Indiana Statesman ... Cloning Potential Justifies Research

[Murray Charters <mcharters@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Indiana Statesman ... Cloning potential justifies research
To the Point

By Erin Willman
February 23, 2004


A week and a half ago, a team of South Korean scientists announced that they 
successfully harvested a line of stem
cells from a cloned human embryo. This development sparked debate across the 
globe about the ethical implications of
human cloning and its possible value.

In order to understand the debate surrounding human cloning, a little 
background information is necessary. There are
two major kinds of cloning: therapeutic and reproductive.

The beginning of the process is the same for both kinds: a nucleus from one 
cell (which contains the genetic
information of an individual in the form of DNA) is implanted in an enucleated 
egg.

In reproductive cloning this egg is implanted in the uterus and carried to 
term, creating an individual that is a clone
of the DNA donor.

In therapeutic cloning, the embryo develops for about five days and then its 
stem cells are harvested. Stem cells are
cells that have not received signals that cause them to become a specific type 
of cell and can therefore be stimulated
to become any type cell in the body, possibly producing organs needed for 
transplants or replacing damaged cells in
patients with Alzheimer's, Parkinson's or other degenerative diseases.

Opponents of cloning state numerous reasons why a worldwide ban on human 
cloning is necessary, but these arguments are
often misinformed and illogical.

Many opposed to human cloning insist that there is no way to develop cloning 
technology and simultaneously prevent the
birth of a human clone, therefore all types of cloning should be banned.

Following this same line of logic, it could be said that all types of ice cream 
should be banned because it is
impossible to continue to produce ice cream without some people eating too much 
and compromising their health.

With the proper standards, scientists can continue to develop cloning 
technology with no dire consequences.

Another popular argument against cloning research is that its benefits are only 
speculative. First of all, scientists
know that stem cells can be directed to become any cell in the body, therefore 
replacing any cell, organ or tissue that
is degenerative with another made from an individual's own DNA which would 
eliminate risk of rejection. Also, further
benefits will remain speculative if more research cannot be conducted.

The benefits of scientific advancements such as organ transplants and blood 
transfusions were speculative until they
were researched and tested, and where would modern medicine be without these 
procedures?

The most popular reason given for banning cloning research is that it is 
unethical to destroy an embryo in order to
harvest its stem cells. However, many scientists have proposed using leftover 
embryos from fertility clinics for
research. These embryos would be discarded whether or not they were involved in 
cloning research.

What is unethical about using embryos that would otherwise be discarded to 
advance science and possibly save lives?

Cloning research is still in the early stages and in order for cloning 
technology to become beneficial, more work needs
to be done.

A complete ban of all human cloning research is a hasty reaction to an 
oversimplified view of a complex and potentially
beneficial scientific advancement.

SOURCE: Indiana Statesman


* * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn