Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Human-cloning-essay
Cloning of humans and mammals
Human-cloning-essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Human-cloning-essay
Cloning
Why? Where? How? All are different types of questions you would like to ask us about this topic, but today I will be telling you about history of cloning. Cloning is a thing that reminds us about horror movies or fantasy stories but its true and it happens all around the world. Cloning is a process of copying an organism by its exact traits and will be totally identical to it. Cloning was a miracle coming true and it helped us in so many ways and even saved lives, the idea of it coming true was great but for every good thing it has its moment from its good and bad. Cloning has its best moments and it worst so I will talk about its great and worst moments. Cloning’s ups and down towards history.
In 1885 the first ever demonstration of artificial embryo twinning was accrued and they had noticed that they are very useful organisms to study development. They had noticed also that if they shake sea urchin embryos they will separate and live independently. Other successfully cloning had happened in the 1902 and 1928 but one very unique moment was when the first ever successful transferred of a nucleolus occurred in 1952. Robert Briggs and Thomas King had come and transferred nucleus from an early tadpole embryo into an egg frog which was the first ever transferring an nucleus from an animal to another and the scientist were still not satisfied and wanted to take it to the next step because the result of the tadpole cloning, the off spring would had relay survived and now they had transferred there interest on cloning mammals.
Dolly sheep was the first step towards evolution. July 5, 1996. Dolly was cloned by Lan Wilmot and Keith Campbell. It was done when they took parts they needed from another sheep and placed into the ...
... middle of paper ...
...t don’t stop at one point but look two steps farther that is how humans are. The history of cloning is a great example of the human’s accomplishments and there well to of being to do their best. History of cloning is a very interesting history to look back at and absorve it. In every history there are its great moments and its bad, in cloning history we showed you the two sides of thaw’s history.
Sources
1. "A Brief History of Cloning." Copernicus Science Centre. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Apr. 2014
2. "14 Extinct Animals That Could Be Resurrected: Huia." MNN. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Apr. 2014.
3. "Cloned Species." — National Geographic Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Apr. 2014.
4. "Scientists Create First Cloned Human Embryo." Popular Science. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2014.
5. "Top Ten Cloning Experiments Gone Wrong." Yahoo Contributor Network. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Apr. 2014
"(261)". We can not undo what has been discovered and we must ensure that all countries involved with cloning form a committee to monitor the uses of this technology to ensure that it is used in the best interest of mankind. Works Cited Bishop, Michael J. - "The 'Bishop'" The "Enemies of Promise" The Presence of Others. C Comp. Andrea A. Lunsford and John J. Ruskiewicz.
“Cloning represents a very clear, powerful, and immediate example in which we are in danger of turning procreation into manufacture.” (Kass) The concept of cloning continues to evoke debate, raising extensive ethical and moral controversy. As humans delve into the fields of science and technology, cloning, although once considered infeasible, could now become a reality. Although many see this advancement as the perfect solution to our modern dilemmas, from offering a potential cure for cancer, AIDS, and other irremediable diseases, its effects are easily forgotten. Cloning, especially when concerning humans, is not the direction we must pursue in enhancing our lives. It is impossible for us to predict its effects, it exhausts monetary funds, and it harshly abases humanity.
Cloning has been in nature for thousands of years, a clone is a living thing made from another consisting of the same DNA. For example identical twins are clones because they have the same DNA but the differ because the twins begin after conception when a zygote, a totipotent stem cell, divides into two, some plants self-pollinate and produce a seed, which in turn, makes plants with the same genetic code (Hyde). According to the Human Genome Project there are three types of cloning, DNA, therapeutic and reproductive; DNA cloning involves transferring DNA from a donor to another organism, therapeutic cloning, known as embryo cloning, involves harvesting stem cells from human embryos to grow new organs for transplant, and last is reproductive cloning which creates a copy of the host (Conger). One of the earliest cloned animals was a sea urchin by Hans Dreisch in the late 1800’s. Unlike Victor Frankenstein, Dreisch’s goal was to prove that genetic material is not lost in cell division, not to create another being, (History of Cloning) stated by Frankenstein “that I might infuse a spark of being into the lifeless thing that lay at my feet.” There are many ways an animal...
The thought of cloning often terrifies people because they believe there will be copies of themselves rampaging around the world. Individuals often overlook that, “In nature, twins form very early in development when the embryo splits in two. Since they developed from the same fertilized egg, the resulting individuals are genetically identical” (Genetic Science). Scientists who understand the procedure of twin formation, have been using reproductive cloning for decades. According to Devolder, “The genetic material is removed from a donor egg so as to create an empty egg. A cell is then removed from the male’s rep...
Proponents of cloning humans today should remind themselves of the lesson of Victor Frankenstein before they have to deal with the products of their research and learn the hard way. & nbsp;
In the essay, Cloning Reality: Brave New World by Wesley J. Smith, a skewed view of the effects of cloning is presented. Wesley feels that cloning will end the perception of human life as sacred and ruin the great diversity that exists today. He feels that cloning may in fact, end human society as we know it, and create a horrible place where humans are simply a resource. I disagree with Wesley because I think that the positive effects of controlled human cloning can greatly improve the quality of life for humans today, and that these benefits far outweigh the potential drawbacks that could occur if cloning was misused.
Herbert, Wray. The World After Cloning. U.S. News and World Report. March 10, 1997: 59-64.
Spearmann thought of cloning as a way to study cell differentiation. Briggs and King used the technique of nuclear transfer on amphibians and it was successful (Campbell). “Subsequently John Gurdon demonstrated the potential to reprogram differentiated cells by producing adult Xenopus using epithelial cells from developing tadpole intestine as nuclear donors,” says Alberio Campbell. Unfortunately, later studies show that this method of cloning tadpoles didn’t allow them to develop to the adult stage of life (Campbell). “The use of enucleated metaphase II oocytes as recipient cytoplasts proved more successful and in 1986 resulted in the production of live lambs using blastomeres from 8 to 16-cell stage embryos as nuclear donors,” says Campbell. This success in sheep was also used on other mammals such as cattle and swine. There were limitations to the technology. First, the “frequency development was very low”...
Imagine yourself in a society in which individuals with virtually incurable diseases could gain the essential organs and tissues that perfectly match those that are defected through the use of individual human reproductive cloning. In a perfect world, this could be seen as an ideal and effective solution to curing stifling biomedical diseases and a scarcity of available organs for donation. However, this approach in itself contains many bioethical flaws and even broader social implications of how we could potentially view human clones and integrate them into society. Throughout the focus of this paper, I will argue that the implementation of human reproductive cloning into healthcare practices would produce adverse effects upon family dynamic and society due to its negative ethical ramifications. Perhaps the most significant conception of family stems from a religious conception of assisted reproductive technologies and cloning and their impact on family dynamics with regard to its “unnatural” approach to procreation. Furthermore, the broader question of the ethical repercussions of human reproductive cloning calls to mind interesting ways in which we could potentially perceive and define individualism, what it means to be human and the right to reproduction, equality and self-creation in relation to our perception of family.
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?
...cloning can be divided into two broad category: potential safety risk and moral problems, and these concerns overweigh its achievement.
Shreeve, jamie “Species Revival: Should We Bring Back Extinct Animals?” ngm.nationalgeographic.com 5 March 2013, 22 March 2014
Last of all, Cloning is not ethical, many religious groups look down upon cloning and think it’s not proper because they think it’s like playing God. Many scientists were mainly thinking about cloning animals and, most likely, humans in the future to harvest their organs and then kill them. “Who would actually like to be harvested and killed for their organs?” “Human cloning exploits human beings for our own self-gratification (Dodson, 2003).” A person paying enough money could get a corrupt scientist to clone anybody they wanted, like movie stars, music stars, athletes, etc (Andrea Castro 2005),” whether it be our desire for new medical treatments or our desire to have children on our own genetic terms (Dodson, 2003).
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.
Emig, R., et al. (1998, April). Practical Uses of Human Cloning. Human Cloning. July 27, 2005: