Likewise, it seems that the
number of developmental hurdles that need to be surmounted is also
greater.  But such is just as it seems to me.  I stand in preparation for
being corrected.

Dave (the developmental)