Jazzmyne's Weblog

Outline

jwilliams105 — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 00:00:15 +0000

1) Introduction

a. What is Cloning?

i. Define three types

b. Focus on reproductive cloning

i. Definition

ii. Dolly example

iii. Possible problems

c. Thesis

2) My arguments/ Support

a. Health Risks

b. Emotional Risk

c. Risks of the Abuse of technology

d. Ethically irresponsible

3) Conclusion/Proposal

Introduction

jwilliams105 — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 00:34:00 +0000

Introduction:

Its been done to Dolly the sheep and countless other mammals such as frogs, monkeys, pigs, rabbits, cows and mice…but could humans really be next on the cloning list? The possibility of human cloning is of widespread interest because of its scientific and ethical implications. But what exactly is cloning? Unbeknownst to the general population, the word “cloning” is actually an umbrella term used to describe the three different processes for duplicating biological material. The first type of is called recombinant DNA cloning. In this process the DNA fragment of interest is transferred to a self replicating genetic element, such as a bacterial plasmid. This type is common in molecular biology labs. The second type of cloning is therapeutic cloning. This is the production of human embryos for use in stem cell research to treat diseases related to human development. The last type of cloning is reproductive cloning. This is what we most times refer to when we mention cloning. Reproductive cloning is a technology used to generate an animal that has the same nuclear DNA as another currently or previously existing animal. Probably the most famous product of reproductive cloning would be Dolly the sheep. She was cloned using somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) in which scientist transfer genetic material from the nucleus of a donor adult cell to an egg whose nucleus, and therefore its genetic material, has been removed. In this process the egg is treated with an electric current and/or chemicals to stimulate cell division. In order to properly work, these cells have to reprogram and readjust themselves, which many of them do not successfully achieve, thus causing high rates of death, deformity, disease and disability among animal clones. Dolly was an exception being the one success out of 276 tries, and more than 90% of all cloning attempts fail. In addition to low success rates, cloned animals tend to have more compromised immune function and higher rates if infection, tumor growth, and other disorders. So why would we even think about initiating the cloning of human beings when the cloning of our closest relatives, mammals, has failing statistics? Due the inefficiency of animal cloning and the lack of understanding surrounding reproductive cloning, attempting to produce human clones could be potentially dangerous. Therefore, human reproductive cloning should not be performed because we are not conscious to the adverse side effects it may produce and because it is extremely unethical.

Health Risks

jwilliams105 — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 09:00:35 +0000

Due to the alarming statistics produced by animal cloning, Physicians from the American Medical Association and scientist from the American Association for the Advancement of Science have publically agreed that proceeding with the cloning of humans could present many unwarranted health risks that could potentially be dangerous. Test have concluded that only one or two viable offspring are produced out of every one-hundred attempts; and of those born alive, about 30% are diagnosed with large-offspring syndrome. In addition, to high rates of death, deformity, and disabilities, cloned animals tend to have more compromised immune function and tumor growth. Since an actual human clone has not yet been attempted, we can only infer that these same statistic would apply to human reproductive cloning. If the technologies used to produced clones like Dolly (SCNT) were implemented on humans it would also risk numerous miscarriages in the mothers and severe developmental problems in the children. Many of which we are still unconscious to. But what we can foresee is major effects on the mood and intellect of the cloned child bringing about negative social implications.

Emotional Risks

jwilliams105 — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:00:56 +0000

Consider the following: A child growing up in a family where its mother is also its sister and its father is also its brother in law. Or a child growing up in a family where it is knowledgeable of being the clone of a previously deceased child, or in other words a “replacement child”. These two examples are just the tip of the iceberg when it come to the emotional risks associated with cloning humans. Imagine the possible pressures that would be inflicted upon that child affecting his/her delicate mental and emotional state. It would often experience a sense of unbelonging and confusion in an abnormal, damaging family setting. It would also continue having these feelings into adulthood and therefore diminish its quality of life. Was creating this cloned child for the benefit of the parents worth the lifelong trauma it had to endure?

Risk of the Abuse of Technology

jwilliams105 — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 07:00:09 +0000

Along with the health and emotional risks, comes the risk of the abuse of reproductive cloning. Just like many other breakthrough innovations, someone always seems to find way to promote negativity through it. For example, with human cloning, powerful dictators trying to clone themselves. And people trying to clone famous athletes, celebrities and TV/radio personalities that they adore. Another risk associated with this technology would be people attempting to create their “perfect” spouse or “perfect” child; parents could mix and match different aspects from the people they idolize without them even knowing. This use would be highly illegal and not to mention ethically wrong. After all how would they feel if they were unknowingly cloned? This is not the original or intended purpose of the technology and its misuse can be disastrous. The last way in which this technology could be misused is by companies who extend cloning services to the public. When they make a clone they naturally keep a copy of their work, so they could sell this to more than one client and have multiple clones roaming around without the original clients consent or knowledge. As you can see, these possible risks of the abuse of this technology cannot be ignored. They are serious and can greatly effect how this technology will be used.

Ethically Irresponsible

jwilliams105 — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 06:00:48 +0000

My last and final supporting argument is that going forward with reproductive cloning would be downright ethically irresponsible. From the possible risks to the possible misuses of this technology, we can accurately assume that more bad than good would result. The main ethical issue with the use of this technology is the fact that it promotes the use of human embryos. People are debating over whether research should be done on actual human embryos. This process would entail the destruction and manipulation of many embryos, which makes many people uncomfortable. The other issue associated with the ethics of human cloning is that it defies nature and God’s plan. Up until now God has been the creator and sustainer of human life. But with what scientists are trying to do today, they could also become “creators” of life. This is better expressed by Dr. Richard Seed, a fertility expert, “We are going to become one with God. We are going to have almost as much knowledge and almost as much power as God.”(NPR 1/6/98) From a religious standpoint, what Dr. Seed is proposing would violate every person’s sense of dignity, uniqueness and individuality. After all, people look to their roots to define themselves. A clone would be created in a lab, so where or to whom would it look to for its personal identity? Also, Christians believe that clones would not have souls. The reasoning behind this; When God creates a person, he gives them an eternal soul, so what happens to the people God doesn’t create?

Opposition Argument

jwilliams105 — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 09:00:21 +0000

Medical Advances

“The aging surgeons dexterity, the athlete’s wind, the construction worker’s muscles, the fashion model’s face–all restored…Cloning will provide the raw materials to put us back together.”(Robertson)This quote from Dr. Paul Segall, a biologist in Berkley, California. Believe it or not, for every person in objection to the implementation of human reproductive cloning, there is someone else who ambitiously supports it. Their reasons range from pure curiosity to supposed heath advances. Some are even bold enough to proclaim that cloning a human is ok because, in essence, a clone is just a time delayed twin complete with aspects of normally born twins such as the same DNA but different personalities, intelligence and talents. Despite the many risks cloning is also seen as being beneficial is medical advances and grief relief.

From a medical standpoint, human reproductive cloning could drastically improve organ donning. As of now, the procedure for organ donning goes as follows. Someone discovers they are in need of a new organ from their physician; they get placed on the long waiting lists and eventually receive the organ they need, if ever. God forbid that the organ needed is a vital one and there is a time statue in which the person needs it in order to survive because they will have to wait in line behind all the other who were diagnosed with needing that particular organ before them. On the brighter side human reproductive cloning proposes cloning humans for the sole purpose of harvesting organs. This would benefit those in need in a variety of ways including faster response time and delivery of organs. Also since the organ is of the own persons DNA, rejection of it will be virtually obsolete. There is no doubt that implementing this speedy technology would save many more lives.

The only problem with this is that it is highly unethical. Dr. Marie Dioberardino, PH.D agrees, “The cloning of animals is certainly useful, but I am morally against manipulation of genetic material that would develop into a whole human being. We just don’t have the right to manipulate the gene pool of human individuals.” In other words, it is unethical for humans to play with the very core of what makes us human, our genetic makeup. And besides, with this technology, it is not even guaranteed that the advances discovered with really be more beneficial than the methods we use today. “I am not convinced that human cloning research will produce significant medical benefits compared to the same funding in other things”(Dixon).

Proposal

jwilliams105 — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 22:03:44 +0000

In conclusion, if we continue to entertain the idea of human reproductive cloning, many of the very core reqirements of humans will be severely compromised. Things such as personal identification, parenthood, and other ethical values would sease to exist. We will live in a culture where humans are on the same level as animals and that in no way can or will be beneficial. The defenders of cloning believe that it will permenantly put an end to medical problems and the grief experience. But as we have seen through this paper, cloning can bring nothing but a demise of our culture as we know it today. Human reproductive cloning is too dangerous to be implementedin our society, therefore it should not be used. It would complicate how we define a human. ”In a n era where everything is virtually dependent on the continued development of new technologies and “where life can be created in a petri dish and genetic codes can be edited like a digital text, the distinction between natural and and artificial have become very complex.”(The Cloning Dilemma)