About Human Cloning The ethics of human cloning has become a big issue in recent years. Proponents on both sides of the issue have many reasons to clone or not to clone. This is an attempt to explore the pros and cons of human cloning and to provide enough information on both sides of the issue for the reader to make an informed decision about whether human cloning is ethical or not. Cloning will be defined first. Next, a brief explanation of why problems with human cloning arose will be presented. Some things cannot be known for sure unless they are tested, such as whether human cloning is not allowed. Next, a discussion of the facts and opinions in favor of cloning and then also against cloning will be presented. Let us remember that not all of this has been proven true nor can it yet be proven, but has simply been held up as a scientific hypothesis. Finally, my personal opinion will be expressed. Definition of human cloning When we talk about human cloning, what do we mean? Different groups and organizations define it differently. To use a specific definition, the American Medical Association (AMA) has defined cloning as “the production of genetically identical organisms by somatic cell nuclear transfer.” is transferred into an egg from which the nucleus has been removed" (Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs 1). In other words, cloning is the method of producing a child who has the same genes as its parent. Take an egg and remove its nucleus, which contains the DNA/genes. Then you take the DNA from an adult cell and insert it into the egg, fusing the adult cell with the enucleated egg, or by a sophisticated nuclear transfer. Then you stimulate it electrically or chemically the reconstructed egg and you try to get it to start dividing and become an embryo. You then use the same process to implant the egg into a surrogate mother that you would use with artificial insemination. (Eibert) However, many groups have used a definition broader cloning. They include the production of tissues and organs through the growth of cells or tissues in cultures together with the actual production of the embryos that will be born. This is done with the use of stem cells. When an egg is fertilized and begins to divide, the cells are all the same. When cells divide, some cells differentiate and become stem cells that produce certain tissues and then organs. Research in this area is very active. There is still much for scientists to learn about cell differentiation and how it works. To clone an organ, you need to produce a stem cell and then use it to clone that specific organ. For the purposes of this article, both definitions will be used to cover all opinions. It must be understood that cloning does not produce an exact copy of the person to be cloned. What cloning does is copy the person's DNA/genes and create a genetic duplicate. The person will not be a Xerox copy. He or she will grow up in a different environment than the clone, with different experiences and different opportunities. Genetics does not entirely define a person and personality. How it all began In February 1997, when embryologist Ian Wilmut and his colleagues at the Roslin Institute in Scotland were able to clone a lamb, named Dolly, the world was introduced to a new possibility and will never be the same again (Nash ). Cloning was previously thought to be impossible, but now there is living proof that the technology and knowledge to clone animals exists. They began toquestions arose within governments and scientific organizations and they began to answer them. Will humans be next? Can this procedure also be used to clone humans? Would anyone actually try? What can we learn if we clone humans? How will this affect the world? These are just some of the questions that have emerged and need to be answered. A whole new concept of ethics was created when Dolly's birth was announced. There are a large number of possible medical benefits and disadvantages related to cloning and its technology. They include the following: Potential medical benefits The possibility that through cloning technology we learn to renew the activity of damaged cells by growing new cells and replacing them. The ability to create humans with the same genetic makeup to serve as organ donors for each other, such as kidney and bone marrow transplants. The advantage of studying cellular differentiation at the same time as cloning is studied and developed. Infertile couples will be able to have children who will have the genetic model of the mother or father. Potential harms and disadvantages The possibility of compromising individuality. Loss of genetic variation. A "black market" of fetuses could arise from desirable donors who will want to be able to clone themselves, such as movie stars, athletes and others. The technology is not well developed. It has a low fertility rate. In cloning Dolly, 277 eggs were used, 30 started to divide, nine induced a pregnancy, and only one survived to term (Nash). Clones can be treated like second class citizens. Unknown psychosocial damage with impacts on family and society. Governments take action Governments got to work immediately after Dolly was cloned. They wanted to take control and make laws before anything drastic could happen. Several ethics committees have been asked to decide whether to allow scientists to attempt to clone human beings. Many of the committees found the data displayed above. In the United States, the National Advisory Commission on Bioethics has recommended a five-year moratorium on cloning a child through somatic cell nuclear transfer (Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs 1). In the state of Michigan, Governor Engler signed a law last year making human cloning illegal with harsh penalties for attempting it ("Governor Engler..."). In the UK, the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA) and the Human Genetics Advisory Commission (HGEC) have approved human cloning for therapeutic purposes, but not for cloning children ("HFEA supports human cloning in the UK"). Many organizations have also come forward and expressed their opinions. Amidst all this ethical definition, many people are ignored by governments. People talk openly about what they want done. Let's clone ourselves After a couple has had their first child, to their disappointment they become sterile and cannot have more children. Cloning would allow such a couple to have a second child, perhaps a younger twin than the one they already have. This example has a great argument. Many couples have difficulty having children and sometimes it is impossible for couples to have children because they are infertile. Cloning would allow these couples to have children. Also, occasionally a woman is born without a uterus or has other complications and cannot produce eggs, so with the help of a surrogate mother she can have a child using her own or her husband's DNA. This and the example at the beginning are both arguments that some have made to promote cloning. ANDIt's hard to tell someone that they can't use cloning to have children when there are no other possible ways to produce offspring. This is one of the reasons why it is difficult to decide whether cloning is ethical or not. Below are some of the reasons why cloning should be allowed. As just discussed, cloning can be used to benefit those who are infertile and cannot have children normally and naturally. It is the desire of most couples to have children and when it is impossible to have children of their own, some are willing to do anything to have them. Cloning will allow them to have one or more children who have the genetic model of one of the parents. Through cloning, research can progress. It is difficult to say what we can learn from cloning if cloning is not allowed. Perhaps we can learn more about cell differentiation. We can learn enough to produce human organs without having to produce humans. We could develop technology to enable simpler genetic testing and solve problems like spinal cord injury, cancer, Tay-Sachs disease, and many others. Organ cloning for organ transplants is one of the main practical reasons why cloning should be allowed. There is always a high demand for organs. Some advocate cloning humans to create replacement body parts. Others simply talk about wanting to clone an organ to replace a defective organ. Rejuvenation is also a key argument for cloning advocates. Human cloning could one day reverse heart attacks. Some scientists believe that injecting cloned healthy heart cells into damaged heart tissue will lead to healing of the heart (Human Cloning Foundation). By combining cloning technology and human stem cell cultivation technology, conditions such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and degenerative joint disease could be curable. The possibilities are endless and could remain unexplored if human cloning is banned. Don't clone One of the government's primary goals is to protect human life. Some people want the government to regulate cloning and not allow it. The Michigan government is convinced of this and became the first government to ban cloning. As previously mentioned, the governor has signed laws prohibiting engaging in or attempting to engage in human cloning. A Michigan state senator, Bennett, said: "This legislation boils down to one thing: banning the creation of human life for scientific research. Human cloning is wrong; it will be wrong in five years; and it will be wrong in 100 years !" ("Governor Engler...") Producing clones for research or to use their parts is unethical. It would be against a doctor's code of ethics to harm a clone (i.e. use it for an organ transplant). The clone would be a human being and would deserve all the rights and privileges enjoyed by a non-cloned human being. A clone should not be a second class citizen. It is assumed that they would be considered as such. The American Medical Association offers four reasons why cloning should not take place. They are: 1) there are unknown physical harms introduced by cloning, 2) unknown psychosocial harms introduced by cloning, including violations of autonomy and privacy, 3) impacts on family and social relationships, and 4) potential effects on the human gene pool (Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs 4-6). We simply don't know the harm that will come from cloning. Cloning would lead to the loss of individuality as one's genetic predispositions and conditions would be known.If raised by a clone parent or as a sibling of the clone, you may have high expectations to meet. However, human clones could differ greatly in personality and even grow up in different conditions than cloned humans. Monozygotic twins also differ. This could represent great stress for the clone and perhaps even the loss of the ability to choose for himself (Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs 5). The long-term genetic effects of cloning can cause more problems than you might imagine. The question of what can go wrong in cloning needs to be discussed. From an evolutionary point of view, cloning is not good. Evolution relies on continuous mixing and matching of genes to keep the gene pool alive (McCormack). With cloning the natural gene selection process would be bypassed and evolution would be compromised. The AMA Council on Judicial and Ethical Affairs has stated the following regarding possible problems with mutations and clones: Because the somatic cell from which the clones originate will likely have acquired mutations, serial cloning would exacerbate the accumulation that occurs in somatic cells. While these mutations may not be apparent at the time of cloning, genetic problems can arise and could become worse in future generations. (Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs 6) We can see that cloning can eventually change the gene pool from how we know it now. It most likely wouldn't be a nice change. Technology as we currently know it will not effectively support the cloning of humans. As mentioned above, the success rate was quite low when cloning Dolly. Only one of 277 attempts was successful, see graph 1. The same problems of difficulty in getting the fertilized egg to implant parallel those of in vitro fertilization. Technology has not yet been able to provide an answer to this problem. There is also a fear that clones will be treated like second-class citizens. If a clone is created to serve as a bone marrow or kidney donor, the question arises: Would it be treated like the first child? Would the parents have loved this child equally? Failure to do so would lead to negative self-esteem and/or other physiological problems. There is also fear that some want to clone people to create large armies of the same soldier or even produce large quantities of workers. This would also lead to the creation of a second lower class for clones. From the Latter-day Saint perspective, the Family Proclamation clearly does not agree with cloning. The Proclamation states: "We...declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation be exercised only between man and woman, lawfully married as husband and wife. We declare that the means by which mortal life is created are divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and its importance in God's plan." (Emphasis added) In other words, the power to create human beings must be used only in marriage between husband and wife. Cloning involves only one parent, so it does not follow God's plan in which a man's sperm and a woman's egg are needed to create life My personal recommendation As a biology student, I have tried to approach both sides and approach them with an unbiased opinion. Personally, I think the world of genetics is fascinating, but after learning what is possible today thanks to technology, I have changed my mind about pursuing a career in the field. I consider cloning to be a wonderful advancement in technology and knowledge. I don't think it should though.