If you explain to a patient what can be done and what might be the downsides, let the patient choose; don't have ethicists, priests, or doctors say you may or may not have replacement cells.
For my part, I have worked all my life with eggs and embryos of frogs. Compared to other small animals, these have figured prominently in the world of literature.
I think that I cannot immediately see the route by which we should really understand memory and the workings of the brain.
The first point to remember is that attempts to clone mice have actually been very unsuccessful for at least a decade. Sheep have been successful. So one asks, 'Where do humans lie?' Most people think they are somewhere between the two, but at least there's a reasonable chance they might be clone-able.
I get into lab early and leave a bit early, too. So I like to have an hour or two before everybody comes in.
Once the principle is there, that cells have the same genes, my own personal belief is that we will, in the end, understand everything about how cells actually work.
I have this rather amazing report which, roughly speaking, says I was the worst student the biology master had ever taught.
There's a danger of some of the best people saying, 'I don't want a career in science.'
Nuclear transplantation is a technique that has enormously facilitated the analysis of these interactions between nucleus and cytoplasm.
I take the view that anything you can do to relieve suffering or improve human health will usually be widely accepted by the public - that is to say, if cloning actually turned out to be solving some problems and was useful to people, I think it would be accepted.
