More handpicked essays just for you.
Human cloning health issues
Ethical problems with cloning animals
Do the advantages of cloning outweigh the disadvantages
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Human cloning health issues
According to Pierre Schaeffer, “The world changes materially. Science makes advances in technology and understating. But the world of humanity doesn’t change.” Scientists have made improvements in the way we use technology for certain studies. These studies have helped us in our society with cloning. With cloning, it have many necessities and outcomes.
With the idea of cloning there are many causes. According to Emily Sohn , “ The goal of cloning is to take control of the reproductive process” (Sohn par. 11). This mean that if we take over breeding then we would have more clones than we do today. From the article “Animals Clones:Double Trouble” it said that “It might also be to save endangered animals if there are too few of them to reproduce well on their own” (Sohn par. 12). This is important because animals in the world play a part and if certain
…show more content…
For example in the article “Positive and Negative Effects of Cloning Biology Essay” it said that “ therapeutic cloning is also called “ Embryo Cloning”, it is a cloning which is performed for the purpose of medical treatment”( Positive and Negative Effects of Cloning Biology Essay par.8). For example treatment”( Positive and Negative Effects of Cloning Biology Essay par.8). For example say a patient has heart disease and the doctors could use cloning to use their heart. The article also said that “clones appear to have a shorter lifespan ”( Positive and Negative Effects of Cloning Biology Essay par.7). This confirms that clones wouldn’t be a good source. For example a doctor puts in a clones heart and the heart dies after a few years. As an effect of the heart dieing then the patient would have died. Also people is disagreeing with cloning because we are taking cloning to another level.( Positive and Negative Effect of Cloning Biology Essay par. 20 ). This is important because cloning can be helpful to us in the future but it could also be dangerous to our
Kevin T. Fitzgerald divided potential scenarios for using cloning technology into three categories: "Producing a clone in order to save the life of an individual who requires a transplant; making available another reproductive option for people who wish to have genetically related children, but face physical or chr...
Therapeutic cloning is the process whereby parts of a human body are grown independently from a body from STEM cells collected from embryos for the purpose of using these parts to replace dysfunctional ones in living humans. Therapeutic Cloning is an important contemporary issue as the technology required to conduct Therapeutic Cloning is coming, with cloning having been successfully conducted on Dolly the sheep. This process is controversial as in the process of collecting STEM cells from an embryo, the embryo will be killed. Many groups, institutions and religions see this as completely unacceptable, as they see the embryo as a human life. Whereas other groups believe that this is acceptable as they do not believe that the embryo is a human life, as well as the fact that this process will greatly benefit a large number of people. In this essay I will compare the view of Christianity who are against Therapeutic Cloning with Utilitarianism who are in favour of Therapeutic Cloning.
“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 ...
But on the contrary, many scientists believe that cloning can be such a positive achievement, not only for medical purposes, but for fighting extinction. For example, what if they could clone many of the endangered species that exist today? There are very few hundred of many beautiful animals that if something isn’t done to save them, they will be extinct in a few years. So if scientists could successfully clone and create these endangered species, although it would still depend on the clone maturing correctly and being able to reproduce successfully, it could be a great
successful clones often have problems with their body and are subject to a short lifespan ridden with health problems. This hurts the person or animal cloned rather than to help them, making cloning an immoral
Both processes also differ in the sense that reproductive cloning has fewer advantages when compared to therapeutic techniques. Studies have consistently made evident the fact that genetically cloned animals have shorter life spans, as well as an inferior quality of life. Consequently, they also lack in genetic variation, which makes the organism more susceptible to disease, and other obstructive circumstances. Contrarily, therapeutic cloning is employed for medicinal purposes, and therefore, ethical implications are quite easy to justify. The continuing practice of therapeutic cloning in relation to stem cell research, can potentially alleviate and cure many incorrigible diseases, which is a significant benefit. Reproductive cloning on the other hand, could be described as a practice instigated to fulfil the many scientific curiosities mankind possesses, and does not have a legitimate reason as to why it is
Automatically when people talk about human cloning that tend to be negative. Most reaction is people shouldn't play god or interfere with nature. Of course there are negative consequences that could come from cloning. On the other hand there is so many positive things that could save more lives than it would cost. Yes Cloning involves risky techniques that could result in premature babies and some deaths. That is why public policy needs to be changed on cloning. The medical possibilities are endless if federal money is given to research and develop cloning techniques.
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.
Herbert, Wray. The World After Cloning. U.S. News and World Report. March 10, 1997: 59-64.
In order to strongly argue against cloning, there must be an understanding of its process and what exactly it is. Simply stated, a clone is a duplicate just like a photocopy. A good example of such “copies” that occur are identical twins, which are duplicates of each other. “The first step of DNA cloning is to isolate a complete gene and is to chromosomal sequences and then to gradually begin flaking the chromosomal sequences of a single DAN molecule. Then the DNA clone can be electronically labeled and used as a probe to isolate the chromosomal sequences from a collection of different types of genes, which should contain cloned sequences that would represent the whole gene. This action will produce new sets of cloned cells identical to the mother cell. The new set of cells are isolated and likewise the simplified process is repeated all over again until the cells form a complete organ. In order to produce a complete organism the DNA must be altered in a variety of way to come out with the finished product to be the complete organism.” In simple terms, a cell is taken from a donor woman. Then an unfertilized egg is taken from a second woman. The DNA from the cell is removed and transferred to the egg. The egg is then implanted into a surrogate mother. The resulting baby is genetically identical to the original donor.
Cloning humans has recently become a possibility. It is achieved by the production of a group of identical cells or organisms that all derive from a single individual (Grolier 220). It is not known when cloning humans really became a possibility, but it is known that there are two possible ways that we can clone humans. The first way involves splitting an embryo into several halves and creating many new individuals from that embryo. The second method of cloning a human involves taking cells from an already existing human being and cloning them, in turn creating other individuals that are identical to that particular person. With these two methods almost at our fingertips, we must ask ourselves two very important questions: Can we do this, and should we? There is no doubt that many problems involving the technological and ethical sides of this issue will arise and will be virtually impossible to avoid, but the overall idea of cloning humans is one that we should accept as a possible reality for the future. Cloning humans is an idea that has always been thought of as something that could be found in science fiction novels, but never as a concept that society could actually experience. "It is much in the news. The public has been bombarded with newspaper articles, magazine stories, books, television shows, and movies as well as cartoons¡¨, writes Robert McKinnell, the author of Cloning: A Biologist Reports (24). Much of this information in these sources leads the public in the wrong direction and makes them wonder how easy it would be for everyone around them to be cloned. Bizarre ideas about cloning lie in many science fiction books and scare the public with their unbelievable possibilities. David Rorvik wrote a highly controversial book entitled In His Image. In it he describes the story of a wealthy man who decides to clone himself. He is successful in doing this and causes quite an uprise in his community. This book was written in the late seventies and even then, societies reaction to the issues of human cloning was generally a negative one. We face a problem today even greater than the one in this book and it involves the duplication of human beings in a society that has always been known for its diversity. The main issue as to whether or not human cloning is possible through the splitting of embryos began in 1993 when experimentation was done at George W...
Secondly, “the most the human race has to loose by playing around with cloning is that the genetic diversity would be lost (Andrea Castro, 2005).” Reducing the genetic differences will produce clones that are grossly overlarge, many animals will be born with genetic mutations, and there will be a higher “risk of disease transfer (Saskaschools, 2003). “A review of all the world's cloned animals suggests that every one of them is genetically and physically defective (Leake, 2002).” Mutations will be passed on to the younger generation because if a cloned species has a mutation in their DNA this mutation will be passed on. Cloning has been linked with diseases of ageing, arthritis and, cancer.
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...
Imagine a world in which a clone is created only for its organs to be transplanted into a sick person’s body. Human cloning has many possible benefits, but it comes with concerns. Over the past few decades, researchers have made several significant discoveries involving the cloning of human cells (ProQuest Staff). These discoveries have led to beneficial medical technologies to help treat disease (Aldridge). The idea of cloning an entire human body could possibly revolutionize the medical world (Aldridge). However, many people are concerned that these advancements would degrade self-worth and dignity (Hyde and Setaro 89). Even though human cloning brings about questions of bioethics, it has the potential to save and recreate the lives of humans and to cure various diseases without the use of medication (Aldridge, Hyde and Setaro).