Cloning Of Human Cells example essay topic

The announcement of the cloned ewe, Dolly, in 1997 by scientists in Scotland, was a shock to the entire world. The idea of cloning wasn't new, but at the time still seemed farfetched to most. As John Greene stated "We had not, as a species, ever truly considered the likelihood that human reproduction would fall so fully under the hand of technology" (1). However, once the reality of this controversial practice set in, scholars and common people alike began to debate the pros and cons of cloning from one end of the globe to the other. With morals and ethics at the forefront of the debate, people were, and still are, quite divided, as those are touchy subjects of personal opinion. Governments around the world quickly echoed the squeamishness of the public as many countries enacted bans on experiments that used the cloning of human cells.

The United States was no exception as the federal government enacted laws to ban all experiments that involve the cloning of human cells. However, it is clear that the cloning of human cells has become inevitable. In response, the United States should draft laws that only allow for therapeutic cloning and cloning for infertile couples, with an agency that will oversee all of these practices. If this were to occur, there would be a higher quality of life throughout the country.

To start, the cloning of human beings appears to be inevitable. Scientists, doctors, and researchers around the world have been successfully cloning and manipulating animals for years as they wait for the moratorium on human cloning to come to an end. With each attempt at cloning animal cells, these doctors and scientists are learning more about cloning and developing hypotheses on how to apply their findings to humans. The only thing standing in their way of actually applying their findings to human beings are the government bans which are to soon be lifted. "Now that the technology exist to easily modify genes in animals, scientists and bioethicist's realize that there is very little standing in the way of applying this genetic technology to human beings" (Richardson 1). Also, in the United States, the federal government gave federal funds to the Oregon Health Sciences University where, "Scientists... modified the genetic make-up of one of man's closest relatives: the monkey", showing that the government is becoming more tolerant to the idea of human cloning (Onion 1).

Even more convincing that human cloning is inevitable, and will reach the United States soon, is the fact that the nation with which the United States has the closest ties, Great Britain, legalized human embryo cloning. On Monday January 22, 2001, "The House of Lords approved a proposed change to government regulations... that made Britain the first country to effectively legalize the creation of cloned human embryos" (Ross 1). From animal research, to sister countries legalizing the practice of human embryo cloning, it is clear that cloning human beings is becoming inevitable in the United States. However, some might say that this practice is far from inevitable and should be completely banned.

The argument here is that cloning animal genes and cells is completely different than cloning human cells and it is just not safe to conduct these types experiments with a human life. These people would also claim that the regulations that are currently banning the experimentation of human cloning now, can and should remain in place indefinitely, therefore, proving that cloning is not inevitable. Likewise, this group of people would contend that cloning could be stopped by stiff penalties that would include jail time and heavy fines. To this, I must say that if we ban the use of human cloning in the United States, then we " ll end up with a type of "genetic tourism" in which people will travel to another country where cloning is tolerated (Richardson 2). Next, in order to stop "genetic tourism", where there would be a possibility of US citizens partaking in inhumane practices, we must assemble an agency that will oversee all of the cloning activity in the United States. Some would ask, to whom, in this era, would be trust with this responsibility?

In response, this agency would be constructed of doctors, scientists, researchers, and representatives of the government. Included in the agency would be a small faction of people who are completely opposed to cloning in order to hear the minority voice. We must realize that, although perhaps not on this same type of level, people are already making decisions similar to these with issues of abortion and in vitro fertilization. Furthermore, if an agency were established, and the practices were put under strict guidelines, the practice of therapeutic cloning would be able to increase the standard of living people throughout the United States. The United States should enact the types of laws that would allow therapeutic cloning so the serious shortage of vital organs and tissues could be drastically decreased or possibly even eliminated. Examples of the benefits of this procedure would include creating bone marrow for leukemia victims in need of a transplant, creating islet cells to return to the pancreas of a diabetic, creating heart or liver tissue to repair the damage by heart attacks or hepatitis, and creating skin to help aid the healing process for burn victims (Eibert 9).

The people who are waiting for these organ and tissue transplants are going through great pain and suffering while trying to find a donor that matches their organs. If the United States government drafted laws to legalize this type of therapeutic cloning, and combined it with an agency that oversaw all of these practices, the government could enhance the quality of life for many of its citizens. Similarly, if this legislation was passed, some types of genetic disorders could be eliminated when a "sick" gene in a baby is replaced with that of a cloned, healthy gene from the baby's parent. Also, this type of cloning could lead to the production of artificial limbs for people who have been in accidents. On the other hand, some might say that cloning organs is unethical because it would permit "organ farms" where. ".. human bodies without any semblance of consciousness would not be considered persons, and thus it would be perfectly legal to keep them 'alive' as a future source of organs" (Krauthammer 469). However, this morbid process would not be necessary as Rifkin explains a different, more humane process that could. ".. take a complete cell and grow an organ in a laboratory", making it unnecessary for the whole body to be used (21).

Robinson explains exactly how the procedure works when he says, "Therapeutic cloning involves the growing of replacement organs from a sample of a person's DNA, and would likely involve the use of human embryos and stem cells" (1). Clearly, the images of "organ farms" are not in concurrence with the available technology for these types of procedures, which would greatly enhance many people's lives. Finally, if the government were to enact laws permitting cloning for married couples who are physically unable to produce children, many people in this country would experience a better life. About 10 to 15 percent of the population is infertile, leaving a large group of people medically classified as having a disease, legally classified as being disabled, and psychologically scarred (Eibert 4).

Infertile couples often go to extremes in trying to produce children by undergoing painful and expensive treatments that have a very low success rate. If the government were to allow cloning for these infertile couples as an alternative to these futile treatments, many people would be positively affected and live better, happier lives. Also, instead of adopting, these infertile couples could have children of their own and keep their gene pool alive with the assistance of cloning. To the contrary, some people might say that cloning actual humans will have only negative results, or that there are alternate solutions to infertility. First of all, this process would only be available to infertile couples. No one else.

This will eliminate the possibility of someone who wants to make a number of copies of him or herself, as well as destroy the possibility of someone trying to produce a master race. These are common misconceptions, which Eibert states are impossible anyway when he says, "You can't replicate a human. That is scientifically impossible, even with cloning" (6). Next, many people also claim that in vitro fertilization could be used instead of cloning. This would be true for people that could create usable sperm or eggs. However, not all people can do that, thus, they are infertile.

Eibert explains how even drugs won't help this phenomenon when he states, "There are literally millions of women who can't produce viable eggs, and millions of men who can't produce viable sperm, no matter how big a dose of fertility drugs you give them". With this evidence, it is quite clear that making multiple copies of oneself or trying to make a master race is impossible with cloning. Similarly, no matter how many fertility drugs people take, or how many times they try in vitro fertilization, some people are just flat out infertile, and only cloning could help these people make babies. In conclusion, it has been four years since the introduction of the first cloned mammal, Dolly.

With the possibility of cloning an actual human more prevalent than ever, the highly controversial and personal debate about the ethics of human cloning presses on. The inevitability of the process seems to be taking effect on the world as countries like Great Britain have recently made cloning experiments with human embryos legal. Similarly, in the United States scientists have cloned some of mankind's closest relatives, making one wonder when the ban on human cloning in this country is going to be lifted. There would be many medical benefits to the lifting of the ban on experiments involving human cloning. From cancer patients, to burn victims, to infertile couples, the ban on cloning is depriving many people of living a physically and emotionally healthier life. In essence, if the United States enacted laws that made it legal to allow therapeutic cloning and cloning for infertile couples, while establishing an agency that would oversee these practices, many people in this country would experience a higher standard of living.