To Andy Vidak, Cloning can have huge benefits in today’s society. Cloning could benefit multiple types of people, and can also benefit animals. In today’s society,has a lot to bring to the table. For example, animals could be clones to produce products that we use today, or products that we need to survive. What i mean by this is that cloned animals still can have the benefits that a natural animal would have. For example, a cloned cow is still capable of producing meat that other natural cows are producing, and it is still safe to eat. This can be beneficial because having a cloned cow and a natural cow would mean that it would bring more food and resources to the table. Another example of cloning would be cloning a plant. However, not just …show more content…
Cloning a pet would bring the same genetics from the old to the new pet. I believe that cloning would have an impact on tons of people today There are tons of ways that cloning is going to change the society. Reproductive and therapeutic cloning both are going to help out in our environment. There are many things that can be cloned that we would use. For example, pets, cows, sheep, humans, and plants can all be cloned. The moned is to replace a lost dog or cat. Cloning would bring the genetics of the original animal over to the cloned version with a transfusion of an embryo. In fact, a pet cloning process has been started already. In addition, Hawthorne from Here, ktty-kitty-kitty-kitty says that “Studies show that a quarain reason for a pet to be clter of 60 million pet owning households would consider cloning their furry friends”. What this means is that 15 million pet owning households are considering to clone their lost pets. Also, Hawthorne believes that “to replicate these qualities adds to the sum of joy in the world”. What he means by this is a cloned pet would bring happiness into the world. In addition, an animal can also be cloned to become a worker animal. For example, a cloned dog can be
Another perk to cloning is that we could possibly alter animals to give more effective products, or more desirable products. For example a herd of sheep in Montreal have a gene in their DNA that lets them produce spider silk through their milk. It is said that bulletproof vests can be made from this silk. Just imagine the possibilities if we were able to create such animals. By using the cloning process, they can make many products that can be helpful to the environment and the people.
When the novel “Frankenstein”, by Mary Shelley came out in 1831 the general public was introduced to the idea of man creating another man scientifically; without the use of reproduction. This idea is still very interesting today, however many ethical problems are implicated when scientists, like Victor Frankenstein, disrupt the moral and ethical standards like many modern day scientists have done today with cloning. The astronomical effects that followed after the creation of The Monster, demonstrates the horrid fact that creating a human was not natural or ethical.
Long after Shelley wrote her classic masterpiece Frankenstein and Huxley wrote Brave New World, the ethical controversy of cloning conflicts with modern artificial intelligence research. The question that challenges the idea of negative or positive behavior in a replicated machine relies on its similarity to the source of the clone, whether it emulates human behavior or acts as a “superintelligence” with supernatural characteristics void of human error. Humanity will not know the absolute answers concerning behavioral outcome without creating a physical being, an idea portrayed in Shelley’s Frankenstein in which the creation of a monster emulates from his creator’s attempts to generate life. At the time of the novel’s publication, the idea of replicating a soul portrayed a nightmarish theme with little consideration for the potential scientific advancements to facilitate in reality. It lead the genetic idea of manmade intelligence and its ethics emerging from the relativity of space, time, and original life on the planet. The debate of the existing possibility of sentient machines continues to progress, but the consideration of ethical questions such as “Should we create these artificial people?” and “How does this enactment define the soul and mind?” warranted from primitive questions about machine learning within the last century. After the initial proof of possibility for sentient machines, the perfection of cloning will generate “good” behavior at its perfect state several generations from now. The perfect machine portrays the potential for sensible human behaviors including compassion, mentality, empathy, alertness, and love. Humanity of the twenty-first century possesses the knowledge to fantasize the idea of artificial ...
But on the contrary, many scientists believe that cloning can be such a positive achievement, not only for medical purposes, but for fighting extinction. For example, what if they could clone many of the endangered species that exist today? There are very few hundred of many beautiful animals that if something isn’t done to save them, they will be extinct in a few years. So if scientists could successfully clone and create these endangered species, although it would still depend on the clone maturing correctly and being able to reproduce successfully, it could be a great
These are points that conservative opponents of cloning have been making for a long time, with limited effect thanks to the media's obsession with the politics of abortion.
successful clones often have problems with their body and are subject to a short lifespan ridden with health problems. This hurts the person or animal cloned rather than to help them, making cloning an immoral
Even though cloning is a huge step in the future there are many reason, concerns, and questions that need to be answered before they continue the research. There are questions like what’s going to happen, or what are you going to do with clones, or why are clones needed. The main concern is what are they going to do with the clones. Many people think that a clone is exactly like what they are cloning. False it starts off a baby its just like making a baby but in a very hard way which is unnecessary. Yeah it may receive more traits from the cloned human but its not needed. They also can not say they will use them for scientific research or testing because it is a live, breathing, and a HUMAN being. Thats just like taking someone off the streets and doing test on them without consent. This is serious and it should be stopped!
Both processes also differ in the sense that reproductive cloning has fewer advantages when compared to therapeutic techniques. Studies have consistently made evident the fact that genetically cloned animals have shorter life spans, as well as an inferior quality of life. Consequently, they also lack in genetic variation, which makes the organism more susceptible to disease, and other obstructive circumstances. Contrarily, therapeutic cloning is employed for medicinal purposes, and therefore, ethical implications are quite easy to justify. The continuing practice of therapeutic cloning in relation to stem cell research, can potentially alleviate and cure many incorrigible diseases, which is a significant benefit. Reproductive cloning on the other hand, could be described as a practice instigated to fulfil the many scientific curiosities mankind possesses, and does not have a legitimate reason as to why it is
President Clinton signed an order banning federal money to be used on research of cloning and embryo science. By not giving money to develop cloning techniques, this leaves cloning to be research by private citizens and private companies. If public policy was changed concerning human cloning and federal money was given to establish national research centers and a commission to regulate cloning then black market of cloning would be seriously decreased. There is a current debate over whether or not the Food and Drug admission has any jurisdiction over cloning research. The argument is that the F.D.A. does not have the power to regulate medical practices. They only have the power to regulate legal drugs. As it stands now there is no type of regulation on human cloning research.
Why would anyone want to clone their pets or loved ones? Some say that if they have those who they love cloned, that they will not have to miss them once they die. If people want to clone their pets, or family members, and have the money and technology to do so, should they be allowed to do so? This is something important to discuss because as technology evolves and becomes more available, the demand for such procedures is greatly increasing. Each year the number of cloning attempts increases….and Cloning pets, humans, or any other organism, should never be allowed no matter their financial status, their ability to give permission for these procedures, or the amount of technology available.
A disadvantage of animal cloning is that there is a high chance of mutations occurring as in animal cloning somatic cells play an important role and when these cells contain mutations, the animal that has been cloned may be weak or could have lethal effects throughout its body later on. Another disadvantage of animal cloning is that death can occur when the donor eggs mitochondria doesn’t exactly match with the body cells (somatic) mitochondria. Furthermore, another disadvantage of animal cloning is that it is extremely expensive. This is because a large number of eggs are required for a single living clone, and this may not be worthwhile pursuing as it much easier to reproduce animals normally. Another disadvantage of animal cloning is the high failure rates. Currently, somatic cell nuclear transfer technique only has an approximate success rate of 0.1 percent-2. What this means is that out of 1000 cloning attempts, between 1-20 cloned would be successfully produced. Nevertheless there are advantages in animal cloning. Firstly, animal cloning can be used to preserve endangered species. Currently, thousands of animal species across the world are in danger of becoming extinct. However, with animal cloning, this would provide a tiny bit of hope for these certain animals surviving as the population could be highly increased in a short space of time, therefore the extinction rate would decrease and the population will increase for that specific species. However, this could very well be an advantage, but reintroducing extinct animals back to earth could lead up to one huge problem. The genes for these extinct animals are blind to us and scientists, therefore if we do reintroduce extinct animals then we could also bring back ancient viruses or bacteria that roamed the earth thousands of years
Secondly, “the most the human race has to loose by playing around with cloning is that the genetic diversity would be lost (Andrea Castro, 2005).” Reducing the genetic differences will produce clones that are grossly overlarge, many animals will be born with genetic mutations, and there will be a higher “risk of disease transfer (Saskaschools, 2003). “A review of all the world's cloned animals suggests that every one of them is genetically and physically defective (Leake, 2002).” Mutations will be passed on to the younger generation because if a cloned species has a mutation in their DNA this mutation will be passed on. Cloning has been linked with diseases of ageing, arthritis and, cancer.
Autumn Feistier and Hillary Bok argue their different views about pet cloning. In her argument for supporting pet cloning, Autumn Feistier insist that pet cloning is ethically and morally justified (Stephen, 132). She poses the idea that it is an ideal way to stretch the experience the owner of the pets has. Considering how expensive veterinary care is, cloning seems to be the ideal way to save money and have variety of the same pet.
The Benefits of Human Cloning In recent years, many new breakthroughs in the areas of science and technology have been discovered. A lot of these discoveries have been beneficial to the scientific community and to the people of the world. One of the newest breakthroughs is the ability to clone. Ever since Ian Wilmut and his co-workers completed the successful cloning of an adult sheep named Dolly, there has been an ongoing debate on whether it is right or wrong to continue the research of cloning (Burley).
The stem cell research controversy is one of the major headlines in bioscience and has been discussed and debated numerous times throughout the last decade or so. It became a major issue in 1997/1998 and continued into the 2000’s where George W. Bush joined the problem by vetoing the first bid that was brought forward by Congress to lift funding restrictions on human embryonic stem cell research. Bush stated after the veto that, “would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others” and also stated “It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect”. Bush was also supported by children that he said, “began his or her life as a frozen embryo that was created for in vitro fertilization (in vitro means the technique of performing an experiment in a controlled environment outside of a living organism) but remained unused after the fertility treatments were complete.