The website on cloning gave Dolly the lamb as the example. Dolly was cloned through the somatic cell nuclear transfer process. This means that her DNA came from a single cell that was taken from the mother egg and was then fused with a mammary cell. The fused cells then develop into an embryo which is then transplanted into a surrogate sheep. This embryo then grew into ‘Dolly’ who is genetically identical to the donor sheep. This can, in theory, also be done in human beings. A cell from a donor is taken and the DNA from this cell is removed and transferred into an unfertilized egg. This egg, with the donor’s DNA in it, is then implanted into a surrogate mother and the resulting baby is then genetically identical to the original donor.
Human cloning technology could be used to determine the causes of spontaneous abortions and understand the rapid cell growth caused by cancer. This technology could also be used study the process of aging, genetics, and to regenerate damaged tissues. There are several arguments again human cloning. Some scientists argue that this process would result in a large number of miscarriages and deaths of newborns. There is also a high concern that there would be an increase in the black marker for embryos. Scientist are also afraid that the clone’s chromosome would match the age of the donors chromosome, which would put them at risk for the same chromosomal disorders, just at a younger age.
There are several religious and ethical arguments regarding human cloning and how it would change our world. The Catholic Church believes that any type of cloning is “intrinsically evil.” They also think that the scientists are trying to ‘play God’ and the clone isn’t manufactured in the image of God. Jewish people fear that cloning humans might harm the family by changing the roles and the relationships between family members. Protestants believe that the Bible says that ‘children should be conceived within a marital union between opposite sexes.’ A Muslim doctor explains that he does not think there should be a limit on scientific nature because ‘knowledge is bestowed on us by God.’ Other Islamic individuals do not believe in human cloning because it might interfere with kinship, which is a key concept in Islamic law.
Some of the ethical arguments against human cloning are that it may cause physical harm to the embryo because the technology is not safe enough to use on humans. They also argue that the child might have psychological problems and suffer a diminished sense of individuality and personal autonomy. The issue that parents might not love the clones as much as they would their children. Opponents to this issue bring up the fact that this is the only chance an infertile couple has to reproduces, so they would definitely love this clone. Another ethical problem with cloning is that it may cause such social problems as cloning becoming the preferred practice of conceiving a child because it is a sure way to have a child that you want. Some supporters of human cloning point out the fact that the benefits to the society of cloning an exceptional scientist or an intellectual outweigh the potential harms.
Human cloning became a main topic in governmental discussions in 1997 after ‘Dolly’ was made public. Former president Clinton called for a bill to ban any type of implantation of cloned cells into the female womb for the next five years. The National Bioethics Advisory Commission, which was created in 1995 provided some recommendations for the government. They said that at this time, human cloning is morally unacceptable for anyone. They suggested requesting any private or non-federally funded sectors to comply voluntarily. Members of the senate proposed banning human cloning forever since “creating multiple copies of God’s unique handiwork devalues human dignity and turns children into mere products of adult’s whims.” Other members of the Senate proposed a ban on somatic cell nuclear transfer but support the scientific community in research not involving human cloning. The majority of the scientific research community believes that these bans on human cloning would limit crucial research.
The topic of human cloning was discussed on the Charlie Rose show where he had a debate between Dr. Harold Varmus, who was a former director at the National Institution of Health, and the Republican Senator Sam Brownback. Senator Brownback, from Kansas, was a supporter of the bill that President Bush proposed banning all human cloning. Dr. Varmus does not support this bill because he believes human cloning could be very beneficial for our society. He discusses that the president and many of the senators do not understand the difference between human cloning with the intent of making a new human being and using the same techniques to generate materials which would deepen the scientific community’s understanding of human development and diseases. Dr. Varmus believes that using this technique could allow us to generate cells which can then be used in medical therapies. Senator Brownback fought back making the same point to every argument. In my opinion he had a very weak argument because he kept referring to the ‘clump of cells’ as a fetus. I don’t believe he has a very strong scientific background and can not understand how important this cloning technique could be to us for future therapies. Senator Brownback did have a good argument asking the doctor when he thought that clump of cells actually turned into a living human being.
No comments:
Post a Comment