|
Cloning: Medical Miracle or Human Hubris? 6/17/2003 Introduction Should human beings be cloned? With a Brave New World advancing quickly upon us, each new announcement of cloned animals, chimeras and human embryos finds scientists, ethicists, politicians and citizens trying to answer the ultimate question: whether what can be done, should be done.
The majority of Americans, and people around the world, are repulsed at the idea of creating identical replicas of human beings. Proponents of cloning, however, are working to change this.
Tapping into the natural compassion for victims of disease and handicaps, the bio-tech industry is presenting cloning as a potential avenue to healing. The industry has divided the debate over cloning into two realms: reproductive and therapeutic.
Introduction
In “reproductive cloning,” the new life is implanted in a surrogate mother and allowed to grow and be born. “Therapeutic cloning” uses the same method, but rather than implanting the clone and allowing it to be born, researchers use the embryo as raw material for experiments or to scavenge for parts, such as skin, muscle, nerve or brain cells. A “therapeutic clone” is no different from a “reproductive clone”—only the researchers’ intent on what to do with the clone changes.
The goal of therapeutic cloning is to obtain embryonic stem cells that, in theory, may develop into any kind of cell or body tissue. Scientists hope to use the stem cells to treat diseases. Since the embryo’s tissue would be genetically identical to the donor, it could conceivably avoid the problem of tissue rejection. However, in animals, it often takes 100 or more eggs to get one viable clone.1 (After receiving hormone injections for days for in vitro fertilization, women will typically produce 10 to 15 eggs.2) Further, the success of these treatments is speculative. No disease or disability in humans has yet been cured through the use of embryonic stem cells.
The High Failure Rate of Cloning Introduction
Regardless, Dr. Tanja Dominko, an Advanced Cell Technology researcher, said her work on cloning monkey embryos (before she joined ACT) resulted in gross abnormalities in most embryos, which died within five days—too early for stem cells to appear.4 Though they look healthy, Dr. Dominko said, a high percentage of cloned monkey embryos are really a “gallery of horrors” within.5
Most efforts fail, even in species that have at one time or another been cloned. Researchers who have occasional success cloning one species, like cows, are finding failure with others, like dogs. Cloning success is the exception, not the rule.6
Dr. Wilmut, the British scientist who successfully cloned Dolly the sheep, said, in general, just 1 to 4 percent of efforts in a species where cloning has worked result in the birth of a live animal. That, he said, indicates that cloning appears to create serious abnormalities in almost all embryos.7
Severe problems, including defects in the heart, lungs and other organs, are suffered by half of all clones of large mammals, like sheep and cows. Most die before they are born. Others that survive die suddenly and mysteriously weeks or months after birth.8
Reproductive Cloning Defies Human Dignity Introduction
The United Nations condemned reproductive cloning in 1997 when it unanimously adopted the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights. This states, “Practices which are contrary to human dignity, such as reproductive cloning of human beings, shall not be permitted.” In 2000, the United Kingdom passed a ban on reproductive cloning, but allowed for therapeutic cloning.
This revulsion for the cloning of humans is a natural response to the utter disregard for human dignity. Cloning inherently treats people as “replacements” or “extras.” This defies the uniqueness of each individual, using technology to manipulate and control human beings. It would create a class of humans deprived of a clear identity, parents and family.
Scientists who claim to be helping grieving family or friends by resurrecting a loved one through cloning are committing fraud. Experiments to create cloned humans carry unimagined, horrific physical risks to the clone and to the woman who carries it. Most animal embryo clones are horribly deformed and die. The few that live long enough to be implanted in an animal’s uterus die soon afterward. The anomalies that have survived to birth are prone to genetic defects. A cloned lamb born soon after Dolly displayed such severe respiratory problems that within a few weeks she was euthanized. An autopsy revealed that her lungs had not developed properly.9
Cloned cows, sheep, goats, and mice often have over-sized internal organs, limbs, and overall body, and the newborns are sickly. The large fetuses cause a risk to the mother during delivery. The dismal results of animal cloning have convinced many scientists that it is unthinkable to clone a human.10
Beyond the physical problems, the cloned human has no defined rights. Who is the parent—the donor or the scientist? Who is responsible when things go wrong? Could a cloned human be killed if he or she were found to be defective or unwanted? Would a clone be treated differently than humans with two biological parents? When would a clone have legal or human rights? What if a living or deceased person is cloned without his or her knowledge or consent?
It is wrong to treat a human as something that can be replaced, and it is wrong to treat another human as a mere substitute.
Should Patients Place Their Hopes in Cloning? Introduction
However, cloned (or even adult) stem cells would not be useful unless the genetic defects were corrected before they were injected back into a patient. “It’s one thing to re-create a pancreas, but if you have to regenerate from diseased tissue, the gene is still defective,” says Inder M. Verma of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in San Diego, California. “You have to correct the defect; otherwise cloning will get you what you started out with.”11
Introduction
Stem cells from adults and umbilical cord blood are already being used to treat numerous kinds of cancer and diseases, to regenerate muscle tissue, and to form cartilage and bone tissue. Adult stem cells bypass the problem of donor rejection, as the patient is the donor, and are a quicker source for stem cells than the laborious, unnecessary step of creating an embryo. There is no need to go through the immoral and dangerous process of cloning when stem cells can be safely obtained directly from the patient.
Additionally, a “miracle” stem cell has been discovered. Mesenchymal stem cells, or MSCs, are found in adult bone marrow. Embryonic stem cells cannot be directed to become the kind of cell desired and, more ominously, can grow into tumors. However, when MSCs are injected, they only seem to go to the patient’s damaged areas, turning into appropriately needed muscle, blood vessels, cartilage, bone and other tissue. They do not carry markers that lead to rejection. The cells are so safe they can be transplanted between different species. A single bone-marrow donation could treat 10,000 people or more.12
Many diseases and disabilities are the result of cells dying. Donated stem cells can replace the damaged ones. Another source for cell regeneration are drugs that stimulate the brain and other organs to grow new cells and repair themselves. Drugs do not present the problem of rejection by a patient’s immune system, and they do not require invasive surgery. Epogen, a drug produced by Amgen, fights anemia by using a human protein to stimulate the body to produce red blood cells. Another protein developed by Curis Inc. stimulates bone growth, which can treat fractures that do not heal.13
Why a Ban on Reproductive Cloning Won’t Work Introduction
The only way to uphold such a ban would be to forcefully abort a woman carrying a human clone. Barring that, how would politicians deal with a clone who escapes detection and is born? Since the clone had no right to be born, would this new person have any legal or human rights, or even be recognized as a human being?
Those working on the front lines recognize that the demarcation between reproductive and therapeutic cloning is easy to cross. Advanced Cell Technology’s president Michael West, while arguing for therapeutic cloning, has written that reproductive cloning is “unwarranted at this time” and should be restricted—that is, “until the safety and ethical issues surrounding it are resolved.”14
Severino Antinori, a scientist who claims he will create a cloned human being soon, stated that reproductive cloning is therapeutic cloning. He argues that infertility is a disease, and the cure, or therapy, is cloning.15
Introduction
Slavery treats a class of people as sub-human. Depraved philosophies like that of the Nazi experimenters view people only in the context of how their body parts can be exploited. Cloning is the modern-day version of history’s corrupt endeavors. The act of cloning views human life as something to be manipulated, used, and disposed of. It endangers the life and health of the offspring, most of which will die in the process, while the few survivors will have deformities and suffer indignities. If we allow technology and rogue scientists to determine the worth, relationships and use of people, civilization as we know it will suffer.
Introduction |
|
|
Concerned Women for America 1015 Fifteenth St. N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, D.C. 20005 Phone: (202) 488-7000 Fax: (202) 488-0806 |
Feedback / Questions? || Problem with this page? || Archives
