Does Human Cloning Produce An Embryo?
In February 1997, Dr. Ian Wilmut and his team startled the scientific world by showing that the nucleus from an adult sheep's body cell could be used to produce a developing embryo that would grow into another, genetically identical sheep. There was no doubt whatever that this process ("somatic cell nuclear transfer") produces an embryo of the relevant species. As Dr. Wilmut said in his groundbreaking article: "The majority of reconstructed embryos were cultured in ligated oviducts of sheep... Most embryos that developed to morula or blastocyst after 6 days of culture were transferred to recipients and allowed to develop to term," etc. [I. Wilmut et al., "Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells," 385 Nature 810-813 (Feb. 27, 1997)]
Now that the discussion has turned to humans, political spokespersons for the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries have decided to engage in a curious avoidance of the fact that somatic cell nuclear transfer using a human nucleus would produce a human embryo. There seem to be two reasons for this:
a. some spokespersons maintain -- contrary to scientific evidence, the findings of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel, and current federal law on embryo research -- that no human embryos should be called "embryos" for the first two weeks of existence.1
b. because cloned embryos are seen as such useful research material for destructive experiments, current restrictions on embryo research etc. must be evaded by denying that an embryo produced by cloning deserves the name.
Thus euphemisms and misleading or inaccurate terms ("totipotent cell," "clump of embryonic cells," "unfertilized oocyte," etc.) have entered the political discussion. They are employed to conceal the fact that researchers want to be allowed to use cloning to produce and destroy human embryos. Biotechnology groups claim to oppose the cloning of "human beings" or "persons" -- but they reserve the right to conduct cloning experiments on human embryos and fetuses, so long as none is allowed to survive to live birth.
Fortunately, one can cut through the political evasions by looking at the professional literature -- including writings by those who support cloning of embryos for research purposes:
"One potential use for this technique would be to take cells -- skin cells, for example -- from a human patient who had a genetic disease... You take these and get them back to the beginning of their life by nuclear transfer into an oocyte to produce a new embryo.
Before Dolly the cloned sheep made news headlines, the same researchers had only the year before raised seven other sheep from oocytes whose nuclei had been replaced with nuclei from either fetal or embryonic tissue.1 This created a minor stir as this is the "first report to [their] knowledge, of live mammalian offspring following nuclear transfer from an established cell line."1 The implications of this is that they have provided techniques to analyze and modify gene functions in sheep (By providing clones of the same sheep).1 The key to their success is the "serum starvation" that the donor cell undergoes, to force the donor cell into a 'quiescent' state, so that it is not replicating its DNA or dividing. This possibly makes the nucleus more susceptible to re-programming by the recipient egg cell.
Opposing Viewpoints offers unbiased opinions on the future of embryonic research as well as how they have currently been used to cure many diseases. In addition, the article specifies how developing ethical standards to ensure that the use of embryos remains moral, allows for science to remain ethical. Many of the topics mentioned in this viewpoint consider bioethics and remain consistent throughout. Essentially, the purpose of this article was to establish a middle ground between ethics and science.
...ns of a morally questionable nature. It is necessary that our practices remain ethical and that we uphold the value of a human life, as this is the cornerstone of human society. Embryonic stem cell research is one such operation that forces scientists, policy makers, and the larger society to define what constitutes a human life and to find an answer to the crucial question: Is it morally acceptable to violate the rights of a human life for the for the sake of medical progress?
While many support embryonic stem cell research, some people oppose it say that it is an unethical practice. According to these people, embryonic stem cells require murdering a baby, human life is defined by rational beings, those capable of rational thought or a consciousness. In order to be rational one must have a consciousness, the ability to have thoughts and feel pain, to begin with. “For a fertilized egg, there is no consciousness and also no history of consciousness” (Stem). If abortions are allowed within the United States, why shouldn’t embryonic stem cell research be? Another claim against embryonic stem cell research is that it devalues human lives. “Some argue that researching embryonic stem cells will lead us into cloning technology” (Embryonic). While embryonic cloning is a possibility, we already possess the capabilities to clone so cloning is an invalid argument. The final argument against embryonic stem cell research is that there are alternatives, like adult stem cells. While adult stem cells may be utilized, they won’t be as effective. Embryonic stem cells are not only efficient but also renewable. They can be grown in a culture where as adult stem cells are extremely rare, if there are any. They can only be found in mature tissue. Isolating these extremely rare cells is challenging and has a high failure rate if not harvested correctly. “One major difference between adult and embryonic stem cells is their different abilities in the number and type of differentiated cell types they can become” (Stem). Using adult stem cells we might never understand our development from conception ...
that make up so much of the adult world are revealed in the book to be
Cloning is a procedure of creating genetically indistinguishable organisms through nonsexual means (Devolder 2008). After years of countless research and experimenting, scientists successfully cloned their first mammal using a technique called somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). In Devolder’s paper she states, “Somatic cells are any cells other than the reproductive system cells” (Devolder 2008). Scientists realized they could take fully developed somatic cells from any part of the body and, through the SCNT system, use the cells to make a genetic copy of the cell. This growth in cell research is binding scientists in a race to establish their findings so they could be the first in the finish line. This pressure to be renowned has driven scientists to attempt to control the very natural process of life. Our world is plagued by disease, an increase in population and poverty with limited resources to satisfy the basic needs of mankind, so cloning is often regarded as the solution. Cloning for reproduction and therapy has improved drastically displaying a lot of potential uses but is vastly outweighed with larger risks.
Cloning is a recent innovative technique the National Institute of Health defines as a process employed to produce genetically identical copies of a biological entity. Depending on the purpose for the clone, human health or even human life can be improved or designed respectively. “Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) is the most common cloning technique. SCNT involves putting the nucleus of a body cell into an egg from which the nucleus has been removed."^1 From this technique, an embryonic cell is activated to produce an animal that is genetically identical to the donor. Today, human cloning still remains as a vision, but because of the success of Dolly, the lamb, researchers are becoming more confident in the ability to produce a genuine
Scientist clones human embryos, and creates an ethical challenge. New York Times. October 26, 1993: A1.
A unanimous decision should be made on when to consider an embryo a human being that has morality. Until then I believe that the embryo is not close to a human life unless it has made it past the fourteen day period in which it is passed the twinning stage. So with this information I come to the conclusion that under specific regulations and laws, including the ones I mentioned in the summary, the cloning of embryos for biomedical research and obtaining stem cells should be deemed acceptable.
Within the past few years, scientist have made several breakthroughs with human stem cells. These breakthroughs have catapulted the issue of stem cell research into the middle of a national debate. Most people have no problem with the research itself, however the source of the stem cells (adult or human embryos) used in research is the primary cause of the debate. Some people feel that destroying an embryo is comparable to murder, even if the research it promotes may help people with serious illnesses. Other believe that an embryo is not a person and therefore research on an embryo is the same as research on any other group of cells.
Ever since the successful birth of Dolly on July 5, 1996, the scientific community as well as the public have been engulfed in the idea of reproductive cloning, its benefits, and its potential threats. This well-publicized event was a giant steppingstone in understanding and using the techniques of gene cloning and reproductive cloning. By using a technique known as Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer, scientists at the Roslin Institute removed the nucleus from an oocyte (unfertilized egg), and then fused this newly enucleated cell with a donor cell (with complete nucleus). This new embryo was then implanted into the womb of a surrogate mother ewe. In total, out of 277 fused cells, 29 successfully developed into embryos, while only one of these resulted in a successful live birth (a total success rate of 0.4%) (Wong, 202). Dolly was the first living mammal to be cloned by this fast and accurate process of somatic cell nuclear transfer, but was by no means the first animal to be cloned. The first...
...on of human embryos but they successfully argue that the benefits of therapeutic cloning outweigh the morally based objections regarding the process” (2011). Furthermore they emphasize the fact that human lives are spared and improved by the use of genetic engineering and that the destruction of human embryos can eventually be omitted out of the process in a near future through other forms of technology.
4) Kassirer JP, “Should human cloning be off limits?” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 338, no. 2 (June 1998), pp. 905-906
In recent years, the development of cloning technology in non-human species has led to new ways of producing medicine and improving our understanding of development and genetics. But what exactly is human reproductive cloning and how has this technology been developed? The term “cloning” refers more specifically to a process known as somatic cell nuclear transfer. In this process, the DNA from the cell of ...
Lauritzen, Paul. Cloning and the Future of Human Embryo Research. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2001. Google Books. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. source 12 (google books)