In similar fashion, Caplan (2003) examines the arguments against human cloning. He refers to the safety of human cloning as he references the unsuccessful cloning of specific animals. Another aspect he references is the three reasons why human cloning would be problematic. All three issues carry a burden on the clones mental, emotional, and physical well being. The first issue he references is clones would look exactly like an individual who lived before them. Cloned humans would often face people constantly looking at them while enduring comments of their appearance. As a result, this would result in psychological and emotional challenges. The second issue is the fact that cloned humans face “strange emotional relationships” (p. 380) because although the clone looks exactly like a deceased husband, wife, or child, new relationship bonds may cause a feeling of betrayal to the deceased person. The third issue is the destiny of genes, because our genes control some diseases. As a result, clones would ultimately know whether or not a certain disease will kill them and this often causes a psychological strain, as clones will feel as if they are a ticking time bomb (p. 381). Although the author rejects the idea of cloning a human, he proposes that therapeutic cloning can be beneficial in creating cells and tissues that can ultimately save a humans life (p. 382).
In general, reproductive cloning poses too many risks to a human’s physical and psychological well being. Examining the health risks that Dolly the sheep endured, it is safe to say that cloned humans will endure serious complications throughout their life. The mutation of genes poses a greater threat because these mutations or abnormalities may be undetected until after the ch...
... middle of paper ...
...uman cloning laws. NCSL. Retrieved from: http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/human-cloning-laws.aspx.
National Human Genome Research Institute. (2014). Cloning. National Institute of Health.
Retrieved from: http://www.genome.gov/25020028.
Nippert, I. (2002). The pros and cons of human therapeutic cloning in the public debate. Journal of Biotechnology, 98(1), 53-60. DOI: 10.1016/S0168-1656(02)00085-8.
Nordgren, A. (2006). Analysis of an epigenetic argument against human reproductive cloning.
Reproductive Biomedicine Online (Reproductive Healthcare Limited), 13(2), 278-283.
Rhind, S. M., Taylor, J. E., De Sousa, P. A., King, T. J., McGarry, M., & Wilmut, I. (2003).
Human cloning: can it be made safe?. Nature Reviews Genetics, 4(11), 855-864. doi:10.1038/nrg1205.
Vogel, G. (2003). Human cloning claim prompts government to back total ban. Science,
299(5606), 489.
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.
“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.
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.
Brannigan, C. Michael. Ethical Issues in Human Cloning. New York: Seven Bridges Press, Chatham House Publishers, 2001.
Many people say that everyone in the world has a twin. Today, science and technology has the ability to make this myth reality through the process of cloning. I am strongly against cloning for many reasons. People should not utilize cloning because it would destroy individuality and uniqueness, cause overpopulation, animal cruelty, it is against morals and ethics, and it violates many religious beliefs.
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?
Whelan, R., Conrod, P. J., Poline, J., Lourdusamy, A., Banaschewski, T., Barker, G. J, Bellgrove, M. A.,
Cloning, especially human cloning attracts increasingly more attention after the first mammal cloning animal Dolly born in 1997. Cloning is divided into two categories: therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning. Therapeutic cloning is more related to tissue level cloning to transplant healthy cells and reproductive cloning is individual level cloning. Thus, the term cloning in this essay is used to describe both individual level and tissue level cloning. Public have different views. Some people support it because of its medical value, yet some people argue that it may bring many safety risks and moral problems. Hence, decisions ought to be made to identify the extent of cloning. Therefore, this essay introduces two major benefits of human cloning on disease therapy and analysis two arguments against it on safety and ethical issues.
Duley, S. M., Cancelli, A. A., Kratochwill, T. R., Bergan, J. R., & Meredith, K. E. (1983).
Timpano, K. R., Keough, M. E., Mahaffey, B., Schmidt, N. B., & Abramowitz, J. (2010).
been made possible but yet a majority of them have died in early stages of development or after birth according to the study of the cloned sheep, Dolly (Magalhães 1). Those who make it suffer from several defects acquired from birth (Magalhães 1). During recent experimentation it took scientist Ian Wilmut of the Roslin Institute in Edinburgh, Scotland, and his colleagues who created Dolly (a cloned sheep) 277 tries before they got a healthy, feasible lamb (Human Cloning 1). Due to the complication of human cloning even more deaths and deadly birth defects can be expected (Human Cloning 1). Even though human cloning has never been performed, one likely possibility is that babies born through this process will as well feature lethal birth defects (Magalhães 1).
1) Robertson, John A. “Human Cloning and the Challenge of Regulation,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 339, no. 2 (July 9, 1998), pp. 119-122.
Recent discoveries involving cloning have sparked ideas of cloning an entire human body (ProQuest Staff). Cloning is “the production of an organism with genetic material identical to that of another organism” (Seidel). Therapeutic cloning is used to repair the body when something isn’t working right, and it involves the production of new cells from a somatic cell (Aldridge). Reproductive cloning involves letting a created embryo develop without interference (Aldridge). Stem cells, if isolated, will continue to divide infinitely (Belval 6). Thoughts of cloning date back to the beginning of the twentieth century (ProQuest Staff). In 1938, a man decided that something more complex than a salamander should be cloned (ProQuest Staff). A sheep named Dolly was cloned from an udder cell in 1997, and this proved that human cloning may be possible (Aldridge). In 1998, two separate organizations decl...
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).