Cloning History and Ethical Issues
In the movie Jurassic Park, we watched as man was able to recreate the existence of dinosaurs using blood and DNA preserved many years ago. This process of taking cells and using it to recreate a lifeform is called cloning. A few year ago man was blest with the discovery of cloning. But with that discovery came many questions. Cloning has been an ongoing topic of debate among the scientific and political community. The constant question ahs arisen of whether or not we can clone a human being. In recent years much evidence has arisen in the field of cloning. Through the analysis of the positive and negative effects of cloning, and a moral analysis, I will propose that cloning be heavily regulated and limited and that cloning in regards to humans be banned. Listing the history, analyzing the benefits and negative aspects, and showing government reaction, I will come to my conclusion. Cloning can be traced back all the way to 1952 when frogs were cloned from the cells were tadpoles. Although the tadpoles died after a few days, the effort to find the key to cloning continued. In 1970 mice embryos were cloned. Then in 1979 the first sheep embryo was cloned. In 1980 followed the cloning of cattle embryo. In 1993 George Was
These medical advancements could be made possible through cloning. Another recent medical discovery was the benefits of stem cells. "Stem cells can be used to generate healthy new cells, that via transplant, can battle some diseases." (Kerr, S.T. 1-22-99) Stems cells are taken from human embryos. Cloning stem cells could create a ready supply that can be compatible to anyone. Cloning of adult cells was a process that took creator Ian Wilmut ten years to complete. He took many risks and had to conduct most of his experiments in secrecy. Within those ten years he made many mistakes. His attempts failed numerous times. "Out of 277 tries, the researchers eventually produced only 29 embryos that survived longer than six days. Of these, all died before birth except Dolly, whose historic entry into the world was witnessed by a handful of researchers and a veterinarian." (Nash) This relatively small percentage for success meant that out of many tries, only a few clones might turn out healthy enough to live. Many pro-life supporters also note that the death of the many embryos was unjust. This likelihood for malfunction in cloning is very discouraging. Ostrum, Carol. "The ethics of cloning ourselves." Seattle Times 2-25-97 pg. A1 Lemonick, Michael. "Dolly your history." Time Magazine 8-3-98 vol. 152 pg. 64 Elmer De-Witt, Philip. "Where do we draw the line" Time Magazine 11-8-93 vol. 142 Even though that these governments have made these decisions it would be almost impossible to regulate cloning. "You can outlaw technique; you cannot repeal biology. And even the outlawing of this technique--Britain, for example, forbids the cloning of humans--will fail. It is too simple, too replicable. No amount of regulation by the FDA or the NIH or even the FBI will stop it." (Kroauthammer) This decision that I make and that the governments of the world already practice will definitely benefit man in the long run. Morals and ethics do change with time, and maybe someday man would be ready for the cloning of his own kind, but until then, we must make a morally conscious effort to control this great power we have finally harnessed. The future will be bright with the oncoming of cloning. Discussion, debate, and regulation are the necessary tools needed for its arrival.
Some common words found in the essay are:
Ian Wilmut, NIH FBI, Madeline Nash, Jurassic Park, Kerr ST, Boys Brazil, University Hawaii, Advisory Commission, ETHICAL CHALLENGE, Recer Europe, effects cloning, human embryos, negative effects cloning, negative effects, adult cell, morally wrong, cloned cells, stem cells, egg nucleus, powerful tool, clone human, magazine 3-10-97 vol, 3-10-97 vol 149, vol 149 pg, egg nucleus removed,
Approximate Word count = 3029
Approximate Pages = 12 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
