Medical and scientific advancements are reasons for celebration as humans move forward to a new era where innovation furthers human understanding and allows new possibilities to form. However, one major scientific innovation seemed to do the exact opposite. As the news of a cloned mammal spread nationwide the opposition to cloning was almost instant, perhaps too instant. The hasty reaction of an overwhelming portion of the population indicates that an already existing ideology towards cloning had developed even before cloning was achieved. Scientists and philosophers agree that the previous use of generic engineering in literary works, even if unconsciously, caused the vast majority of individuals to develop a negative or unrealistic perspective regarding cloning. The apprehension towards cloning was only solidified by the negative and bias reaction of the media as they covered the news of Dolly the sheep as well as by new science fiction books and films that focused only on the potential negative risks of cloning.
Cloning might not have been a real possibility or an issue until the 1980s when the success of nuclear transfer in mammals was reported. However, as soon as cloning became a reality in 1996 with the birth of Dolly the first cloned animal derived from an adult cell (). It became increasingly clear that a large majority of the population was against it. Perhaps it was the lack of clear scientific information individuals received as the news of Dolly spread that lead the public into a period of fear and confusion, or perhaps it was the previous attempts of manipulating human genetic traits during the 1930s and 1940s when the Nazis tried to create a super-race know as eugenics (40), that many individuals feared the discove...
... middle of paper ...
...their dignity” (Marcus 408). For more than a century individuals have been warned trough literature and films about the moral wrongness of genetic engineering. Was it then mere coincidence the instant negative reaction of the public when cloning became a real possibility? Or is it possible that the novels, films, and News individuals use for entertainment purposes, actually had a greater psychological impact that resulted in the adopted formation of beliefs fed to humans by years of bias fictional and unrealistic scenarios that resemble reality. Can humans than separate reality from fiction as new helpful innovations surge such as therapeutic cloning were the harvesting of embryonic stem cells could be used to potentially cure diseases or be used to replace damaged organs. Simply because they have been lead to believe nothing good can come out of genetic engineering.
In the summer of 1996, an animal unlike any other was born unto the world. Roughly three feet high and covered in an insulating material, there were countless others that looked nearly identical freely roaming the countryside. But this animal was special; it was precisely identical to one of its brethren. Dolly the sheep was the first ever manmade clone, an exact copy of its genetic donor. In the fifteen years since the birth of Dolly cloning technology has been improving at a steady pace, and now humanity as a whole is at an impasse: human clones. Scientists are very close to being able to clone a human being, but should they? A ban on human cloning issued by the World Health Organization is in place (World Health Organization 1) but it is non-binding in nature, and individual governments must come up with their own cloning policies. For the United States, the choice is obvious: the federal government should not place a ban on human reproductive cloning. There are numerous reasons for this, such as the notion of cloning as an alternative to adoption, the elimination of disease, the possibility of continuing life after death, and the possibility of an improved quality of life for the clones themselves. At the same time, there are arguments against human cloning, mostly centering on moral issues, that must also be addressed.
Since the birth of Dolly, the cloned sheep, the debate over human cloning has been characterized in the media as an ethical debate. When scientists announced that they had cloned an adult sheep, the public also heard that cloning humans was possible. The media stories about this unprecedented feat was not about the procedures utilized in but rather about the morality of the process itself. Media coverage focused on ethical concerns of cloning, its social, religious and physiological significance, and the motivation behind it. Although the there are many views expressed in the media on cloning, the main characterization of cloning as an ethical issue centers around two connected worries: the loss of individuality, and the seemingly evil motivations behind cloning. In a sense media coverage framed the public moral debate on cloning around the above issues.
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.
Although the issue of human cloning has received the most attention within the last two years, cloning techniques have existed since the late 1970s. The cloning technique used at this time was a process called artificial twinning which involved split ting a single fertilized ovum into what are then considered new embryos and then implanting each into a female to be carried to term (religioustolerance.org 1). These experiments, however, were limited to animals. By the 1980s and early 1990s, during the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George Bush, restrictions had been placed on the research of the cloning of human beings. The pro-life groups, which have considerabl e influence in the Republican party, held many concerns about the experimentation and destruction of human embryos, which they consider people with rights, thus they pressured the administration for restrictions on research (cac.psu.edu 1). A series of measures prohibiting federal funding for human cloning were thus implement...
Cloning, a topic that has recently caused mayhem all over the world, is possible, but will it be here to stay? The astonishing news that scientists had cloned a sheep a couple of years ago sent people into panic at the thought that humans might be next. "Cloning is a radical challenge to the most fundamental laws of biology, so it's not unreasonable to be concerned that it might threaten human society and dignity" (Macklin 64). Since most of the opposition is coming from the pure disgust of actually being able to clone species, it makes it difficult for people to get away from the emotional side of the issue and analyze the major implications cloning would have for society. To better understand this controversial issue, the pros and cons of cloning will be discussed.
Not so far in the future, a young boy of the age of six, dying a heart-wrenching death, will only be able survive with a bone marrow transplant. His parents will have searched near and far for a match, but none will come to their aid. The only possible way that they can produce a perfect match for their son's bone marrow is to clone their son. Unfortunately, at this time this topic is still being discussed and debated upon with the government. Their only child that has been their treasure for six years might die. A clone of their son becomes their apple of aspiration to keep the treasure from being buried.
When people think of the word cloning they think of evil scientist in a dark laboratory’s full of dangerous and scary instruments of science for conducting experiments, when actually the word clone means, “a cell, cell product, or organism that is genetically identical to the unit or individual from which it was derived (Dictionary.com).” In the past 50 years the science community has made many discoveries such as the cures for different life threatening diseases, different techniques of approaching different types of cancer, and different uses for the practice of cloning. Different people have many opinions about cloning. Some people in the medical field support the practice of cloning, because they believe it can help cure certain diseases by watching how they develop during the cloning process. But some people in the medical field do not support the practice of cloning, because they feel as if it is just a waste of time, and waste of money. Other people do not support the practice of cloning for religious reasons; because they feel as if things are suppose to live once and if a once living organism is artificially reproduced then it is defying the divine grace of God.
In 1997 Dr. Ian Wilmut, a British scientist successfully cloned a sheep named Dolly. This turned the scientific world upside-down. The success of the experiment is considered by all as an amazing achievement in science. However, ethics and morals must surface to regulate cloning. It is understood that individuality is the most important part of life. Individuality is given to a person at birth and considered a right they will have for rest of their life. There is also a fear that the clone may only be produced to live the life of the clone, thus causing severe emotional damage as well pain and suffering for the clone. The progression of the clone may be limited, the advance in idea development will slowly die off. Evolution could come to a halt, because with clones, diversity will be limited and there will not be as many advances in society. The cells, in all humans, will all be the same and there will not be a process of natural selection and diversity.
Genetic cloning has become an issue in these past years, and many questions have arisen due to this scientific breakthrough. As with any new technology, ethical and moral ideals have clashed between those who support it and those who favor the opposing side. The dispute involves what to do with our ability to clone and manipulate DNA of human beings, plants, and animals, and whether it is ethical for us to pursue research and experiments with genetics or whether it is people just playing "God". Genetic cloning is a problem because it splits the country and for many of its questionable natures causing people not to trust it. Yes, it is a proven fact that people are scared of what they do not know about, and with genetic cloning, they have a very good reason to be both scared and relieved.
When they finally made cloning happen, after years of ethical hand wringing and science-fiction fantasy, it was done in such a low key way by researchers so quiet and self-effacing that the world nearly missed it. Once it was out, the news that human embryos had been cloned, flew around the world with the speed of sound bouncing off of satellites. Critics decried the commercialization of fertility technology. Scientists steeled themselves against a backlash they feared would obstruct a promising field of research. One way to look at the future of cloning is to look at the livestock industry. More than a decade has passed since the first calves, lambs and piglets were cloned and yet there were no dairy herds composed of carbon copy cows, no pigpens filled with identical
A recent controversial topic that was discussed in class is the process of cloning. The novel Never Let Me Go is a literary work displaying cloning in England during the 1990’s. The clones are raised and nurtured until they are completely matured. After maturation, they are used for organ donations that are used for “normal” non-clone human beings. The outcomes from cloning taps into the morality and ethicality of human existence. Numerous questions are raised about the outcomes from cloning and some of the answers contradict the morals that humans have concerning what is means to live as a human being. “Cloning refers to asexual reproduction, reproduction without fertilization” (Harris 2). Due to recent advancements in cloning technologies, the foreign process of cloning human beings does not sound like science fiction but a glimpse into the reality of the future. Cloning does not only threaten humans’ previous way of classifying life but leaps into the realm of ethicality. While some may say that cloning human beings is unethical, the counter argument poses the benefits of cloning go way past the argued ethics of human existence. Even though there are benefits, the ethics of making an entire new human being from another one is unethical but some small scale cloning appears to meet ethical “guidelines” and provide benefits toward medicinal practice.
Despite negative reactions the research continues, “Some scientists think safe and efficient cloning procedures will emerge in five to ten years. 'Cloning is entering a new era’ (Klein).” With the use of more developed experiments and advanced therapeutic cloning, people gain different views on the subject, allowing the public to choose a point of view on the process. With more research and study the public will embrace it more. Arguments against the growth of therapeutic cloning and embryonic cloning state that the procedure is unreliable and very expensive. It takes several hundred embryos and donors to get them, and even after all those attempts, few will make it to birth and become adult organisms, “Additionally, animal cloning has also proved to be very inefficient, with 277 attempts needed to create Dolly. There is no reason to think that human cloning would be any more successful, so a large supply of donated human eggs would be required (Aldridge).”
Cloning is a very controversial topic since it relates to moral values of human beings. In February 1997 scientists in Scotland announced the birth of the first cloned sheep named Dolly, this heralded the future of cloning possibilities and scientists began extensive experiments on cloning and have since then cloned both plants and animals successfully. The next step was to clone actual human beings but before experiments could have been carried out pressure started build on the scientists because people started to doubt if cloning was ethical and morally correct. Governments began to introduce bans and constraints on cloning, as they felt cloning was not correct and because they represented the people of its country, it had to act on it. Cloning has its cons but its pros seem to overcome them greatly.
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.
In 1996, Scottish scientist Ian Wilmot and his research team was able to successfully clone a lamb named Dolly from an adult sheep. This invention shocked all of the world at the realization that cloning was no longer a fantasy or an element of a Science Fiction movie. Since then, human cloning has become one of the most debated topics in the world. Everyone started to discuss about its advantages or the ethical issues of human cloning. Most of the people were against it and called it an ‘evil’ experiment. In several recent polls by Cable News Network (CNN) and TIME magazine (The Ethics of Cloning, 1998), it was shown that seventy five percent of the responding population thought that cloning was not a good thing. Furthermore, three quarters of the respondents believed that cloning was against God’s will, and when they were asked that if they are given the opportunity to clone themselves, only seven percent of the people said that they would allow it. However, when asked to define human cloning, an estimated ninety five percent of them could not describe it correctly. Although many people believe that cloning is against the will of God and it is immoral and unethical to clone human beings for both religious and humanitarian reasons, however, human cloning can have many benefits for the human race in terms of helping infertile couples and people with genetic problems. In addition, it can be really helpful for the people who suffer from diseases such as kidney and liver defects or cancer. It can also be used to develop ‘spare parts’ of the human body to be used for organ transplants.