Thanks. I couldn’t find them more than likely as I was using the wrong search terms based on your initial post on the subject.
Having read through the links provided on your two posts, they do not prove that tests have confirmed “the cloned embryo inherited the biological clock of the donor DNA”, probably explaining the reason why it is ‘little publicized’.
There’s some telomere shortening in some, but not all clones. There’s even indications that telomere’s in some species actually lengthen with age, the opposite of what would be required to support the hypothesis you initially claimed was proven.
I’m not prepared for an in depth discussion nor comfortable making claims about on the subject, as it is not my line of work, nor have I studied it at any great length, so I have no special knowledge.
From what I have been able to find on my own, and with the links you’ve provided (some 20 years before Dolly was put together in a lab), there is no established link to support the statement:
“the cloned embryo inherited the biological clock of the donor DNA, which means any tissue or organs generated by the cloning process will not extend the life of the host since they are of the same age.”
These processes are not understood well enough to make any such conclusion, though some have speculated that may be the case. The mistake here is drawing conclusions based on unproven inferences on subjects we don’t fully comprehend or understand.
If the cause of the premature aging cannot be found, for example tying it to the length of the telomeres, then a statistical study can be performed to see if Dolly’s early demise was in the tail of the distribution, or very close to the expected value.
The reason is is “little publicized” is because it was an unexpected negative outcome that the cloning community is not real happy about. As a person of Faith I find it kind of funny that human science tried to pirate God’s code only to find out that their ultimate quest, immortality, will not be fulfilled.
My other assertion, which you did not react to, is totally unproven, but worthy of note. As the human genome becomes more and more known, I predict that the actual number of generations of man will be discovered in the genetic code. It will be similar to a software revision, a trivial piece of the DNA that keeps track of every time a haploid is formed, or when two come together. Then we will be able to evaluate how accurate the number of generations as described in the Sacred Scriptures are versus the modern explanations which assume that man has been on this Earth for hundreds of millions of years, which was what started this whole thread.