Categories

Quite recently President Obama made an announcement to our country stating he felt that human cloning was not only dangerous, but profoundly wrong and has no place in society. Better yet, a major question is how human cloning can be justified not only when our world is dangerously populated already but also how can we justify the death and disabled which will result from the effects of human cloning. Both of these statements are portrayed in the work of a notable Australian artist, Particia Piccinini, who once said:

 "Some things, once done, are not easily undone. We might recognize later that we should not have done them in the first place, however undoing them is not so easy. Like an egg, which once broken cannot be unbroken, when something is created, it is difficult to contain. This stands as much for a work of art as it does for a genetically modified creature. Anyone who thinks that they can maintain control of the things they create is fooling themselves. Whether it is genetically modified canola, the cane toad, a work on the secondary market or an image on the market, once the thing leaves our hands all we can do is watch."

On January 9, 2009, Nebraska's Representative, Jeff Fortenberry, introduced to the House of Representatives the H.R. 110 bill, "The Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2009". This bill states that Congress recognizes that certain individuals will attempt to clone human beings using the technique known as "somatic cell nuclear transfer". This process has already been used with limited amounts of success in sheep and other animals, with the bill H.R. 110 taking a firm stand against human cloning and stating why.

DEFINITIONS IN HUMAN CLONING

H.R. 110 states that new and decisive steps by laboratories that will turn human reproduction into a manufacturing process, with preordained specifications and in multiple copies, with reproductive cloning involving the creation of cloned live-born human children. This begins with the creation of cloned human embryos---a process which some consider a way to create embryos for research and to use as sources of cells and tissues for human treatments. Almost all scientists agree that this poses a danger and massive risk of producing children who are not only stillborn but unhealthy and severely disabled.

Human cloning is best described as human asexual reproduction, accomplished by the introduction of nuclear material of a "human somatic cell" into a fertilized or unfertilized oocyte, with the nucleus removed or inactivated.  The purpose is to produce a living organism at any stage of development, within a human or predominantly human genetic constitution. 

The term somatic cell refers to a diploid cell which involves a complete set of chromosomes, obtained or derived from any human body—living or deceased—at any stage of development.  Considered a "non-sex cell", it is opposite a germline cell which normally consists of the ova and spermatozoa which fuse together during fertilization to form a zygote cell. Also, somatic cells contain 46 individual chromosomes as compared to the 23 chromosomes in germline cells, involved in the development of internal organs, skin, bones, blood and connective tissues.

SUPPORT FOR HUMAN CLONING

In 2000, the UK went public for the support of a limited form of human cloning for the revolution of medicine, applying to human cloning the same technology that was originally pioneered in Dolly the cloned sheep.  What was controversial at that date was the act of therapeutic cloning itself, as it required experiments on early-stage embryos.  Therapeutic cloning is hoped to result in disease cures for Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, which made this technology needing to be carefully controlled but worthy of serious investigation.  Professor Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer in England, felt that the potential benefits would outweigh the ethical issues involved in it, justified by the potential benefits for patients in future generations.

But in 2005, scientists' need for women to donate eggs for controversial research had begun yet another ethical issue. The creator of Dolly the sheep, Professor Ian Wilmut, had sought permission from the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA) for this human egg donation in order to shed light on the "debilitating condition motor neurone disease", as the HFEA approves the cloning of human embryos for research purposes.  Because of the need in cures for motor neurone disease, Wilmut was granted full license to use human cloning for this purpose only. Presently, the HFEA licenses centers which are carrying out Virto Fertilization, assisted conception procedures, and human embryo research.

TYPES OF ETHICS FOR HUMAN CLONING
When people think of human cloning, immediately a negative moral and ethical reaction quickly develops. Ethics and Bioethics are two entirely different ballgames as far as the reaction of people goes and "never the twain shall meet". The majority of the public feels that normal procreation should not be replaced by laboratory technology and mass production of humans, regardless of the purpose stated. But will this matter when it comes to the fact science has already begun its development? 

Science has been fighting ethic experts for a long time, with the majority of these experts coming from a religious standpoint---and religious ethicists are dead against human cloning. Considered outside the field of science, they are the opposite viewpoint. Yet science supports the belief of human cloning in order to fight disease, genetic diseases and infertility.  But many famous scientists, such as Dr. James Watson, suggest that issues involving ethics should not be left to science alone.  And would it not be fascinating if science, religion, government, and the public would all agree for just once---working  kindly together for the benefit of mankind to look at all sides,  instead of each side fighting that their own side alone is the answer for all?