Human Cloning

[demon_dissector]

Human Cloning: Is making people wrong?

The ultimate bit of genetic engineering would be cloning people - just as scientists have already done with Dolly the sheep, and CC the cloned cat - so that babies would be born without having two biological parents.

Pro-cloning arguments | Anti-cloning arguments

Cloning is asexual reproduction and it produces individuals who are genetically identical to someone who already exists.

It's done by removing the DNA from the nucleus of an egg cell taken from the mother and then replacing this genetic material with the DNA taken from one of the father's cells - perhaps a skin cell.

Creating complete people like this would lead to even more ethical problems than therapeutic cloning in which scientists create human embryos through cloning and extract stem cells that can transform themselves into other types of cell with the aim of using them to treat illness.

The less extreme supporters of human cloning say that even if human cloning doesn't produce great benefits for the world, it's unlikely to do any real harm. Therefore cloning should be cautiously explored, rather than banned.

Much of the argument goes along the lines of the traditional pro-life, pro-choice debate.

The Roman Catholic Church has said that "every possible act of cloning humans is intrinsically evil" and can never be justified.

Other faith communities are more divided in their views.

Some of the objections

people shouldn't play God
cloning violates human dignity and makes people into products that can be replaced
cloning makes people in man's image, not God's
cloning involves destroying embryos
cloning amounts to unethical experimentation on people
clones will be considered inferior to 'real people'
cloning will change family relationships
cloning will change human relationships and the nature of society
it's one step short of Brave New World

For Human Cloning

What are the arguments in favour of making people by cloning?

Banning things is a bad idea
It doesn't hurt anyone
It gives people more choices about their family
It would help infertile people or those who've lost a child
People should be allowed to reproduce in the way they choose
It would let gay or celibate people have biological children
It lets parents do their best for their children
It satisfies a child's right to have good genes
It's going to happen anyway, so it must be discussed
It's wrong to stand in the way of progress
Some religions would have their freedom curbed if cloning was banned
It would help save our species if there was a global disaster.
"If tomorrow someone could prove that you were a clone, would you think your life was worth less, that your loves and experiences were devalued?

"You would be the same person you always were. Nothing would be different simply because you were born from a 'previously experienced genome'".
Ronald Bailey

Against Human Cloning
Why do people think human cloning is wrong?

It's just a horrible idea
It involves murdering embryos
It is unsafe and requires the carrying out of unethical experiments
It's playing God
It's a charter for eugenics
It doesn't respect human dignity (religious argument)
It doesn't respect human dignity (secular argument)
It confuses family relationships and genealogy
It reduces a person's individuality and uniqueness
It might alter population demographics
Most of these arguments either deal with the morality of using and destroying human embryos or the morality of designing human children.

Some of the arguments are not concerned with whether cloning is ethically right or wrong in itself, but are concerned with what the consequences of cloning would be for the world.


Ethics > Human Cloning > Latest developments
Printable version of this page


Latest developments in the UK

Cloned embryo
Revelations that British scientists have cloned the UK's first human embryo has re-ignited the debate over the ethical implications of cloning.

The controversial scientific breakthrough in May 2005 was hailed as a triumph for people suffering from diseases such as Parkinson's.

A team of scientists at Newcastle University successfully cloned a human embryo after taking eggs from 11 women. The team removed the genetic material and replaced it with DNA from embryonic stem cells.

Opponents of cloning argue that the process is unethical because all embryos have the potential to become fully fledged human beings. But supporters insist the new techniques could offer numerous benefits in the future, such as fighting disease, battling infertility and preserving endangered species.

Reactions
The breakthrough provoked a mixed reaction from Britain's Church leaders.

The Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales condemned the new move as a "tragedy".

In a strongly-worded statement, Archbishop Peter Smith, chair of the Department for Christian Responsibility and Citizenship at the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales, said: "It is deeply morally troubling that this country is leading the world down a dangerous path by cloning human lives to obtain these stem cells. It cannot be right to treat young human lives as disposable."

The Church of England also sounded a note of caution but stopped short of calling for an outright ban on all cloning-based treatments.

The Bishop of Southwark, Dr Tom Butler, vice-chairman of the Church of England's Public Affairs Committee, said: "We are really concerned that extravagant claims are being made for a highly risky procedure that needs detailed, painstaking research before its safety and efficacy can be proved. We remain firmly opposed to the use of this technique for reproductive cloning, and we continue to press for other sources of stem cells than embryonic."

The Evangelical Alliance which represents 1.2 million Christians from 40 denominations condemned the procedure as "profoundly unethical."

The Methodist Church argued that cloning-based treatments had to value human life. It recognised that scientific developments of this kind could help people afflicted by terrible diseases but called for a full debate on the issue.

Latest developments on cloning alternatives

Ethical alternatives
Pro-life groups have urged scientists to explore alternatives to cloning. "Adult stem cells are already being successfully used to treat an ever-growing number of human conditions," argued a spokesman for LIFE in the UK. "This is the real way forward."

In June 2005, the Catholic Medical Centre in South Korea revealed it had successfully used adult stem cells to treat vascular diseases and stroke victims who have suffered brain damage. The Neuroscience Genome Research Centre, Chonbuk University and the Catholic University of Korea participated in the clinical research. Scientists there believe adult stem cells could be used as an ethical and effective alternative to human cloning.

But South Korean cloning pioneer Hwang Woo-Suk insisted the cloning of human beings would remain an impossible and dangerous fantasy for decades to come.

The cloning expert, who in 2004 created the world's first cloned human embryonic stem cells, said: "Human cloning is not only ethically outrageous and medically dangerous, but technically impossible as well. Cloned human beings are merely a science fiction fantasy. I can assure you that on this globe, you'll never bump into a cloned human being at least within 100 years."


Latest developments worldwide

Ban on cloning
Cloning has been banned in countries such as the United States, Germany and Italy. The United Nations voted in favour of a ban on all forms of human cloning at the beginning of 2005. The UN declaration was non-binding, allowing scientists in the UK to continue cloning under strict controls.

Therapeutic cloning - believed to have huge potential to treat disease and disability - is allowed in Britain. Reproductive cloning - the cloning of human embryos with the intention of creating a baby - was made illegal in 2001.

Other advances worldwide
In South Korea, scientists disclosed (June 2005) that they had created a dozen new embryonic stem cells from cloned human embryos. Stem cell lines were created by taking genetic material from the patient and putting it into a donated egg.

In Egypt, the leading IVF (in-vitro fertilisation) Centre in Cairo announced plans (June 2005) to start research on stem cells from the umbilical cord. The clinic also revealed that it would like to use surplus 'early embryos' from IVF couples and was open to the possibility of therapeutic cloning.

At present both cloning and embryo experimentation are prohibited under Egyptian law. The country's predominately Muslim population is divided on the issue.

Stem cell debate in the Muslim world
Islam does not have a centralised authority - like the Vatican in Roman Catholicism - to state its position. Most Muslim countries have not yet introduced laws on embryonic stem cell research and human cloning.

Some Muslims are in favour of research, arguing that the embryo does not have a soul until the later stages of its development. Others agree with the Catholic Church which says that it is immoral to destroy embryos at any stage to harvest stem cells.

Egypt will not be the first predominately Muslim country to conduct stem cell research. In 2003 Iranian scientists developed human embryonic stem cell lines. Other Muslim groups and countries such as Turkey and the National Fatwa Council in Malaysia also support both embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning.

But many Muslim officials still fear the technology could be abused and that babies could be cloned and then killed to supply organs or 'spare parts' for other patients.

South Korea controversy

In May 2005, a team of scientists at Seoul National University claimed to have cloned 11 colonies of human stem cells matched to individual patients.

The team was led by Hwang Woo-Suk, a professor of biotechnology. Hwang had already achieved celebrity status in South Korea following his announcement in 2004 that he had created the world's first cloned human embryo and harvested stem cells from it. Earlier in 2005, Hwang announced that his team had created a cloned dog called "Snuppy".

Controversy over the research
The 2005 stem cell paper was called into question because of a lack of evidence and because other scientists could not duplicate the results. Meanwhile, there had also been allegations of ethical misconduct by Hwang's team in acquiring the human eggs used in their research. Seoul National University began to investigate the source of the eggs, and later broadened the scope of the investigation to examine the 2004 and 2005 papers.

The investigation found that Hwang's claimed breakthroughs in human stem cell research were all faked.

"The data in [the] 2005 article including test results from DNA fingerprinting, photographs of teratoma, embryoid bodies, MHC-HLA isotype matches and karyotyping have all been fabricated... In conclusion, the research team of Professor Hwang does not possess patient-specific stem cell lines or any scientific bases for claiming having created one.
...the committee concluded that results described in [the] 2004 Science article including DNA fingerprinting analyses and photographs of cells have also been fabricated."
Summary of the Final Report on Hwang's Research Allegation
The report found that Hwang's team did clone the dog Snuppy.


Hwang's work was mentioned in school textbooks

Unethical egg donations
Hwang and his team were found to have acted unethically by soliciting egg donations from female technicians and students for payment. Hwang had denied knowledge of this but a student testified that Hwang had authorised her procedure and even accompanied her to the hospital.

Such action is a breach of the Declaration of Helsinki, a statement of ethical principles concerning experiments on human subjects.

When obtaining informed consent for the research project the physician should be particularly cautious if the subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In that case the informed consent should be obtained by a well-informed physician who is not engaged in the investigation and who is completely independent of this relationship.
Declaration of Helsinki section C article 23
Hwang's official title of "Supreme Scientist" has been stripped, text books mentioning his achievements are being revised and his commemorative postal stamps are no longer being sold.