>A reasonable prioritization based on the relative impacts of
>the solutions would be:
> a) solve the organ supply problem
> b) reduce the "cost" of the organs (grow them faster/cheaper)
> c) minimize the rejection problems (make them look like the recipient)
>
>I'm not convinced that "cloning" technologies make any significant
>contribution in these areas.
>
>Robert
>
Sorry for not being clear before by what I meant about the connection
between stem cells and cloning - my point was that if you create a zygote
cloned from yourself, and do the neccessary biotech procedures to keep the
zygote from becomming a person (i.e. keep it as a mass of stem cells), then
grow organs from these stem cells, the organs will be a perfect match to the
person who gave the cell sample. This would solve issue c) completely.
I believe what mis-led you was my use of the word 'clone' - I define it as
creating a zygote which is a genetic match to some living or dead person -
not neccessarily letting the zygote grow to maturity.
I'd like to add:
d) Legalize organ selling and trading, with strict controls in place to
prevent the theft of organs from living people. There are many people who
would be willing to sell a kidney. Many more who would be willing to take a
cash reward today in exchange for their organs after death. Competition
among organ agencies would solve most of the supply problems. An eBay-like
organ website would be ideal.