>>nd a clone of yourself, while it might
>>be nice to have a child with 100% of your genes instead of 50%, would
>>probably die young after being infected with germs from you that have
>>had 100s of generations to adapt to your--and therefore his--immune
>>system.
>
>Good point. But couldn't you get around that by infusing the "experienced"
>blood into the fresh clone?
I think Lee meant the capacity of the immune system here, not its experience.
It is the same problem we face with life extension. As our lifespan
increases, our generation renewal ratio drops compared to that of the
germs. Germs will evolve and adapt more quickly than we do, added to the
fact that we already do less, and they do more so because of medical
improvements.
J. de Lyser
participant evolutionist movement
Brussels