Is the cloning of whole animals (including humans) desirable?

Is the cloning of whole animals (including humans) desirable?

Second assignment for St Aidan’s Anglican Girl’s School

This blog is a combination of a previous post and one of the GNTIS Ethical Questions, plus some new stuff relevant to animals.

(A little disclaimer here: My views are not necessarily those of the GNTIS)

US fertility expert Panayiotis Zavos a few months ago claimed (yet again) to have implanted cloned embryos into women in an attempt to produce a cloned child. 

There was loads of chatter about this on news sites and blogs worldwide.  But we have been here before – kooks to con artists claiming that they have cloned a human being only to be revealed as charlatans.  But Zavos is trying it for real, as far as we can tell, albeit unsuccessfully, so far.

At the moment there appears an overwhelming public abhorrence to human reproductive cloning.  But one thing that has been shown in nearly all cloning stories is that there appears to be a good supply of people willing to have themselves or, in the case of one couple, their deceased child cloned. People are lining up to be implanted, despite the high risk.  

Why do all these women or couples want to have a cloned child? The article in The Independent suggests the mother wanting to clone her deceased child wanted desperately to replace her child.  (I assume she was counselled that the cloned child would be a completely different person and likely even look a bit different because of different womb conditions.  What about other clone-obsessed people?  Do they see it as simply an extension of IVF?  Is it morbid curiosity, fame/celebrity status they seek?

There is no real technical reason why we can’t clone humans.  We have done it we other mammals and there are only relatively minor technical obstacles to overcome to achieve it in humans. It will just take time and a lot of money.

So is there anything wrong with cloning a human being.  We do it with animals on a regular basis, why not humans as well?

Society has accepted IVF and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis which allows us to create and select out embryos free of genetic diseases/disorders. In some countries you can select the sex of your child and potentially in the future other appealing characteristics. Some proponents argue reproductive cloning it is just an extension of these assisted reproductive techniques.

We accept identical twins, which are effectively clones. 

OK, I personally don’t think we should or need to clone humans, but who am I to dictate what a person can or can’t do assuming they aren’t harming anyone else and they are consenting adults who have been fully informed about the process. 

Issues??

Based on comments in news stories, editorials and blog postings some of the rejection of human cloning is because of the technical difficulties in creating a healthy clone.  At the moment, even in animals, it can take the creation of hundreds of embryos to get one clone born healthy. The others die at various stages or soon after birth because of deformities and other complications.

But what if we could perfect the technique and ensure that the chances of producing a healthy human clone were as good as or better than trying to produce a child by natural means?

Would this make cloning acceptable?  Why or why not?

Forget the silly and extreme arguments against cloning such as the possibility of creating an army of cloned super warriors or Hitlers. There are loads of more realistic religious, cultural and social reasons why people consider cloning wrong.  These include the following:

Destruction of human dignity, loss of individuality

The Universal Declaration on Human Genome and Human Rights (UNESCO 1997) is one of a number of documents that state that reproductive cloning is contrary to human dignity. This is based on a number of considerations.  For example, cloning risks turning human beings into manufactured objects and that it could further the attitude that people exist to serve purposes set by other people.

Psychological trauma/harm to the clone.

Knowing you are a clone, a genetic copy of another person could cause psychological harm.  How would you feel knowing that you were a clone of your dead brother or sister?

What if someone cloned you without your permission?

For further details see the links below

Given that the technical issues of cloning will doubtless be overcome, though probably not for decades, human reproductive cloning, I suggest, is inevitable.  Someone somewhere will do it and there will be a queue of people lining up for their service.

But just because we can (or will) perfect human cloning, should we do it?

If we do, what restrictions do we put on it, if any?  Who should or should not be allowed access to reproductive cloning technology?  Should everyone be allowed access, that is, equity of access?

A few extra resources

www.biotechnologyonline.gov.au

WHO

http://www.who.int/ethics/topics/cloning/en/

Human Genome Project

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/cloning.shtml

Animals

As mentioned we clone animals routinely nowadays.  So why do some of us, at least, think differently about the cloning of animals?  There is a lot of lobbying from various groups worldwide to ban the sale of meat from cloned animals and their offspring.  What are their reasons for this opposition?  Is the meat unsafe? Definitely not as there is no logical or scientific basis to this.  The US Food and Drug Administration recently gave the OK for consumption of milk and meat from cloned animals and their offspring – http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/01/15/fda.cloning/

Food Standards Australia New Zealand are monitoring this debate.  http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/newsroom/factsheets/factsheets2008/foodderivedfromclone3821.cfm

Besides you are unlikely to eat a cloned animal.  If it costs $50,000 to make a cloned animal you are hardly going to sell it for meat within a year of it being born.  Such animals are for breeding purposes.  Their offspring, however, you may find on your dinner plate.

Here is the view of one company that clones agriculturally important animals

http://www.cloneinternational.com.au/

Do a Google for Matilda, Australia’s first cloned sheep born in 2000 or see the story in the GNTIS “Biotechnology in animals ” publication.

Stuff to get your head around

Yeh, we can clone things. But we need to discuss whether just because we can, should we?  And if we should, how should we?  That is, this knowledge can be used in many ways for many outcomes. Which ways are acceptable, which are not?

Is there anything wrong with cloning a human being?  We do it with animals on a regular basis, why not humans as well?

Is the cloning of animals a separate argument from humans?  Obviously, governments of the world are making decisions that suggest this is the case, but what do you think?

What circumstances, if any, would make cloning acceptable?  Would perfecting the technique so we could clone humans safely make it acceptable?

If cloning is done, what restrictions do we put on it, if any?  Who should or should not be allowed access to reproductive cloning technology?  Should everyone be allowed access, that is, equity of access?

Is there really any destruction of human dignity or loss of individuality for a cloned human?  That is, they will be there own person with their own values, they will just happen to share the same genes as someone else – just like an identical twin?

What about psychological trauma/harm to the clone?  Will human cloning, should it ever become legal and technically feasible, ever become mainstream or common enough to avoid this, if it can be avoided at all?

What about what I call the “Yuk factor”?  That is, it just feels wrong, but you can’t articulate why.  If you fit this category, have a go at articulating.

There are loads more issues here. This is just to get the discussion started.  Feel free to throw your own thoughts into the fray.

Jason

Manager

GNTIS