FREE ESSAY ON SHOULD WE CLONE

SHOULD WE CLONE

Should We Clone
Cloning is a scientific process that has miraculous potential to better humans and other
species alike: however, the resounding negative repercussions far outweigh these
potential benefits. Cloning is biologically defined as the construction of a special
chromosome by somatic cell fusion, cytogenetic manipulation, or organelle introduction
into cells by means of genetic microsurgery. (Funk & Wagnall's, 1) This process has been
completed successfully although the accuracy, precision, and consistency are lacking.
Even isolated experimentation of cloning on living species is dangerous. Anytime the
natural rhythms of human life are disrupted in such a momentous manner, disastrous
outcomes are bound to unfold. Cloning is an extremely powerful tool that carries extreme
burdens, and, in order to properly convey this message, it is necessary to explain the
techniques, history, ethics, and reasons of cloning.
Before continuing with processes or history, it is vital to understand two things: what
cloning is and what is a clone. Cloning, in its simplest term, is the technique of
producing a genetically identical duplicate of an organism. A clone is any descendant
derived asexually form a single individual, as by cuttings, bulbs, fission, mitosis, or
parthenogenesis reproduction. (Hoffman 78) There are clones that develop naturally
everywhere you look. Bacteria, algae, unicellular organisms, fungi, invertebrates, and
plants are all examples of clones. Even human beings clone in rare instances, in the form
of what we call identical twins. 
The history of cloning stretches much farther back than most people think. The first
attempts at cloning have been documented back to the beginning of this century. Adolph
Edward Driesch was the first scientist to experiment with this process. He was able to
divide the egg of a sea urchin by shaking it in a test tube, which separated the egg,
turning it into two dwarf sea urchins. Though Dreisch was able to conduct a simple
cloning, he was never able to explain his findings and eventually gave up and switched
his area of study to philosophy. In 1952, Robert Briggs and Thomas J* King, who were
scientists in Philadelphia, were the first to implant a nucleus into an egg cell, using
the nuclei of Leopard Frogs' eggs. Unfortunately the procedure was unsuccessful, but in
the early 1970's Dr. John. Gurden successfully transferred the frog nuclei and was able
to develop the frog's eggs into tadpoles. 
Scientists announced in 1981 that they had transplanted mouse nuclei of embryos into
mouse eggs: however, these findings were deemed fabricated after several other scientists
tried and were unsuccessful. Other than the two findings described, few other experiments
during this time period were successful, or even conducted. Most scientists of the late
seventies and early eighties had determined cloning of embryonic mammal cells to be
impossible. 
These views were drastically changed in 1984 when Dr. Steene Willadson reported
successfully transferring nuclei from a sheep embryo to produce clones. Following this
success, Dr. Willadson went on to successfully clone cow and monkey embryos in the same
manner. Developing upon Dr. Willadson's findings, in 1994 Dr. Neal First developed cows
by nuclear transfer from much more developed embryos that had ever been previously used.
His next historical feat was cloning and producing Megan and Morag, the first cloned
sheep from embryo cells. 
Chances are, the first thought that enters an individuals mind when discussing cloning is
Dolly, the sheep that made headlines all over the world in 1997. Obviously, this was not
the first cloning to ever take place, but what was momentous about Dolly was that they
had cloned a mammal from an adult cell. Dr. Ian Wilmut and Dr. Keith Campbell did this,
both embryologists in Edinburgh, Scotland. The two were able to clone dolly by placing
the mammary cell of a sheep into an egg, then transplanting the developed embryo of the
egg into a ewe, which acted as a surrogate mother. Six months later, on July 4, Dolly was
born weighing fourteen pounds and perfectly healthy. This single event has been the
foundation of debates for the last two years on the practicality, dangers, and ethics of
scientifically cloning living species.
Having discussed the history and techniques of cloning, it is important to discover the
uses cloning has on living species. There are many ways in which cloning could be used:
better engineering the offspring of humans and animals, making copies of those who have
deceased, and researching cures for diseases. Agriculture could benefit from cloning as
well. Livestock could be cloned by nuclear transfer, passing on preferred traits to
produce better, more profitable animals. However, this technique cannot be implemented at
this time due to the less than five- percent success rate of such a procedure.
The benefit to the human species is what has many scientists interested. Researchers
believe that cloned pigs could possibly produce organs that could be transplanted into
needy humans. In addition, cloning of livestock could produce proteins for people
suffering form diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson's, and Cystic Fibrosis. The process
also provides for research into diseases and could unveil cures that would save lives. A
final way cloning could be used is for infertile mothers. Nuclear transfer could be used
to clone a child instead of other methods, such as in-vitro fertilization or artificial
insemination. 
While these possibilities sound wonderful on paper, they in fact have dismal potential
reactions. If cloning becomes wide spread among a species, then that species genetic
information would be almost identical. If a disease were to enter the species, it would
undoubtedly wipe out all those with the similar genetic make-ups. Also, the risk of error
when cloning is far more likely than not. Dolly, the cloned sheep, was the only
successful attempt out of 277 tries. The other 276 animals were either killed or
developed severe abnormalities. 
There is also an important moral aspect to cloning. If nuclear transfer becomes wide
spread among humans, men's role in reproduction would be obsolete. Furthermore, those
with religious inclinations believe humans maintain individuality and have a soul, which
cloning could not reproduce since scientists cannot explain it, let alone copy it.
Lastly, the mental and emotional repercussions of cloning are unknown and could never be
predicted.
Cloning is an amazing, powerful resource whose functions should never leave the
laboratory and enter society. The world has functioned properly for millions for years by
means of natural reproduction, which is instinctive in every being. The miraculous
creation of life by God should never be manipulated or copied by those created by the
same amazing process. Interrupting the natural cycle of human life would have devastating
effects upon both humans and animals. Such a mistake as wide spread cloning would likely
lead to the self-demise of the human species. Creation has always been a miraculous,
natural work of God alone, and it should remain so for all times.