Dolly, woolly, innocent, and sweet, strongly contrasts with the severity of the issues that she has raised. Ever since the news surfaced that Dr. Ian Wilmut had succeeded in cloning a sheep, people around the world have been participating in a frenzied debate over the morality of cloning animals, and more importantly humans beings. The cloning of animals and humans could help the world in unprecedented ways, but could also give rise to unforeseen problems. It raises moral, ethical, and regulatory issues which must be considered during with the formation of cloning legislation. While I believe animal cloning is useful on a restricted level, I feel that human cloning is unnecessary and I advocate its full prohibition.
Animal cloning could, in many ways, be beneficial to society. For instance, animals could be cloned to produce medicine. According to Ian Wilmut, cloned sheep could be used to produce a protein called alpha-1 antitrypsin that can help treat cystic fibrosis (2). Alpha-1 antitrypsin can be produced by inserting certain genes into the sheep that will be "expressed in the mammary cells," making the protein available in the sheep's milk (2). By cloning a sheep with such capabilities, scientists could have a potentially unlimited supply of this protein (2). According to one article, the animals would act as "hoofed pharmaceutical factories" (2). Scientists are also hoping to use this technique to produce human factor IX for hemophiliacs (15).
In addition to its medicinal benefits, animal cloning could be used to produce tissues or organs for transplants (15). This can be done by culturing "embryonic stem cells," or "primitive cells that appear between six and 12 days after fertilization" and that are capable of performing the functions of any cell in the body (15). Such work is now being done to produce pig organs for human use (5).
The cloning of animals could also be used to prevent the extinction of certain animal species (6). This, in turn, promotes the maintenance of a diverse environment (6).
Furthermore, cloning allows man to exploit the desirable traits of animals (8). For instance, one could clone a cow that produces large amounts of milk and that resists sickness (8). Such a process would maximize the production of milk, decrease the risk of financial loss and food shortage, and ensure that the desirable traits will be passed on to offspring (8). Also, disease resistant mice could be cloned for use in experiments (5). A company named Enzo Biochem Inc. has created a mouse immune to mouse hepatitis, which is very harmful to mice colonies as it spreads rapidly (5). The cloning of this mouse could provide scientists with a more reliable supply of mice for experimentation (5).
Lastly, the cloning of animals also provides research benefits. For example, through animal cloning scientists can now study how genes are turned on and off (17). An understanding of this process could lead to a cure or treatment for cancer and offers hope for the restoration of damaged nerve cells (17). Furthermore, scientists might be able to produce new skin for burn victims and cure sickle cell anemia (17).
While the cloning of animals offers many benefits, it also presents society with a number of ethical and moral considerations. One such consideration revolves around the rights of animals. Animals cloned for organ or tissue transplants would have to be killed (7). One must ask himself whether it is just to manufacture animals for their parts and then slaughter them. Some might argue that animals are slaughtered daily for food and clothing, but does the fact that animals are already being killed for other purposes make killing for organs permissible? At the same time, though, is it fair to let those in need of transplants die when such resources are available? From a religious standpoint, humans are allowed to make use of animals, but are also responsible for protecting them (14). Moreover, according to the Church of Scotland, "...nature is not ours to do exactly what we like with. We too are creatures, companions with all created things. Our use of animals, therefore, implies we need a sense of "Family hold back" (14).
Another moral or ethical issue arises from the exploitation of animals possessing desirable traits. Although beneficial in many ways, such a practice decreases diversity, making animals more susceptible to sickness and other problems (8). According to writer Keay Davidson, "Genetically homogeneous species are especially vulnerable to sudden environmental changes: say, a mutated virus or climate shift" (6). Furthermore, variations that are allowed to "go extinct" may not seem useful now, but might be important in the future (6). One must question whether man can take advantage of the benefits available in the present or whether he must forego these advantages to ensure safety down the road. Also, in limiting the production of new combinations man could be preventing the creation of a new, more efficient or useful variety of species (1). Religiously speaking, diversity is a precious gift from God (14). Dr. Donald Bruce, director of the Church of Scotland "Society, Religion, and Technology Project," explains, "The Bible declares that God created diversity, and rejoices in it. To clone is to reduce a living organism to a narrow blueprint, where God through evolution seems to have made a point of doing the opposite" (14).
Human cloning, like animal cloning, has the potential to benefit society. For example, it could be used to produce organs for transplants. A person in need of a bone marrow transplant, who cannot find a matching donor, could have a clone possessing compatible bone marrow produced (2). This is accomplished by removing the nucleus from the donor's egg cell and inserting the transplant recipient's genetic material (2). Within a short amount of time the embryo will make the necessary stem cells (2).
Human cloning could also be used by infertile parents who want to have "genetically related offspring" (16) or parents who want to avoid "passing a genetic disease" on to their kids (1). In such a situation, the parent that is cloned provides all the DNA (16).
Like the cloning of animals, human cloning also raises ethical and moral issues. One question that arises is whether or not it is permissible to bring life into being "solely for the purpose of exploitation" (2). Is it okay to create another human being only to use his or her organs? Did God intend for man to use the gift of children to save his own life? Some argue that such actions are already taking place when parents give birth to another child to provide a transplant for a family member (2). Moreover, some in favor of human cloning argue that such a move "benefits" the clone (2). Norm Fost, an ethics professor, explains,
However, there is no guarantee that the family will be "loving" nor that the clone will be "much better off for it" (2). One can only speculate on the clone's true feelings. Can man base decisions of this scale on speculation? At the same time, the cloning of humans for transplants could save lives that might otherwise be lost.
The cloning of humans to produce offspring creates additional ethical and moral dilemmas. From a religious standpoint, one must question the meaning of a child. Is not a child a gift from God bestowed on man when God sees it fit? Or is a child something man is entitled to obtain by any means necessary? On the other hand, is it fair to deny a couple children because they can produce offspring no other way but through human cloning? Lastly, one should speculate on the feelings of the cloned child (11). "How would you feel if you reached a certain age and were told that you weren't an original - that you were brought into this world as a genetic Xeroxed copy of someone else?", author Richard Roeper asks (11).
Perhaps the most apprehension with regards to human cloning stems from the possibility that something could go terribly wrong. In an interview, Bonnie Steinbock of the State University of New York at Albany said, "...I think the important ethical issues have to do with the problems of getting results that you don't expect, unintended side effects" (4). How can we be sure that these clones will be normal human beings? Philip Boyle, "a former Dominican priest," suggests that human cloning could one day produce a "monster" which he describes as
Stephen Grebe, a biology professor at American University in Washington asks, "...are we willing to accept the costs of so-called bad copies? What about failed experiments?" (13). Allegheny University's Marie DiBerardino notes that when cloning humans, scientists might utilize mutated cells that have been subject to "chemicals and environmental radiation" (10). Such a mutation could lead to a failed pregnancy or an "abnormal child" (10).
Animal and human cloning also present society with regulatory issues. For instance, what possible atrocities lie ahead if cloning is allowed to go unregulated? Abdelmuti Bayyoumi, a doctrine professor at the al-Azhar University, asks, "What if this reckless science goes further and thinks of cloning criminals or mummified pharaohs or even cloning prophets..." (3). Bayyoumi is asking for a ban on all cloning research as he believes that the bad outweighs the good (3).
At the same time, however, there is the risk of placing overly restrictive regulations on cloning. Director of the National Institutes of Health, Harold E. Varmus, for instance, cautions that hurrying to pass legislation against human cloning could inadvertently place unnecessary restrictions on other studies in biology and genetics, thereby hindering advancements in the fields of medicine and agriculture (3). Likewise, Bonnie Steinbock warns against letting fear limit possible benefits to society. She states,
Also, one must realize that even with legislation the government only has limited control over the situation. What will prevent scientists from going ahead with research or attempting to clone animals or humans? Jeffrey Kluger of Time Magazine writes,
One must also consider the boundaries of the government's power (16). With regard to the production of children through human cloning, Varmus asks, "How do we define reproductive rights? What is the government's role? Where does privacy begin and end?" (16).
I propose that the government ban any form of human cloning and research into that area. In my opinion, the only two solid benefits that the cloning of humans offers are the production of organs for transplant and an alternative way to produce children. I feel, however, that both these benefits can be obtained by other means. The cloning of animals offers much potential in the way of producing organs for transplant and there are still people willing to donate their own organs to help others in need. I believe that the cloning of humans to produce children is unnecessary. Couples unable to have children can look into assisted reproduction and if a couple wants children badly enough, they should have no problem considering adoption. I am opposed to research in the area of human cloning as I feel it is unnecessary and will only tempt scientists to violate the restrictions imposed.
Animal cloning, I believe, should be restricted to medicinal purposes. I strongly sympathize with those afflicted with diseases like cystic fibrosis and see nothing wrong with cloning a restricted amount of animals to produce the protein they need. I also advocate the use of animal cloning for the production of organs for transplant, but as with the previous case, I believe the number should be restricted. I am firmly against animal cloning to exploit desirable traits. It is dangerous to limit the diversity of the environment and cloning for this purpose is unnecessary and is shamefully greedy. As for research, I do not object to a restricted amount of cloning for the exploration of select projects, especially that of gene expression. Human progress can only be limited so much and there are promising discoveries to be made.
Animal cloning could potentially benefit society through the production of medicine, the creation of organs for transplant, an improved food supply, and the opportunity for research. However, it also brings into question the rights of animals and the destruction of environmental diversity. Likewise, human cloning could provide both benefit and harm. While it could produce organs for transplant and provide parents with a means to have children, it calls into question the meaning of children and is potentially dangerous. These pros and cons must be taken into consideration and backed by precise legislation.
1. Bates, Karl Leif and Greenwood, Tom, "Sheep Now; Humans Next? Cloning Breakthrough Fuels Ethical, Religious Debate", National News, http://detnews.com: 80/1997/nation/ 9702/25 /022050111.htm, (7 March, 1997).
2. "Brave New World", Scottish Sheep Shocker!, http://whyfiles.news.wisc.edu:80/034clone/ practical.html, (7 March, 1997).
3. "Cloning Fears Ripple Around World", MSNBC, http://www.msnbc.com:80/news/ 60305.asp, (7 March, 1997).
4. "Cloning Responsibly", Online Focus, http://www1.pbs.org:80/newshour/bb/science/march97/cloning_3-5.html, (7 March, 1997).
5. Dalton, Richard J. Jr., "Future Not Very Bullish For Commercial Cloning", Newsday.com, http://www.newsday.com:80/mainnews/rnmi011, (7 March, 1997).
6. Davidson, Keay, "To Clone or Not To Clone", San Francisco Examiner, http://www.sfgate.com:80/cgi-bin/examiner/article.cgi?year=1997&month=03&day=04&article=NEWS15526, (7 March, 1997).
7. "Got a Copyright on them Genes?", Scottish Sheep Shocker!, http://whyfiles.news.wisc.edu:80/034clone/ethics1.html, (7 March, 1997).
8. Henahan, Sean, "Send in the Clones", Access Excellence: What's News, http://www.gene.com/ae/WN/SU/clone297.html, (7 March, 1997).
9. Kluger, Jeffrey. "Will We Follow the Sheep?" Time Magazine 10 March 1997: 67 - 72.
10. Ritter, Malcolm, "Expert: Clone People? Ewe'd Be Very Sorry", http:www2.phillynews.com:80/daily_news/97/Mar/07/national/CLON07.htm, (7 March, 1997).
11. Roeper, Richard, "Cloning Debate Lacks Human Element", Chicago Sun-Times, http://www.suntimes.com:80/columnists/roeper/columns/RP06_Mar06.html, (7 March, 1997).
12. Scheinin, Richard, "Religion Grapples with Man-as-Creator", Mercury Center, http://www.sj mercury.com/news/nation/clonre/022497.htm, (7 March, 1997).
13. "Should We Be Cloning Around?", CNN Interactive, http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9702/24/cloned.sheep.index.html, (7 March, 1997).
14. "Should We Clone Animals?", Society, Religion and Technology Project, http://webzone1.co.uk/www/srtproject/cloning.htm, (7 March, 1997).
15. "Transgenic Clones Possible Within Months", Fox News,http://www.foxnews.com:80/scitech/030597/clone.sml, (7 March, 1997).
16. Weiss, Rick, "Human Clone Ban Opposed By NIH Chief", Washingtonpost.com, http://washingtonpost.com:80/wp-srv/WPlate/1997-03/06/100L-030697-idx.html, (7 March, 1997).
17. Weiss, Rick, "Lost in the Search for a Wolf Are Benefits in Sheep's Cloning", Washingtonpost.com, http://washingtonpost.com:80/wp-srv/WPlate/1997-03/03/045L-030397-idx.html, (7 March, 1997).