Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The Disadvantage of cloning
The Disadvantage of cloning
The Disadvantage of cloning
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The Disadvantage of cloning
“Human cloning will take place, and it will take place in my lifetime. And I don't fear it at all - I welcome it. I think it's right and proper that we continue this kind of inquiry.” (Tom Harkin)
Imagine a world where there was no fear of diseases or infertility. A world where parents could choose and pick the desired traits they would like to see in their children. The human cloning process is slowly but surely developing to become an official process worldwide, to provide benefits to our species. You may be wondering, what is human cloning? There are two categories in which human cloning are grouped. One being human reproductive cloning which is the creation of a genetically identical copy of a human, and the other being therapeutic cloning where in human cells are cloned for use in medicine and research. At the moment, human reproductive cloning is banned in a large percentage of the world. However, therapeutic cloning is allowed in many parts of the world including the United States of America and Great Britain. So is it a good idea or a recipe for disaster?
The most dominant reason for the legalisation of human cloning is that it saves lives. Due to the fact that a large percentage of people globally will suffer from organ failure at some point in their life, through the means of cloning, organ donation would become an easier process. If the patient can be cloned, then the resulting organ needed would be perfect for that patient. In 1988, San Francisco a girl named Anissa suffered from cancer. The only therapy available was to kill all of her stem cells, of which she needed to survive. Her parents decided to have another baby for bone marrow transplantation, which was completed successfully with the baby only being 14...
... middle of paper ...
...ey certainly can rejuvenate the tissue.” Two months ago, Chloe, 2, received an infusion of her own stem cells and her progress is remarkable, said her father, Ryan Levine. “Her therapist said she’s made a 50 percent recovery,” he said. “She can walk, run, and do sign language with her right hand.” (Dr. Manny Alvarez, FOX News)
In conclusion, I believe that human cloning is a positive step forward in Britain’s society and that the technology of cloning will certainly improve the standard of living, simplify existing procedures and most importantly, save lives. Those who argue that cloning interrupts the natural process of life and that it would create a slippery slope I believe are mistaken because as a result, it would far outweigh the cost in human materials providing benefits for all species. If clones are treated the same way as humans, cloning can only help.
If a random individual were asked twenty years ago if he/she believed that science could clone an animal, most would have given a weird look and responded, “Are you kidding me?” However, that once crazy idea has now become a reality, and with this reality, has come debate after debate about the ethics and morality of cloning. Yet technology has not stopped with just the cloning of animals, but now many scientists are contemplating and are trying to find successful ways to clone human individuals. This idea of human cloning has fueled debate not just in the United States, but also with countries all over the world. I believe that it is not morally and ethically right to clone humans. Even though technology is constantly advancing, it is not reasonable to believe that human cloning is morally and ethically correct, due to the killing of human embryos, the unsafe process of cloning, and the resulting consequences of having deformed clones.
“Cloning represents a very clear, powerful, and immediate example in which we are in danger of turning procreation into manufacture.” (Kass) The concept of cloning continues to evoke debate, raising extensive ethical and moral controversy. As humans delve into the fields of science and technology, cloning, although once considered infeasible, could now become a reality. Although many see this advancement as the perfect solution to our modern dilemmas, from offering a potential cure for cancer, AIDS, and other irremediable diseases, its effects are easily forgotten. Cloning, especially when concerning humans, is not the direction we must pursue in enhancing our lives. It is impossible for us to predict its effects, it exhausts monetary funds, and it harshly abases humanity.
Long after Shelley wrote her classic masterpiece Frankenstein and Huxley wrote Brave New World, the ethical controversy of cloning conflicts with modern artificial intelligence research. The question that challenges the idea of negative or positive behavior in a replicated machine relies on its similarity to the source of the clone, whether it emulates human behavior or acts as a “superintelligence” with supernatural characteristics void of human error. Humanity will not know the absolute answers concerning behavioral outcome without creating a physical being, an idea portrayed in Shelley’s Frankenstein in which the creation of a monster emulates from his creator’s attempts to generate life. At the time of the novel’s publication, the idea of replicating a soul portrayed a nightmarish theme with little consideration for the potential scientific advancements to facilitate in reality. It lead the genetic idea of manmade intelligence and its ethics emerging from the relativity of space, time, and original life on the planet. The debate of the existing possibility of sentient machines continues to progress, but the consideration of ethical questions such as “Should we create these artificial people?” and “How does this enactment define the soul and mind?” warranted from primitive questions about machine learning within the last century. After the initial proof of possibility for sentient machines, the perfection of cloning will generate “good” behavior at its perfect state several generations from now. The perfect machine portrays the potential for sensible human behaviors including compassion, mentality, empathy, alertness, and love. Humanity of the twenty-first century possesses the knowledge to fantasize the idea of artificial ...
Currently 70,000 Americans are on the organ waiting list and fewer than 20,000 of these people can hope to have their lives saved by human organ transplantation.1 As a result of this shortage, there has been a tremendous demand for research in alternative methods of organ transplantation. Private companies are racing to develop these technologies with an estimated market of six billion dollars.2 Xenotransplantation, or cross-species organ transplantation, appears to be the most likely solution in the near future, and cloned pigs are the main candidates. Pigs and humans have remarkable similarities in physiology, which along with cloning makes pigs strong possibilities for organ donors. A controversial alternative method involves the use of genetically altered headless human beings as organ donors. Although this method may not be developed for some years, scientists are already discussing the necessary technologies. Whether the solution is the cloning of a pig or a human, organ farms may provide us with a solution to our ever-increasing need for donors.
Proponents of cloning humans today should remind themselves of the lesson of Victor Frankenstein before they have to deal with the products of their research and learn the hard way. & nbsp;
Have we as a society come too far too fast? This is a very applicable question recently asked by senator Roger Bennett, from Michigan, before the Senate on the topic of human cloning. It is speculated that we as a human race have the technology to make a clone of any given human (Jackson 2). If this is done, at what cost is it done? If cloning is allowed it will come at the cost of misguided effort, the creation of a process known as gene selection, and loss of individuality and diversity.
In the past, cloning always seemed like a faraway scientific fantasy that could never really happen, but sometimes reality catches up to human ingenuity and people discover that a fictional science is all too real. Such was the fate of cloning when Dolly, a cloned sheep, came into existence during 1997, as Beth Baker explains (Baker 45). In addition to opening the eyes of millions of people, the breakthrough raised many questions about the morality of cloning humans. The greatest moral question is, when considering the pros against the cons, if human cloning is an ethical practice. There are two different types of cloning and both entail completely different processes and both are completely justifiable at the end of the day.
Cloning is a topic with complexities that should be taken into consideration before one simply agrees or disagrees with it. There needs to be ethical codes set to ensure that the beneficial attributes of this method, such as crop propagation and cell research, can be taken advantage of, and so the unethical concepts, such as human and animal cloning for reproduction, can be banned. Imagine the improvements of life that are possible in the near future for society with a moral stance taken on this matter; the possibilities for millions are indescribable.
In the essay, Cloning Reality: Brave New World by Wesley J. Smith, a skewed view of the effects of cloning is presented. Wesley feels that cloning will end the perception of human life as sacred and ruin the great diversity that exists today. He feels that cloning may in fact, end human society as we know it, and create a horrible place where humans are simply a resource. I disagree with Wesley because I think that the positive effects of controlled human cloning can greatly improve the quality of life for humans today, and that these benefits far outweigh the potential drawbacks that could occur if cloning was misused.
Stephens, Patrick. ?Human Cloning is Good for All of Us,? The Objectivist Center. April 3, 2001.
In conclusion, with the development of cloning technology, public have different attitudes towards it. On one hand, serious diseases, like liver cancer, are likely to be cured by transplanting healthy cells and scientists have more access to medical research. It brings hope for infertile families to obtain a baby. On the other hand, it has raised public concerns about security risks due to high failure and malformation rate, and ethical issues about dignity, which are mainly caused by productive cloning. Hence, therapeutic cloning should be enhanced to minimize its potential safety risks in order to be put into clinical application, while reproductive cloning ought to be prohibited worldwide without the agreement on moral issues.
Last of all, Cloning is not ethical, many religious groups look down upon cloning and think it’s not proper because they think it’s like playing God. Many scientists were mainly thinking about cloning animals and, most likely, humans in the future to harvest their organs and then kill them. “Who would actually like to be harvested and killed for their organs?” “Human cloning exploits human beings for our own self-gratification (Dodson, 2003).” A person paying enough money could get a corrupt scientist to clone anybody they wanted, like movie stars, music stars, athletes, etc (Andrea Castro 2005),” whether it be our desire for new medical treatments or our desire to have children on our own genetic terms (Dodson, 2003).
John A. Robertson’s article “Human Cloning and the Challenge of Regulation” raises three important reasons on why there shouldn’t be a ban on Human Cloning but that it should be regulated. Couples who are infertile might choose to clone one of the partners instead of using sperm, eggs, or embryo’s from anonymous donors. In conventional in vitro fertilization, doctors attempt to start with many ova, fertilize each with sperm and implant all of them in the woman's womb in the hope that one will result in pregnancy. (Robertson) But some women can only supply a single egg. Through the use of embryo cloning, that egg might be divisible into, say 8 zygotes for implanting. The chance of those women becoming pregnant would be much greater. (Kassirer) Secondly, it would benefit a couple at high risk of having offspring with a genetic disease choose weather to risk the birth of an affected child. (Robertson) Parents who are known to be at risk of passing a genetic defect to a child could make use of cloning. A fertilized ovum could be cloned, and the duplicate tested for the disease or disorder. If the clone were free of genetic defects, then the other clone would be as well. Then this could be implanted in the woman and allowed to mature to term. (Heyd) Thirdly, it would be used to obtain tissue or organs...
Human cloning is dangerous. It is estimated that between 95 and 98 percent of cloning experiments have failed (Genetics and Society). These downfalls to cloning are in the form of miscarriages and stillbirths (Genetics and Society). Cloned human beings also run the risk of having severe genetic abnormalities. Children cloned from adult DNA would, in a sense, already have “old” genes. These children’s main problem would be developing and growing old too quickly. This includes arthritis, appearance, and organ function. Since the chance of having a child with mental and physical problems is so much higher than that of a normally conceived child, cloning should be illegal.
In recent years, many new breakthroughs in the areas of science and technology have been discovered. A lot of these discoveries have been beneficial to scientific community and to the people of the world. One of the newest breakthroughs is the ability to clone. Ever since Ian Wilmut and his co-workers completed the successful cloning of an adult sheep named Dolly, there has been an ongoing debate on whether it is right or wrong to continue the research of cloning (Burley). Recently, in February 2001, CNN conducted a poll that stated, 90% of American adults think that cloning humans is a bad idea (Robinson). Even though the majority of Americans are opposed to human cloning, there are many benefits that will come from the research of it. Advancements in the medical field and in the fertility process will arise from human cloning. These advancements make cloning very beneficial to the human society.