Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Cloning in animals and humans
Cloning moral and ethical issues
Is animal cloning beneficial
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Cloning in animals and humans
The word "cloning" is commonly used in everyday communication to mean many different technological procedures. Cloning is more specifically defined as somatic cell nuclear transfer. Simply explained by Glenn McGee in his article Primer on Ethics and Human Cloning as "the starvation and subsequent implantation of DNA from one organism (e.g., cells specialized to make that organism's hair or milk) into an egg whose DNA nucleus has been removed. The resulting egg and nucleus are shocked or chemically treated so that the egg begins to behave as though fertilization has occurred, resulting in the beginning of embryonic development of a second organism containing the entire genetic code of the first organism," (........).This method was first harnessed in 1952. Further manipulation of the procedure provided the first mammal being cloned in 1996. A sheep named Dolly was created by Dr. Ian Wilmut form PPL Therapeutics and the Roslin Institute of Edinburgh, Scotland. Several more mammals proceeded Dolly including mice, cows, pigs, cats, rabbits, and a mule in 2003. While progressing leaps and bounds, cloning still provided many undesirable presentations. For example, Dolly was severally obese and died prematurely. Aged chromosomes during her creation is thought to be the cause of her unfortunate death. Many clones created have had complications with their immune system, lung, livers and like Dolly, many have been obese. Cloning has also proven to require nearly endless attempts to provide a full pregnancy resulting in a live mammal. In Dolly's case, she proceeded 277 failed pregnancies. Furthermore than physical complications, many other issues, both tangible and ethical, steadfastly accompany cloning.
Cloning, still being entirely exp...
... middle of paper ...
...in need of organ transplants. One needs a liver, another needs a kidney, two need a new lung, and another needs a heart. Should I justify therapeutic cloning, I would then have to justify the murder of an innocent local to provide organs to these five people in need. If my wife needs a kidney transplant and I can provide a match and giver her one of mine, I have the conscious ability to make that decision. However, and embryo, a premature child, does not have the voice to say that he or she is willing to give up his or her life to benefit research of medical advances.
The idea of being able to use exactly compatible cells to safe lives sounds like a beautiful reverie. If there was a way to create this miracle without creating an embryo, without killing a life, I would be extremely supportive. Until that breakthrough occurs I will stand firm behind my beliefs.
Silver’s argument illustrates to his audience that reproductive cloning deems permissible, but most people of today’s society frown upon reproductive cloning and don’t accept it. He believes that each individual has the right to whether or not they would want to participate in reproductive cloning because it is their reproductive right. However, those who participate in cloning run the risk of other’s imposing on their reproductive rights, but the risk would be worth it to have their own child.
Therapeutic cloning is the process whereby parts of a human body are grown independently from a body from STEM cells collected from embryos for the purpose of using these parts to replace dysfunctional ones in living humans. Therapeutic Cloning is an important contemporary issue as the technology required to conduct Therapeutic Cloning is coming, with cloning having been successfully conducted on Dolly the sheep. This process is controversial as in the process of collecting STEM cells from an embryo, the embryo will be killed. Many groups, institutions and religions see this as completely unacceptable, as they see the embryo as a human life. Whereas other groups believe that this is acceptable as they do not believe that the embryo is a human life, as well as the fact that this process will greatly benefit a large number of people. In this essay I will compare the view of Christianity who are against Therapeutic Cloning with Utilitarianism who are in favour of Therapeutic Cloning.
Children grow up watching movies such as Star Wars as well as Gattaca that contain the idea of cloning which usually depicts that society is on the brink of war or something awful is in the midsts but, with todays technology the sci-fi nature of cloning is actually possible. The science of cloning obligates the scientific community to boil the subject down into the basic category of morality pertaining towards cloning both humans as well as animals. While therapeutic cloning does have its moral disagreements towards the use of using the stem cells of humans to medically benefit those with “incomplete” sets of DNA, the benefits of therapeutic cloning outweigh the disagreements indubitably due to the fact that it extends the quality of life for humans.
One of the most heated political battles in the United States in recent years has been over the morality of embryonic stem cell research. The embryonic stem cell debate has polarized the country into those who argue that such research holds promises of ending a great deal of human suffering and others who condemn such research as involving the abortion of a potential human life. If any answer to the ethical debate surrounding this particular aspect of stem cell research exists, it is a hazy one at best. The question facing many scientists and policymakers involved in embryonic stem cell research is, which is more valuable – the life of a human suffering from a potentially fatal illness or injury, or the life of human at one week of development? While many argue that embryonic stem cell research holds the potential of developing cures for a number of illnesses that affect many individuals, such research is performed at the cost of destroying a life and should therefore not be pursued.
In arguing against cloning, the central debate is derived from the fact that this unnatural process is simply unethical. The alleged
Technology is radically changing and improving every single year, with new advances and inventions all the time. However, with all these changes and developments in technology, there are also a series of problems and ethical issues that it may impose on society. In the scientific fiction novel written by Nancy Farmer, The House of the Scorpion, Farmer introduces the idea of a society where technology is used incorrectly and to a person’s own advantage. The House of the Scorpion brings up a variety of moral and ethical issues, mainly cloning and technology used for all the immoral purposes. In an article written by Elizabeth Landau, "Cloning Used to Make Stem Cells from Adult Humans," she explores how our modern day world and scientists have finally developed a method of deriving stem cells from a person’s own cloned cells. In the future, with greater technology and research, it may be possible to create a complete clone of a person. Technology may be very useful and efficient, but if used incorrectly, it can cause drastic effects and problems for all of mankind. Farmer’s novel The House of the Scorpion and Landau’s article, "Cloning Used to Make Stem Cells from Adult Humans," explains the future in cloning with newer technologies, and possible concerns that may arise from it.
Cloning is the creation of an organism that is an exact genetic copy of another. Every single bit of DNA is the same. There are three different types of cloning. Gene cloning produces copies of genes or fragments of DNA, reproductive cloning creates copies of whole animals, and therapeutic cloning builds embryonic stem cells for experiments aimed at creating tissues to replace injured or diseased tissues. In 1997 scientists in Scotland announced the birth of a clone. Its name was Dolly; after the American country singer. She was the clone of an adult female sheep, and the first mammal to ever be cloned successfully. As Dolly matured, she mated with a ram, and gave birth to a lamb showing that clones have the ability to reproduce. Dolly died at the age of six. According to Sheep 101, the life expectancy for a sheep is 10-12 years, but some sheep can live up to 20 years.
In conclusion, it is clear to see that cloning is not the taboo it has been made out to be. It is a new boundary that humanity has never encountered before and so it is understandable that people have qualms about ‘playing God’ by shaping a life. Although some might argue that it is immoral to clone human beings, the truth is that it is unethical not to. Given that such technology has the potential to save millions upon millions of lives, not tapping into that industry would have dire consequences on the future. In this case, the ends more certainly justify the means.
Cloning is, and always has been an extremely contentious topic. To some, the ethical complications surrounding it, are far more promiscuous than what scientists and medical experts currently acknowledge. Cloning is a general term that refers to the process in which an organism, or discrete cells and genes, undergo genetic duplication, in order to produce an identical copy of the original biological matter. There are two main types of artificial cloning; reproductive and therapeutic, both of which present their respective benefits and constraints. This essay aims to discuss the various differences between the two processes, as well as the ethical issues associated with it.
Imagine a world where everyone looked like you and was related to you as a sibling, cousin, or any form of relation, wouldn’t that be freaky? Although cloning is not an important issue presently, it could potentially replace sexual reproduction as our method of producing children. Cloning is a dangerous possibility because it could lead to an over-emphasis on the importance of the genotype, no guaranteed live births, and present risks to both the cloned child and surrogate mother. It also violates the biological parent-child relationship and can cause the destruction of the normal structure of a family. The cloning of the deceased is another problem with cloning because it displays the inability of the parents to accept the child’s death and does not ensure a successful procedure. Along with the risks, there are benefits to Human Reproductive Cloning. It allows couples who cannot have a baby otherwise to enjoy parenthood and have a child who is directly related to them. It also limits the risk of transmitting genetic diseases to the cloned child and the risk of genetic defects in the cloned child. Although the government has banned Human Reproductive Cloning, the issue will eventually come to the surface and force us to consider the 1st commandment of God, all men are equal in the eyes of god, but does this also include clones? That is the question that we must answer in the near future in order to resolve a controversy that has plagued us for many years.
Ever since the successful birth of Dolly on July 5, 1996, the scientific community as well as the public have been engulfed in the idea of reproductive cloning, its benefits, and its potential threats. This well-publicized event was a giant steppingstone in understanding and using the techniques of gene cloning and reproductive cloning. By using a technique known as Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer, scientists at the Roslin Institute removed the nucleus from an oocyte (unfertilized egg), and then fused this newly enucleated cell with a donor cell (with complete nucleus). This new embryo was then implanted into the womb of a surrogate mother ewe. In total, out of 277 fused cells, 29 successfully developed into embryos, while only one of these resulted in a successful live birth (a total success rate of 0.4%) (Wong, 202). Dolly was the first living mammal to be cloned by this fast and accurate process of somatic cell nuclear transfer, but was by no means the first animal to be cloned. The first...
By applying research from cloning normal cells to cloning stem cells, a wider range of people can be helped, and the cost of procedures will be lowered. Scientific research into cloning will allow doctors study how to safely replicate
In recent years our world has undergone many changes and advancements, cloning is a primary example of this new modernism. On July 5th, 1995, Dolly, the first cloned animal, was created. She was cloned from a six-year-old sheep, making her cells genetically six years old at her creation. However, scientists were amazed to see Dolly live for another six years, until she died early 2005 from a common lung disease found in sheep. This discovery sparked a curiosity for cloning all over the world, however, mankind must answer a question, should cloning be allowed? To answer this question some issues need to be explored. Is cloning morally correct, is it a reliable way to produce life, and should human experimentation be allowed?
In the article that I chose there are two opposing viewpoints on the issue of “Should Human Cloning Ever Be Permitted?” John A. Robertson is an attorney who argues that there are many potential benefits of cloning and that a ban on privately funded cloning research is unjustified and that this type of research should only be regulated. On the flip side of this issue Attorney and medical ethicist George J. Annas argues that cloning devalues people by depriving them of their uniqueness and that a ban should be implemented upon it. Both express valid points and I will critique the articles to better understand their points.
"Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry." The President's Council on Bioethics Washington, D.C. N.p., July-Aug. 2002. Web.