Is Human Cloning Ethical? (PAPER)

Is Human Cloning Ethical?

1

Is Human Cloning Ethical?
Introduction to Logic
Philosophy 114
Saginaw Valley State University
Professor – T.A. Edwards
Assignment #1 – FIRST DRAFT
Fall 2012
Felicia McCaw

Is Human Cloning Ethical?

The question is whether human cloning is ethical and what it entails. Cloning is a derivative of the Greek word Klon and is a referral base relating to the asexual reproduction of a cellular organism. This type of scientific procedure can range from molecules, cells, plants, animal and human tissue which are conceivably genetic and identical copies which excludes the necessary process of sexual reproduction. The nature of controversy that surrounds the cloning of a human being is whether or not it is ethical and definably correct to clone a human being and its inceptively to be considered human or a product of the human species. Because of this controversial procedure it entails the combining of a nucleus from a cell from an individual who is the donor (or cloned individual) and proceeds to the insertion into an enucleated cell from the female and subsequently placed into the uterus.

This process is highly controversial and very expensive to conduct and render and because of this it is still a relatively new process and the ability to obtain positive and safe results is still under observation and consideration. Being considered human or not is the question to be answered and what it means to be human and the rights and entitlement that goes along with it and because of this it is still a working theory in process. Presently, my working position is that it is a procedure that I would not countenance myself and find that the finding of perfection will not be realized nor gained through the process of cloning. Further I find that it is possible that problems will result and be of no good acknowledgement or usage in finding and perfecting of cloning. Further a person is a unique entity as God so wills and based upon this they are not DNA but instead is a product of nature and nurture. As in all things humans or clones are unique with differing personalities with different environments and should be viewed subjectively and given the rights of each.

Felicia McCaw
Is Human Cloning Ethical?
Page 2

Science being as adventuresome and innovated is eager to progress and leap forward to initiate cloning of humans. Disregarding ethics and legalities the advantages of replacing a dead child is a relative wish for grieving parents. Consensus would reflect that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with in vitro fertilization therefore results the thought there is nothing wrong with cloning. Despite protestations the proposal of working with human stems is still progressively leading the way to human cloning and its possible potential and allowability. Therefore based on theory and practice cloning is the perfect embodiment of the ruling opinions of this age and a product of a “single-parent child” due to the nature of asexual reproduction of an individual organism. Another point in favor of cloning is the ability to reproduce if it is deemed ethically acceptable under certain conditions if affectation is caused by difficulties to conceive and be subsequently reversed by initiating cloning as an alternative.

Although human cloning would be the epitome of a scientist’s dream it still causes me to pause at the ethical rights of a human being cloned and used to develop a replica and whether or not it is entitled to be called a product of the human species. Further established is whether or not the rights as a human being born in the usual fashion is established as a unit of the human generation and assigned a social security number as a protective and identifying factor. As a human we have rights that are naturally distributed and granted. We as humans are not an artificially replicated unit devised and developed by the splitting and combining of DNA. Further comes the thought what type of life form are we constructing and does it have the same rights as us since it is my personal opinion that duplicating a human to me is not a relative or rational thought because unapparent flaws are duplicated and necessitated through the new life form.

Felicia McCaw
Is Human Cloning Ethical?
Page 3

Cloning is not a predictable endeavor because it is not a suitable idea to use for replacement of a child. Cloning subsequently loses definable reproduction properties and the ability to properly distribute chromosomes and genes leading to a possible deleting amount of genetic variation. Further any genetic mutation would be reproduced automatically in a clone
and then comes the contention of the religious order that cloning is censored and violates various religious doctrines. Consequently, the theory persist to support that cloning is not a feasible venture and is a process that needs to be skipped and avoided and in vitro is similar to cloning but still a different avenue in science feasible and usable whereas cloning is not.

As a conclusionary summarization of the argument against cloning, is whether ethics are violated and if a clone will be allowed the same rights as people who are not clones. Humans are not an artificially replicated unit and do not suffer the reduction of genetic levels or variables or replicated flaws that are hidden or are unknown as they affect clones. Because of theorist’s progressive move toward the future cloning is the embodiment of the ruling opinion of this age and a product of a single-parent child but unfortunately the dark side of cloning results in deleted amounts of genetic variables and the replication of clones with mutations would automatically replicate the flaws. Consequently, evidence reflects that cloning is not a feasible venture although similar to cloning in vitro is a different scientific breakthrough that is enabled to be done.
Cloning and historical data was originated in the late 1800s by Hans Drieisch and his purpose was not to create identical animals but to prove genetic material is not lost during cell division. In 1902, Hans Spemman, embryologist, experimented with a small embryo to evolve

Felicia McCaw
Is Human Cloning Ethical?
Page 4

into two identical adult salamanders from which a single cell from a 16-cell embryo was used to conclude the experiment.
Presently, as time progressed successful ventures in cloning was enabled in 1951 and a frog embryo was cloned. The nucleus was removed out of a frog embryo and placed in the nucleus of an unfertilized frog egg cell. This procedure is called nuclear transplant and is used today although the methodology has evolved. The first cloned mammal was accomplished in 1986 and was led by Steen Willadsen in England whereby a cloned sheep embryo was accomplished. Other ventures were accomplished in later years and were able to substantiate and fulfill gathering of information for future ventures in cloning and duplication.
The statistical report on the success rate of cloning is (depending on species) 0.1 to 3%. Comparatively speaking the rate is low because it equates to only one to three cloned animals living and born for every one thousand cloning attempts. The rates of failure outweigh the success rate with missing chromosomes, particles in the nuclei and other elements evolved in the duplication process.

The cloning development and procedures have evolved to encompass development of duplication of stem cells which are biological cells that are classified as embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells. Both stem cells are found in various tissues and with the assistance of progenitor cells they act as a repair system for the body and to replenish adult tissues. In a developing embryo the stem cells can be differentiated into specialized cells (pluripotent cells) and allow the maintenance and normal turnover of regenerative organs, e.g., blood, skin, or intestinal tissues. Because of this the cells have the capability to form diverse types of tissue in

Felicia McCaw
Is Human Cloning Ethical?
Page 5

the cloning process and allow the ability to regenerate damaged organs and allow healing of ailing people.
One of the main criteria of study is the embryonic stem cells which are derived from human embryos and is a controversial process because they cannot be retrieved without destroying a human embryo. Therefore, this is the crux of controversy to harvest or not, to maintain a coldly logical approach or a humanistic approach in view of science and progressive technology.
The other source of stem cells are available and are harvested from the umbilical cord blood as well as from fat, bone marrow and other adult tissue without harm to donor to reconstruct organistic tissue. Adult stem cells are easier to handle and involve less controversy and are comparatively enabled to be stabilized then embryonic stem cells and lessen the chances for various tumors. However, embryonic stem cells hold possibilities that have not been fully tested and may hold a positive superiority as technology evolves then the adult embryonic stem cells.

Further embryonic stem cells are of such an unknown factor of discovery that these cells may be enabled to replicate and replace a human organ that would ordinarily require a donor, e.g., a kidney, a bioscopic portion of the liver, etc. Also, not only can the stem cells be designated as a form of beginning of the cellular growth of new organs but it can also be the basis of the formation of skin to graph as replacement of damaged or lost tissue. Previously, tissue was removed from another part of the body as replacement of damaged tissue but as progressive changes have occurred stem cells have replaced this procedure and allow the regeneration of tissue to replace the damage mass.

Felicia McCaw
Is Human Cloning Ethical?
Page 6

The advantages of development of using stem cells to grow or duplicate cells allow for a genetic match that will ensure compatibility and reduce the rate of rejection. Further the human immune system will allow adaptability and assimilation of new tissue if a spliced stem cell contains the recipient’s DNA which will result in the required segment that will be transplanted. The analogy of stem cells became a factual reality rather than a supposed and unsupported theory and because of this the potentiality of a single stem cell evolving into an entire human organism becomes a future reality.
Human cloning has been a controversial topic and procedure because of the nature of whether the organism is human. Even though the debate is a readily defensive topic the favor toward cloning is still a prevalent, viable endeavor that is still an active part of growing technology. The defining of a person is the sole crux of the matter and whether this is a truly humane venture or if this is indeed an interest not in the study of science but in the self-interest of greed. If this venture is perceived as a matter of financial gain with the lack of human dignity then of course the opposition will not favor cloning but will steadily oppose and negate it as not a truly needed scientific venture. Besides it being a controversial subject and procedure it is still not established as a relative clear cut option but still a working theory in progress. The ability to clone is affected by rates of failures versus successes with the results leaning heavily in the failure sector. Cloning is still an embryo itself and needs to be nurtured, evolved and grown with peculiarities focused on eliminating problematic area with trial and error with minute details of each consistent fault and non-consistent fault relayed and approaches to alter the variables of replication and duplication and initiation of a new organism. Therefore based on this the possibilities of human cloning is possible as each fault is addressed and eliminated. Further as

Felicia McCaw
Is Human Cloning Ethical?
Page 7

each fault is eliminated therefore comes the nearing and radical approach of a human clone in the making.
The issues regarding human cloning is effected by the costly nature of research, rate of variables and of the failure and receptability of the public to cloning. Further comes the thought is whether a human clone is indeed a human being or as human as the next person when each were derived from different circumstances. The thought of artificial life is it entitled to the same rights as a person born by natural birth and as viewed as an entity with a soul and of spiritual consequences with entitlement of rights of existence. Perhaps the view of a human clone would be viewed as a soulless creature by people of Christian faith and with the view of not as human. Further the human clone would possibly be viewed as a potential guinea pig for study rather than a human being irregardless of the possibilities of emotional levels that may exist. Also, if a clone has the unique qualities of a brain and displays the same human emotional level as a human does and does this entitle this artificially physically contrived human the right as a natural born human or still a reflective property of science and the country that manufactured this organism.
Does this mean that this clone is never free if a reflective relayence reflects high levels of human qualities? What rights does this organism have? I am human this clone states and would this emotional level be negated as nothing and be deferred as not because of the questionable ethical choice would define correctness or a dismal disregard for moral consequence and lack of care. A human clone is in itself a unitary organism and if the rights of humanity are not attributed then is this organism being cloned merely for the purpose of harvest. But is that in

Felicia McCaw
Is Human Cloning Ethical?
Page 8

actuality truth, is the human clone now unfeeling or has no thought or brain pattern and will be used merely as advantage for replacing other people’s defective organs or used as possible labor or for any relative menial task.
The advantages of human clones are relatively slim because as of right now it is an impossibility. But if it was possible then the ability to replace a lost one would be possible or with the possibility of bypassing regular reproductive measures with free option. Another advantage is that a cloned human being is not a duplicate of the original that the cell is donated from but a true individual with varying characteristics. Consequently, this affects the human genetic diversity and reflects a reduction and allows the ability to weed out genetic mutations, disease or other prevalent malignant problems would be enabled. Furthermore, replacement abilities would allow the alleviation of grief but with the possible knowledge that reproductive possibilities may not be possible.

Some of the disadvantages of human clones involve the possibility of inner undetected flows in genetic relayence. Further because of this the possibility of unknown genetic disorders may occur with an inability to correct flaws perpetuated by cloning or sustain a continuance of inner immune abilities automatically distributed and attributed to naturally born humans. Also, the ability to clone human as paralleled to other cloning attempts reflect that if other attempts are
not successful then human cloning chances will indubitably be unsuccessful as the cloning of any cells, stem cells or as pluripotent cells. Consequently, human cloning would not be an option that is considered because it would entail the treating of human clones as object and not as individual life forms.

Felicia McCaw
Is Human Cloning Ethical?
Page 8

The procedure for development of a human clone is based on the replication and duplication of a cell or stem cells and whether the ethical choice to clone a human or not relegates to whether or not it is a feasible venture or not. Based on past and modern research that is prevalent and views and opinions on this procedure it is truly not a viable or choice to clone a human when humanity is already fraught with inconsistencies.



References
Articles Boulevard. (2011). Human Cloning Pros and Cons. How far should we go? Retrieved
November 5, 2012, from http://www.articlesboulevard.com/human-cloning-pros-and-cons.html

Buzzle. (2011). Human Cloning Pros and Cons. Retrieved November 5, 2012, from http://www.buzzle.com/articles/human-cloning-pros-and-cons.html

The Tech Online Edition. (1993). Experiment Shows Possibility of Cloning Human Beings. Retrieved November 5, 2012 from http://tech.mit.edu/V113/N52/cloning.52w.html

Human Genome Project Information. (2012). History of the Human Genome Project. Retrieved November 5, 2012 from http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/project/hgp.shtml

Human Genome Project Information. (2009). Cloning Fact Sheet. Retrieved September 28, 2012 from http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/cloning.shtml

Yenra. (2002). Pros and Cons of Human Cloning: National Academies Report Debates the Pros and Cons of Human Reproductive Cloning. Retrieved November 5, 2012 from
http://www.yenra.com/pros-and-cons of human-cloning/

Family Research Council. At the Podium. Retrieved September 27, 2012 from http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PD02D5

Hines, Terrence. (Nov/Dec 1999). Clear Thinking About Human Cloning. The Skeptical Inquirer, 23.6, 57-59. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/printviewfile?accountid=960

Tauer, Carol A. (Jul 10 – Jul 16, 2004). International Policy Failures: Cloning and Stem-Cell Research. The Lancet, 364.9429, 209-14. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/docview/1990028301/139932CF5...

Miele, Frank. (1999). How Close Are We To Cloning Time? Skeptic, 7.2, 48. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/printviewfile?accountid=960

Bosch, Xavier. (Oct. 31, 1998). Geneticists Discuss Ethics of Human Genome Project. The Lancet, 352.9138, 1448. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/docview/199044626/139933BD...

Eisenberg, Leon. (Feb. 11, 1999). Would Cloned Humans Really Be Like Sheep? The New England Journal of Medicine, 340.6, 471-5. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/docview/223936231/139933BD...

Zucker, Arthur. (May/June 1997). Law and Ethics. Death Studies, 21.3, 319-322. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/docview/231381943/139933BD...
References
Page 2

Turner, Leigh. (April 15, 1997). A Sheep Named Dolly: Cloning Experiment Answers Some Questions But Raises Many More: CMAJ CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 156.8, 1149. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/printview?accountid=960

Barbour, Virginia; Horton, Richard. (Nov 29, 2003). Human Stem-Cell Research for Medicine: Call for Papers. The Lancet, 362.9398, 1778. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/printview?accountid=960

Lane, Melissa. (Sept 18 – Sept 24, 2004). Bioethics, Health, and Inequality. The Lancet, 364-9439, 1017-19. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/printview?accountid=960

Annas, George J. (July 9, 1998). Why We Should Ban Human Cloning. The New England Journal of Medicine, 339.2, 122-5. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/printview?accountid=960

Kassirer, Jerome P; Rosenthal, Nadia A. (Mar 26, 1998). Editorial: Should Human Cloning Research be Off Limits? The New England Journal of Medicine, 338.13, 905-6. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/printview?accountid=960

Anonymous. (Jan 5, 2002). The Business of Cloning. The Lancet, 359.9300, 1. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/docview/199037725/1399337FB...

Hall, Harriet. (2010). Science and Morailty. Skeptic, 15.3, 71. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/printview?accountid=960

Jaenisch, Rudolf. (Dec 30, 2004). Human Cloning – The Science and Ethics of Nuclear Transplantation. The New England Journal of Medicine, 351.27, 2787-91. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/docview/223936729/139932CFS...

Caulfield, Timothy. (July 10 – July 16, 2004). Scientific Freedom and Research Cloning: Can a Ban be Justified? The Lancet, 364.9429, 124-6. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/docview/199002257/139932CFS...

Evers, Kathinka. (May 16, 2002). European Perspectives on Therapeutic Cloning. The New England Journal of Medicine, 346.20, 1579-82. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/printviewfile?accountid=960



References
Page 3

Eggertson, Laura. (July 10, 2001). Cloning in Canada? Don’t Hold Your Breath: CMAJ CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 165.1, 76-7. Retrieved from Proquest.com.library.svsu.edu October 4, 2012.
http://0-search.proquest.com.library.svsu.edu/psychology/printviewfile? Accountid=960