Cloning pros and cons

The cloning of sheep at Roslin Institute near Edinburgh was thus a highly significant biological departure, and one of the most momentous scientific events of the 1990s. In 1995, Ian Wilmut, Keith Campbell, and their colleagues cloned Megan and Morag from cultured embryo cells; and in July 1996, Dolly, produced from cultured adult cells, was born. In the following year, the biotechnology company PPL produced Polly, who was not only cloned, but genetically transformed (“engineered”) en route. Polly had been fitted with a human gene that causes her to secrete a human blood-clotting factor in her milk, which potentially was of great value to .                                      

 do sometimes clone naturally, but by a quite different route. Sometimes a single embryo divides in the womb to form identical twins, or even divides twice to produce identical quads. Nine-banded , for reasons unknown, always produce identical quads. In such cases, the offspring are clones of each other, but are not clones of the mother. (4)

The Council of Europe has passed human cloning protocol, for example, which states: “The instrumentalisation of human beings through the deliberate creation of genetically identical human beings is contrary to human dignity and thus constitutes a misuse of medicine and biology.” Human dignity is continually debated in the ethics of biotechnology. (6)

There are many risks involved with cloning: health risks from mutation of genes - an abnormal baby would be a nightmare come true.  The technique is extremely risky right now.  A particular worry is the possibility that the genetic material used from the adult will continue to age so that the genes in a newborn baby clone could be - say - 30 years old or more on the day of birth.  Many attempts at animal cloning produced disfigured monsters with severe abnormalities. 

So that would mean creating cloned embryos, implanting them and destroying (presumably) those that look imperfect as they grow in the womb.  However some abnormalities may not appear till after birth.  A cloned cow recently died several weeks after birth with a huge abnormality of blood cell production. (5)

Emotional risks must also be taken into consideration when debating cloning. For example if a child grows up knowing her mother is her sister, her grandmother is her mother.  Her father is her brother-in-law. Every time her mother looks at her she is seeing herself growing up.  Unbearable emotional pressures on a teenager trying to establish his or her identity. What happens to a marriage when the "father" sees his wife's clone grow up into the exact replica (by appearance) of the beautiful 18 year old he fell in love with 35 years ago?  A sexual relationship would of course be with his wife's twin, no incest involved technically.  You will not find a child psychiatrist in the world who could possibly say that there will not be very significant emotional risk to the cloned child as a result of these pressures. (5)

The most dangerous risk could be the abuse of the technology - what would Hitler have done with cloning technology if available in the 1940s?  There are powerful leaders in every generation who will seek to abuse this technology for their own purposes.  Going ahead with cloning technology makes this far more likely.  You cannot have so-called therapeutic cloning without reproductive cloning because the technique to make cloned babies is the same as to make a cloned embryo to try to make replacement tissues.  In any case it is a myth that you will get organs from cloned embryos.  At best you will get clusters of cells.  And at the speed at which biotech is accelerating there will soon be other ways to get such cells. (5)

A child born permanently deaf, or lame, or blind, or with short life expectancy would surely have grounds for complaints if these characteristics were deliberately chosen. Why then do some people feel that designing children to be healthy, talented or to possess some beneficial feature might be wrong? (7)

The phrase “designer children” has clear negative connotations. The implication is that parents are more concerned with pleasing themselves than with valuing children for their own sake. However, normal sexual reproduction has always had a large element of design in it. Cultures, religion and races that have encouraged their members to marry other members of the same group are all into designer children. If creating a world with less disability and disease seem preferable, then, like me, you will believe in minimising disease and disability and maximising health and good fortune.(7)  

Bibliography

1. Biological Sciences 1 & 2 Third Edition by D.J. Taylor, N. P. O. Green, G.W. Stout.

2. Understanding Biology For Advanced Level Fourth Edition by Glenn and Susan Toole

6. New Scientist- 20th April 2002

7. New Scientist- 11th May 2002