[mcg1969]

Don't misinterpret what this is, BTW. This embryo would haves a genetic mother and father in the traditional sense. What is going on is that the second mother is "donating" the ooplasm from an egg, replacing the mitochondial DNA. This DNA is always passed from mother to child---the father has no contribution---and in some cases, defects in that DNA can cause disease.

But it's not like this baby, assuming it is successfully born, will acquire any of the physical or mental characteristics of its "second" mother.

I'm not saying there are no ethical issues here, it's just important to get the story right. As far as I know it's a long way to actually creating an egg with two equal mothers and no father.

[hispanichoosier]

Don't misinterpret what this is, BTW. This embryo would haves a genetic mother and father in the traditional sense. What is going on is that the second mother is "donating" the ooplasm from an egg, replacing the mitochondial DNA.

Good point. The child would still have 23 pairs of chromosomes from 1 father and 1 mother, the true parents. The donor of the ooplasm is no more a mother in the genetic sense than a surrogate mother would be.

Note that the researchers plan to kill the developing child before he or she reaches a stage that may appear "too human" to the general public.

[brytlea]

But the baby (assuming down the road they do produce a child this way) is getting something from the mitochondrial DNA. It does something, else there would be no need to do this procedure. I wonder what the potential upshoot of this are. I'm not smart enough to figure it out, just smart enough to know that the potential child is getting something from that DNA.
susie