Mankind has always tried to extend his knowledge about the properties of every living thing; it is an integral part of human nature. What is also important about it is that there is constant disagreement in new views between scientists and society. One such problem is the question of human cloning. Firstly, the term “cloning” must be defined: “Cloning is the production of an exact genetic duplicate of a living organism or cell” (Baird 2002, 20). This procedure not only led to producing a sheep, Dolly, but it can also have other very useful applications.
The goal of transgenic livestock1 is to produce livestock with ideal characteristics for the agricultural industry and to be able to manufacture biological products such as proteins for humans. Farmers are attempting to produce transgenic livestock already, but not efficiently, due to the minimal ability to alter embryos genetically. Researchers can harvest and grow adult cells in large amounts unlike embryos; scientists can then genetically alter the adult cells, find which ones transformed, and clone only those cells. Scientists also ponder the idea of cloning endangered species to increase their population. The possibilities of cloning are endless, however as suggested by (Hawley, 1998) we are actually doing much of this research for the improvement of life for humans.
The benefits and problems of cloning tend to make a cycle. For example, if scientists continue to genetically clone species that help in the medicinal field, then this would cause people to live unnaturally long. The issue of extreme overcrowding would arise, and scientists would have to clone or grow more crops to provide an adequate amount of food for everyone, thus leading to more possible environmental damage. Cloning has been proven to be useful to society; however there are many risks that come with it. This process needs to be analyzed in more depth in each circumstance, to determine the long term effects, before moving forward with the use of cloning on a global scale.
If this technique were attempted in humans, it would risk miscarriages in the mother and severe developmental problems in the child. Standard medical practice would never allow the use of any drug or device with such little study and without much additional animal research. (National Bioethics Advisory Commission) The actual risks of physical harm to the cloned child cannot be certain without conducting experiments on human beings. This in itself is unethical because no one knows what will happen and the child is in danger because "one does not know what is going to happen, and one is^possibly leading to a child who could be disabled and have developmental difficulties." (Professor John Robertson) Human cloning would violate a person's individuality and take away a child's identity.
It might just be a gut reaction of humans to fear and suspect new technology, or it could be a well-founded fear. In the animal world, cloning could be used to save endangered species and increase production of livestock. In time, this relatively new technology may become a powerful and useful tool This study examines the many supporting arguments for cloning, including objectives, among them starting families, organ transplants, and medical research. The creation of Dolly revolutionized the scientific world and sparked a flaming debate of what might one day become reality. Humans now had the power to intentionally create what is essentially a copy of another organism.
It is because of these medical, societal, and religious concerns that human cloning should not be performed. Medically, we are not sufficiently advanced enough to safely perform cloning on humans. Societally, our government is unsure of what to do about the situation, and the people are unsure about cloning’s effectiveness. Finally, on the religious side of cloning, Christians, Catholics, and other religions are against the use of cloning for the fear that people will become too prideful in their ability to essentially design life. Until something is done to rectify these issues, human cloning will continue to be unethical and should remain unused.
Multiple Source Essay Cloning: What is the Right thing to do? Cloning offers many applications, especially in medicine, however, in spite of the many advantages, many people still consider the idea of human cloning, and the practice of cloning all together to be immoral. This opinion is rarely based on a careful analysis of facts, often only a spontaneous reaction. Cloning technology has potential for doing much good, research in human cloning should continue, although some applications of it may need to be restricted. Cloning is the process of extracting the DNA out of a donor’s cell and implanting this genetic code in another cell in order to grow a being with identical genes, thus virtually duplicating the donor.
There are many ethical, philosophical, and religious objections to cloning, especially the cloning of humans. In this paper I hope to convince you that both human and animal cloning are veins of research that are worth pursuing and that only some divisions of human cloning should have restrictions placed on them. Animal cloning has many potential applications. According to The National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC), "Some of the immediate goals of this research are: to generate groups of genetically identical animals for research purposes to rapidly propagate desirable animals stocks to improve the efficiency of generating and propagating transgenic livestock to produce targeted genetic alterations in domestic animals to pursue basic knowledge about cell differentiation" (p. 24). Cloning sets of animals that are genetically identical would be beneficial to research scientists because it would eliminate differences in results due to genetic differences in the test subjects.
INTRODUCTION When the Roslin Institute's first sheep cloning work was announced in March 1996 the papers were full of speculation about its long-term implications. Because of this discovery, the media’s attention has focused mainly on discussion of the possibility, of cloning humans. In doing so, it has missed the much more immediate impact of this work on how we use animals. It's not certain this would really lead to flocks of cloned lambs in the fields of rural America, or clinically reproducible cuts of meat on the supermarket shelves. But it does force us to ask questions about the way we are using animals with new technology, and the kinds of assumptions we make.
“Stem cells have the potential to develop into any kind o... ... middle of paper ... ...versity is bound to decrease.”(“Disadvantages of plant…”) Animals have created a fairly populated amount of controversy agriculturally. “Basic” nuclear transfer was used in Mitalipous, Chung’s and Egli’s studies; these studies successfully created the first mammal clone. This animal was a sheep, and it was named Dolly. Animals are cloned using adult and/or embryonic cells. As controversy arrived over the use of embryos in humans the same thing happened here.