cloning for medical research

7/30/2019 Cloning for Medical Research

1/5

1CLONING FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH

Cloning for Medical Research

Using Human Cloning for Medical Research

The subject of human cloning has many different points of view. The utilization of human

cloning for the sake of medical research is a path that we, as guardians of the future, should standup against in an effort to preserve the human race as we know it today. The topic of cloning has

many different terminologies as well as types.

What is cloning? Cloning is not limited just to humans but is actually all around us. It exists in

nature, animals and humans. Cloning is defined as the creation of a genetically identical copy ofan existing human or growing cloned tissue from that individual. This term is generally used to

refer to artificial cloning; human clones in the form of identical twins are commonplace, with

their cloning occurring during the natural process of reproduction. Human cloning is the asexual

production of a human being whose genetic makeup is nearly identical to that of a currently or

previously existing individual (Chesire et al., 2003, p. 1010). To be successful with cloning,

scientists utilize and create generic cells that that have the ability to make exact duplicates orcopies of themselves indefinitely. This process is known as stem cell research. Stem cells are a

key element of the different types of cloning and will impact advances in helping to cure many

different types of diseases such as Alzheimers and Parkinsons disease, diabetes, spinal cordinjury, heart disease, stroke, arthritis, and cancer. Before we can discuss this, I need to explain

the different types of cloning.

Cloning for the most part, as we know it, began on July 5, 1996 with a sheep named Dolly.The creation of Dolly was accomplished after many failed and aborted attempts. Dolly came

about by agricultural research scientists who were tasked and funded to create the perfectsheep. The reason behind the experiment was to create a more efficient agricultural production

environment in Scotland. The success of cloning Dolly sparked the interest of the scientificcommunity to clone many other large mammals, including horses and bulls. Dollys cloningmarked the realm of science fiction that had become a realistic technology, with its risks and

promises of great medical progress. Unfortunately, Dollys life span was extremely short. The

average sheep has a life expectancy of fourteen years. Dolly died at five years of age due to

advanced stages of arthritis. The current state of nonhuman animal technology is so rudimentarythat the procedure has resulted in a staggeringly high occurrence of severe physical and genetic

defects and premature aging in cloning offspring (Chesire et al., 2003, p. 1010).

Following the successful experiment to create Dolly, the next direction of technology was to

improve In Vitro Fertilization (IVF), which was developed in the late 1970s. IVF is the process

utilized by infertile couples wishing to have a child with both parents biological traits. Themothers eggs are collected and fertilized by the fathers sperm in a laboratory, then the eggs thatare successfully fertilized are then implanted in the mothers uterus. As cloning has advanced, so

have the terminologies, methods and results.

Cloning in general is primarily divided into two different types. The first is known asReproductive Cloning. The sole purpose of this type of cloning is for the creation of a child. In

many cases, couples who may be having difficulties conceiving on their own may opt to utilize


2/5

IVF. While this offers alternatives with the newer advancements in stem cell research, it has also

raised the issue of genetic altering within the cells to try to guarantee a healthy, perfect child.

Currently, the parents of embryos created via in vitro fertilization (IVF), for example, are givena great measure of decision-making power regarding the fate of their embryos (Chesire et al.,

2003, p. 1011). Fertilizing the egg is no longer the only choice in the laboratories. Genetic

defects as well as sex and eye color preference are now possible.

The other type of cloning is Therapeutic Cloning. Therapeutic Cloning is a proposed form ofstem cell therapy. It primarily deals with the duplication of healthy cells to be used as

replacements for damaged tissues and organs. The process involves removing the cell and then

removing the egg nucleus from the cell. Once this is done, the cell is scientifically reprogrammedand stimulated to develop. When this is completed, some stem cells from this cell are removed

and transplanted as new tissue cells back to the patient. This procedure is known as Cell Nuclear

Replacement (CNR). Understanding how nuclear reprogramming occurs during CNR could

eventually develop alternative stem cell therapy techniques that reprogram cells without the need

to use eggs, embryos or cloning (April 28, 2005, Medical Research Council).

While these two types of cloning are different in nature, both have brought to the forefront thesame highly debated question. When does life begin? Attention to this question first came to the

public in 1973 with the decision of Roe v. Wade. The belief of those who opposed this decision

viewed it that life had begun the minute an embryo was created, while those in support of it

looked at it as a womans right to choose. While my purpose is not to address the subject ofabortion, it is an effort to highlight the question of when does life begin?

You can hardly pick up a newspaper or a magazine today without there being an article related to

cloning. The subject of cloning is an extremely sensitive one among politicians, scientists and

religious leaders alike. Having proven that cloning is possible, the doors of additional

opportunity have swung open. With these opportunities, the controversy has developed regardingwhether the means justifies the end result.

Recently published was in an article about a twenty-two year old woman. At the age ofseventeen, this woman lost her ability to walk due to a severe spinal cord injury caused by an

automobile accident. While she is considered by some in the medical profession to be a prime

example of a patient who would benefit from stem cell research, she is opposed to it. Do I wantto walk again? That would be great. Do I want to see the suffering of others diminish? Of course

I do. But I would never accept the harvesting of another human life for my comfortno matter

how small (Carlson, 2005, p. 25). The primary question then is if a cloned embryo is created in

a lab through therapeutic cloning, is this essentially the beginning of life? This has caused amoral dilemma for many people as they hear about legislation for or against such research.

The above graph represents the results of an ABC/Washington Post survey, conducted in April,

2005. It indicates that the majority of those surveyed support embryonic stem cell research. How

in depth does it really go? Where do these embryos for the research originate?

Within certain medical arenas, the positive side has to do with the potential cures for many

different types of diseases and, in some cases, disabilities. In an article published by Fox News


3/5


earlier this year, it was revealed that scientists using stem cells feel they may have come up with

a treatment that could someday treat spinal cord injuries or provide a cure for amyotrophic

lateral sclerosis, better known as Lou Gehrigs disease, (Fox News, January 31, 2005). In yetanother example of the advancements that cloning/stem cell research offers, an additional article

appeared on the Fox News channel with the headline Stem Cells Help Paralyzed Rats Walk.

The article went on to state that by injecting paralyzed rats with healthy human stem cells thatthe scientists had created, the rats were able to walk again. While the research is continuing,

researchers hope to be able to inject their first human patient sometime in 2006. In addition to

these potential cures, other researchers are being successful in creating organs in animals to betransplanted into humans. Some of these animals have been altered to the point where they have

human blood coursing through their veins to help minimize transplant rejections. Through

therapeutic cloning, humans have has the ability to prevent some of today's most common anddeadliest diseases. Therapeutic cloning technology allows research to go further into the field of

studying genetic diseases so that tests for them can be conducted and perhaps find a cure

someday, as evidenced by the articles listed above. The advancements in testing for genetic

diseases continue to spark cures for a multitude of diseases.

In reading the many available articles on this subject, my research provided several papers

supporting my position. Many experts from around the world have checked in on this topic, andin one article, one of the statements rang clear. The cloned individual would not be born withthe special privilege of having a unique genetic identity (Chesire et al., 2003, p. 1010). Every

living and breathing person in this world is unique, without that uniqueness, we would allfunction and behave the same, potentially resulting in the perfect race.

The concept of a perfect race could possibly be achieved through cloning. No individual or groupof individuals should have the power to determine who or what is acceptable. This is best

demonstrated by the inability of the experts to arrive at any method of regulation to control the

financial funding aspect and scientific research. The moral and ethical question of how farscience should advance in this arena is astronomical in size and proportion. Lacking any type of

regulation to limit the extent of medical research for cloning, all activities should be curtailed.

There are potentially hundreds of potential cures waiting to be discovered, but science needs to

limit just how far it can go with human cloning.

Given the highly contentious subject of cloning, science needs to look at alternatives. One ofthese alternatives has to do with what is considered by many today as medical waste. This

medical waste is called Umbilical Cord Cells. Umbilical cord cells can be utilized to help with

many ailments as well as further research related to a host of diseases. Blood saved from

newborns umbilical cords could help treat about 11,700 Americans a year with leukemia and

other devastating diseases, yet most are routinely discarded (April 18, 2005, FOX News ).There exists a relatively large potential source for cord cells; however, very few women are

aware of the benefits. Most umbilical cord cells are discarded each year. There is a growing push

now to create a bank for storing these samples and conducting further research. Leukemia and anumber of other diseases plague thousands of Americans per year, yet umbilical cord cells,

which show promises in helping cure these illnesses, are being regularly destroyed. Umbilical

cord blood is filled with stem cells, these cells act as the foundation from which blood is


4/5

produced, bone marrow for transplants. This offers an alternative to the normal methods of

matching donors, etc.

Given the lack of any type of national registry program, this trend will continue. With over four

million infants born each year, it would take only a minuscule portion of these cords to be

donated to build an adequate supply. Banking of the Cord cells is a growing business in theprivate sector, but how to go about donating the cord cells is difficult for many to find out about.

Washington has recently approved a sizeable amount of money over the next couple of years to

help fund the creation of a national registry and the creation of guidelines. The United Nation

recently gave initial approval to a declaration condemning all human cloning and embryonicresearch as incompatible with human dignity and the protection of human life (April 21, 2005,The Beacon).

While I agree that there are a number of benefits that cloning may represent, we need to be

careful as to how we proceed. What we set into motion today will set the course of history for

our future and our childrens future. I feel that allowing cloning to proceed unchecked can be acostly mistake in many ways. I strongly believe that utilizing stem cell research involving the use

of medical waste instead (umbilical cord cells and IVF waste) offers a solid median for both

sides. The notion of creating embryos for the benefit of others should not be publicly funded, as

it crosses the moral decision line concerning when life begins).

ReferencesCarlson, H.J., (April 2005) Stem cell debate splits politicians on question of life. State

Legislatures, 31(4), 25-27. Retrieved May 5, 2005, from EBSCOhost database.

Cheshire, Jr., W. P., Pellegrino, E. D., Bevington, L. K., Mitchell, C. B., Jones, N. L.,

FitzGerald, K. T., Koop, C. E. & Kilner, J. F. (2003). Stem cell research: why medicine

should reject human cloning. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 78(8), 1010-1018. Retrieved April 17,2005, from EBSCOhost database.

Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research. (February 7, 2003). Myth vs. fact scnt

(therapeutic cloning). Retrieved May 1, 2005, from

http://www.stemcellfunding.org/fastaction/default.asp

Fox News. (December 20, 2004). Stem cells help paralyzed rats walk.

Retrieved April 19, 2005, from http://www.foxnews.com

Fox News. (January 31, 2005). Stem cell breakthrough paves way for future als cure.



5/5


Fox News. (April 18, 2005). Donated umbilical cord cells could save thousands of lives.


Holm, S. (2002). Going to the roots of the stem cell controversy. Bioethics, 16 (6), 493-507.

OBrien, N. F., (April 21, 2005. Catholics fight push by states for embryonic stem-cell research.

The Beacon, 21.

Streisand, B., & Boyce, N., (2004). Stepping up for stem cells. U.S. News & World Report, 137

(17), 64. Retrieved April 24, 2005, from EBSCOhost database.

cloning for medical research

Documents