Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Human cloning debate arguments
Ethical issues about human cloning
Ethical issues about human cloning
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Human cloning debate arguments
The topic I chose was cloning, but I will be focusing on Human Cloning. Dolly the sheep was the first mammal to be created using cloning technology in 1997. With the birth of Dolly the sheep it had raise of a possibility of one day being able to clone human. It took 277 times to create dolly the sheep although it suffers from arthritis and premature aging. In December 2002, a religious group of Raelin claimed that a human baby was cloned but it had not been scientifically confirmed. In 1962 John Gurdon claimed to have cloned South African frogs from the nucleus differentiated adult intestinal cells. In 1964, F.E Stewart grew a complete carrot plant using the carrot root cells and to prove that cell cloning was possible. Francis Crick and James Watson were the first pioneers to discover double helix structure of DNA in 1953. It increased the scientific research of learning about human genetic codes and discovers the possibility of cloning. According to Vos (2004), “In 1984, Steen Willadsun cloned a sheep from embryo cells, which were the predecessor to Dolly’s method of cloning.” In 2002 Boisselier chemist and CEO of Clonaid, cloned Eve the first baby to be cloned and was 7lbs; she is known to be a healthy and happy baby. Eve was created by an America woman of 31 years old who donated her DNA for a cloning process. The woman didn’t give her name, but her embryo was implanted and then gestated to the baby, with that it would make an identical twin as an exact genetic duplicate of the mother. The reason why she decided to donate her DNA was because her husband was infertile of resorted cloning.
There are two ways to make an exact genetic copy which are artificial embryo twinning, and somatic cell nuclear transfer. Artificial embryo ...
... middle of paper ...
...s is that in some states human clone research was banned, other were ensure legally without being fund and in California for instance is funding embryonic stem cell research.
I think that human cloning shouldn’t be controversial because it’s giving people a second chance to either live longer or become parents for the first time. I think it’ll be very useful in the future and besides its not hurting anyone. To some people they might not think it’s a good idea because of the different features it might have but then again its being used for good. Human cloning sounds weird, but I think it’s interesting to know that animals and human can be cloned. I would like to learn more, that’s one reason why I decided to write about this topic. Human cloning as positive things to it even if there are side effects to this issue but it’s not harming anyone its helping the world.
In 2001 scientist attempted to create a cloned human embryo, they had consulted all the necessary sources before getting the “ok” to begin “creating”. Then they had to find a female subject to donate eggs. To start the process of cloning they need to use a very fine needle and get the genetic information from a mature egg. Then they inject it into the nucleus of a donor cell. The female donors were asked to take psychological and physical tests to screen for diseases and what not.
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.
Human cloning research has once been the subject of terrifying science-fiction films and novels, science experiments gone wrong, accomplished only by the evil scientists twirling their moustaches. However, ideas presented on page and screen are rarely accurate. The possibility of cloning an exact copy of another human with one already fully developed is almost impossible, but through meticulous research, scientists have discovered the numerous benefits of cloning humans, either with individual cells or an embryo.
Professor: Good morning class! I am sure that you all have heard about the recent scientific discovery in the process of cloning. If not, allow me to fill you in on this current controversial scientific discovery. Last week, a Scottish scientist named Dr. Ian Wilmut from the Roslin Institute in Edinburgh, Scotland, successfully cloned an adult sheep. I said adult sheep because scientists already have the ability to clone sheep and calves, for farming purposes, from undifferentiated embryonic cells. Is there any questions so far?
Many people think the US should reconsider the ban placed by President Clinton, and have it modified to fit the needs of the American public. This includes the research and development of human tissues for the use of replacing organs, specialized cells, and nervous systems. Along with this, there is an implied consensus that the government should tightly regulate these experiments. Most of the people who support this position have some type of involvement with a degenerative disease or ailment that stands to be solved with the promises of genetic cloning.
In recent decades, questions about genetic engineering, genetic modification, and cloning of animals and humans are on the minds of many. On February 27, 1997 when Dr. Ian Wilmut and his team sent chills down our spine with the announcement of the first successfully cloned sheep Dolly. At this time the reality of animal cloning stared us in the face while the human cloning was just around the corner.
...the future. Federal money needs to be spent on establish national research centers and a commission to deal with certain cloning issues on an individual basis. Cloning does not need to be banned completely. Well the first question is, "Where would this money come from to fund this technology?" The answer is from government bonds. That could be paid back when cloning is further research and cloning becomes an optional procedure. Then the medical tasks that cloning could aid would certainly produce enough money to repay the bonds and justify the use of federal money.
The process of cloning has existed for decades. Plants have been cloned for years now, although, cloning was never recognized until February 22, 1997 when the first mammal (Dolly the Sheep) was cloned from an adult cell (“Cloning Dolly The Sheep”). Dolly was named after Dolly Parton, the mammary cell that was cloned after giving birth at the Roslin Institute. The cloning of Dolly sparked much discussion and debate that has stuck around today. Dolly was the first successful reproductive clone. What first started out as the first ever demonstration of artificial embryo in 1885 quickly transformed into the success of cloning animals such as sheep, cows, and mice (“The History of Cloning”). With the help of decades of me...
“Dr. Ian Malcolm: God creates dinosaurs. God destroys dinosaurs. God creates man. Man destroys God. Man creates dinosaurs,” this is one of the most memorable lines in the movie Jurassic Park. It is a popular yet haunting movie that introduced the idea of cloning dinosaurs and generally cloning animals. This popularized and suggested the idea that cloning should be avoided and to be feared. Cloning is often questioned as to be morally acceptable in our society. With the technological advancements made so far, there are many human and animal benefits that will be made possible with cloning. Animal cloning can be applied to many different societal needs and desires, while there are limitations the process is still viable. If not today, then tomorrow, there is time to improve and perfect the process. There will be no learning curve if it is only applied to one aspect of creating an identical twin. Cloning will create medical, social, and environmental benefits which outweigh its ethnic disadvantages. Animal cloning should be allowed and regulated for medical and environmental benefits as well as an alternative food source.
In recent years our world has undergone many changes and advancements, cloning is a primary example of this new modernism. On July 5th, 1995, Dolly, the first cloned animal, was created. She was cloned from a six-year-old sheep, making her cells genetically six years old at her creation. However, scientists were amazed to see Dolly live for another six years, until she died early 2005 from a common lung disease found in sheep. This discovery sparked a curiosity for cloning all over the world, however, mankind must answer a question, should cloning be allowed? To answer this question some issues need to be explored. Is cloning morally correct, is it a reliable way to produce life, and should human experimentation be allowed?
ProQuest Staff. "Human Cloning Timeline." Leading Issues Timelines. 2013: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 11 Feb. 2014. source 3
In conclusion, it is clear that human cloning has enormous potential benefits or negative consequences to the human race. It also demands funding for further development and error methods. Cloning humans not only threatens society, but also the value and uniqueness of every individual. Maybe they will have a check box where it asks if you are a clone or an original. We do not need any more discrimination than what we have going on now. How I mentioned in the beginning, human cloning will be detrimental to the human race. This is clearly going against the course of nature.
These ways include molecular cloning, organismal cloning, and somatic cell nuclear transfer. In the process of molecular cloning, scientists insert a fragment of DNA into a an element, such as a bacterial plasmid, that is able to self-replicate. It is then directed into a host cell so it can create many copies of that gene (LaPensee 2012). Organismal cloning allows the production of organisms that are genetically identical and could be able to create copies of livestock for farming or to help save members of endangered or even extinct species (Cloning Fact Sheet 2015). “In 1997, another sheep named Polly was cloned using both molecular and organismal cloning. Polly was derived from a fetal sheep cell that had been engineered to contain the human gene that makes coagulation factor IX. Factor IX is missing in people with a disease called hemophilia type B” (Cloning Organisms 2003). In the case with Dolly, somatic cell nuclear transfer was used. When using this technique, scientists first remove a mature somatic cell, like a muscle cell, from the species they want to duplicate. The DNA given from the somatic cell is then moved into an empy oocyte that has had its own nucleus removed (Cloning Fact Sheet 2015). There
This dialogue is between two students at the university. Steve is a little uncomfortable about cloning, while Sally presents many valid arguments in favor of it. Steve presents many moral questions that Sally answers.
I strongly believe in the idea that there is only one “you” and that even though the West Coast clone generated by the teletransporter would resemble you on the East Coast, there are still two consciousnesses involved. In this paper I will argue that identity is unique to every person, regardless of his or her appearance, actions, or mental being. To correlate my opinion on identity and cloning, I relate it to a key: when a duplicate of a key is made, the second key will serve the exact same purpose as the original key and they might even be mistaken for each other from time to time, however, in the end, the second key is never anything more than a copy, even if the first key has been lost or destroyed. Due to my view on identity, I have derived