Debate over what constitutes cloning

Stanford stem cell project draws criticism

Wednesday, December 11, 2002 Posted: 12:46 PM EST (1746 GMT)

Stanford says its new research is not cloning, but other scientists disagree.

SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- Stanford University has reignited the debate over the use of stem cells with a top scientist saying the school intends to experiment with cell nuclear transfer technology, an effort many consider to be cloning.
"Our avowed goal is to advance science," said Stanford medical professor Dr. Irving Weissman, who will direct the work. "For any group to stay out of the action and wait for someone else to do it because of political reasons is wrong."

http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/12/11/stanford.cloning.ap/index.html

By definition I suppose this is cloning. But is it what we have come to believe cloning is? Most people I believe think of cloning as reproducing a living creature, be it man or animal which is almost universally frowned on. In this instance it is the cloning of cells for medical research. Cells which cannot on their own develop into a human."
Is the research as being conducted at Stanford the image you would conger up when you think of cloning?