Not surprisingly, news involving one organism or another being cloned is not that infrequent in today’s world. It seems that the most predominant use of cloning is to serve the interests of human beings. While some researchers have worked with cloning that would benefit the natural world, cloning efforts focuses for example on the breeding populations of endangered species or actually reintroducing species that have gone extinct, the primary focus of cloning is to serve humans themselves either by increasing food supply or by providing transplant organs.
The intent of this paper is to review some of the more frequent applications of cloning and to discuss those applications for a bioethics standpoint and discussed the areas of cloning, livestock, and stem cell issues and concerns that occurred within the past year or so. Few of us if any really do not know the term of bioethics! According to The American Heritage® Dictionary, “bioethics” means “the study of the moral implications of new biological discoveries and biomedical advances, as in the fields of genetic engineering and drug research. (The American Heritage Dictionary Of the English Language, Fourth Edition). “Bioethics” also means the study of ethical problems and arising from biological research and its applications and such fields as organ transplantation, genetic engineering, or artificial insemination. (The American Heritage Dictionary Of the English Language, Fourth Edition). When people think of the word cloning, they constantly think of frightening images of duplicate human beings created in somewhat of a mad scientist style experiment.
In fact, numerous members of the public were shocked “when, Dolly the sheep resulted from a cloning experiment in Scotland. Therapeutic cloning, however, is entirely different and does not involve the creation of a somewhat copied human being” (Adult stem cells, 2009 ). It is the reproductive cloning which results in a copy of a specific human being. The process of cloning generates products or even individuals that are genetically identical. The process can occur in three distinct ways. These are (1) Gene cloning, (2) reproductive cloning, and (3) therapeutic cloning (Wagner, 2007).
Concerning Gene cloning, the Genes or segments of an organism of DNA produced by taking samples of genes after the “progenitor” means someone or something that begets or creates (The American Heritage Dictionary Of the English Language, Fourth Edition). (Wagener, 2007) Nonetheless, placing the samples taken and put them into a vector cell such as a bacteria or a virus which is next enticed to reproduced the product with the preferred genetic makeup. Reproductive cloning, on the other hand, remains to create a duplicate of the supply of the nucleus, for example Dolly the sheep.
Human reproductive cloning, which is highly unethical, would be a challenge to duplicate a human. In theory, a blastocyst created and then implanted in a womb to bring about a pregnancy. The overwhelming consensus of the U. S. scientific and medical communities, including the AAMC and the National Academy of Sciences, is that reproductive cloning should be barred. In the March 21, 2011 edition of the (States News Service, 2011) BIO advocated the cloning of livestock aimed at the purposes of use such as human food. The organization quarrels that cloned livestock allows the easier production of healthful food (States News Service, 2011). In notion these foods might be of a huge asset in feeding the world. There are, of course, many bioethical considerations when we consider cloning. Bioethics considers biological processes as they linked to morals. The rights and wrongs of any particular situation also effects upon other situations (Wagner, 2007). ” Several bioethical considerations is that anytime we start to depend on high technology and abandon the age-old practices that have nurtured us as a species; we position ourselves and our world in danger.
We simply ignore how to do things the old way and as we rely on the new way more and more there is a potential of forever changing the world’s gene bank. As an added bioethical concern in regard to cloned food, to more reliable and healthier food if that is indeed what cloning represents, translates into the human population only growing larger and larger over time and people living to older and older ages. While this may appear preferable, we do so at the risk of the natural world. Natural populations cannot exist in the same place as high density human populations. The world’s population is increasing at a phenomenal rate.
Traditional agriculture is not only forgotten other than made impossible for instance the lands which are available for agricultural production shrink. Initially the big business owns the world’s food supply, not the small scale farmers and hunter and gathers that have fed us throughout our history. “Another bioethical problem inherent in cloning is the production of animals solely to act as organ donors on behalf of humans. The March 23, 2011 edition of UPI News Track reports that pigs are now aimed to be produced within the next six months specifically for that purpose! While one might argue slaughtering a pig for its transplantable organs is no different than slaughtering one for meat, the result is significantly different. Nonetheless, the human life expectation may definitely be considerably prolonged. While this is good in some regards, it is bad in the same respect that cloned food is bad. Natural populations are in danger of extinction by constantly increasing human populations. Another bioethical problem with cloned transplants of course is who gets them and who pays for them. They would obviously be tremendously expensive.
Would it only be the rich that got to enjoy enhanced life spans. Then we have human cloning and stem cells. Human cloning and stem cell is a creation of genetically identical copy of a human. Ethics of cloning is a controversial issue. The term is normally refer to artificial human cloning for an example twins which are identical and taking place throughout a natural process of reproduction such as birth. Their is two types of stem cells. First, the embryonic stem cells attained from blastocysts. A blastocyst is mostly an egg, once it has been fertilized, yet before an embryo begins developing in the egg.
Second, there are adult stem cells too. As the name implies, these adult stem cells are attained from developed organisms. Adult stem cells are not naturally as versatile or available as embryonic stem cells; therefore, they are currently not as useful for research. “The controversy over stem cells is from the destruction of fertilized human eggs when harvesting embryonic stem cells, therefore killing the human child that the egg could have developed into. Currently, scientists and researchers are only using embryos that are unwanted that would already not be given an opportunity to develop into a human being. Phil B ). ” For instance, infertility doctors typically create several embryos for women who are unable to naturally become pregnant, and then the doctor chooses the finest fertilized egg to implant into the woman and disposes of all the remaining eggs. Instead of these embryonic eggs going to waste, they are sometimes used for stem cell research. However, many conservative individuals, especially officials, are trying to make embryonic stem cell research illegal, because they believe it kills human life.
For instance, President Bush has already removed public funding from all embryonic stem cell research in the United States of America In conclusion, there are many things to consider when considering cloning. Anything taken to an excess has the potential to be bad. It seems that when we are considering human wants, desires, and needs, everything is taken to the extreme. Why would cloning, whether it is reproductive cloning or therapeutic cloning or simple gene copying, be any different?