Forum
Human Cloning Foundation Hails British Scientists
Paralyzed
Walk Again
Childless Couples
Essays
The Benefits of
Human Cloning
All the Reasons to
Clone Human Beings
The Top Ten Myths
about Human Cloning
Human Cloning is the Cure for Infertility
Infertility is
a Disease
Books
People
Reports
Archives
Feedback
Donate
Links
Website Links
About Us
Contact Us
Site history
Site Map
Past Books of the Month
John Kunich's Books
Copyright
Illegal Beings: Human Clones
Re: My proof that cloning,Human and Animal, is wrong
EternalWater7K ( 11/24/2004, 22:12:52 )Frequently Asked Questions: Human Cloning September 15, 2003by Carrie Gordon EarllThe U.S. House of Representatives passed a comprehensive ban on human cloning on July 31, 2001. This legislation prohibits human cloning for both reproductive and research purposes. The U.S. Senate has yet to vote on this legislation, sponsored in by Sen. Sam Brownback. Meanwhile, the United Nation's is also considering bans on human cloning. Debate in all of these deliberations primarily centers on allowing human cloning for embryonic stem cell research. The following talking points examine the issues involved.Q. What is human cloning?A. Human cloning intentionally copies the genetic code of one person in order to create another with the same genetic material. It creates a new, individual human life based on the genetic blueprint of only one donor or parent rather than two. Current attempts to clone humans utilize the same technique previously used to clone animals, such as Dolly, the sheep. The method employed is called somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), which results in the creation of a new organism by way of fusing two cells, as opposed to fertilization. Successful SCNT in animals results in the creation of an individual member of the species that carries the full complement of genetic material, just like fertilization. Just as Dolly was 100 percent sheep, cloned human embryos will be 100 percent human. (Dolly was euthanized in February 2003 due to complications from premature aging.) Q. What happens in the cloning process known as somatic cell nuclear transfer?A. Somatic cell nuclear transfer removes the nucleus of an unfertilized egg, which contains 23 human chromosomes and replaces it with the nucleus of a somatic cell from the donor to be cloned, which contains 46 human chromosomes. The somatic cell, such as a skin or white blood cell, contains the donor’s DNA or genetic code. Then, instead of fertilization, a small electric pulse is applied to cause the cells to fuse and divide. If successful, the result is a newly cloned individual who begins the same process of human development that we all experienced. Q. What is the difference between “reproductive” and “therapeutic” cloning?A. All human cloning is reproductive, as it duplicates the genetic material of the donor and creates a new human life. The terms, “reproductive” and “therapeutic,” speak to what you intend to do with the cloned embryo: it could be implanted into a woman’s womb with the goal of a live birth (reproductive) or destroyed in a research laboratory for its stem cells (therapeutic). It is important to understand that cloning is the method used to create the embryo, regardless of why the embryo was created. Q. Why do some groups support “therapeutic” cloning and oppose a total cloning ban?A. It is speculated that embryonic stem cells may be a promising source of cures for a variety of human illnesses and ailments. Some scientists want to expand embryonic stem cell research by using a patient’s genetic material to clone a human embryo, which would be destroyed for its stem cells. These cells would be used to create personalized therapies that the patient’s body would not reject. To date, scientists attempting to use embryonic stem cells (cloned or otherwise) in such research have failed to develop a successful animal or human model confirming their theory. Other researchers argue that cloning for embryonic stem cell research is unnecessary. They point to the proven track record of alternative sources of stem cells — from bone marrow and umbilical cord blood — which currently provide medical therapies for patients. Q. What is the status of research using these alternative stem cell sources?A. A steady flow of published research indicates great promise in the area of so-called “adult” or non-embryonic stem cell sources. Even more, therapies using stem cells from sources such as bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, and the pancreas have already successfully treated patients with conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, and multiple sclerosis. These direct therapeutic benefits to patients demonstrate that advancements using adult stem cells surpass any animal research currently underway using embryonic stem cells.One example involves research into Parkinson’s disease. A recent study published in the U.S. reported success in addressing some Parkinson’s disease symptoms in rats using embryonic stem cells from mice. As promising as this may sound, it pales in comparison to Parkinson’s disease research using adult stem cells. For instance, in April 2002, a Los Angeles physician reported effectively treating a Parkinson’s patient using the patient’s own neuron stem cells.At this time, there is no clear scientific consensus to say that one source of stem cells is more promising than another. It is inaccurate to say, for instance, that embryonic stem cells are the only hope for this type of research. It is too early to tell what research will develop using these sources, which is a separate issue from the ethical question raised by destroying embryos for stem cell research.(For more information on developments in alternative stem cell sources, see Adult Stem Cells: It’s Not Pie-In-The-Sky.)Q. Why does your organization support a ban on “therapeutic” cloning?A. The mounting evidence of the apparent healing power of adult and non-embryonic stem cells makes research using embryonic stem cells unnecessary. Furthermore, the moral implications of creating human embryos for the purpose of destroying them for stem cells are staggering. It is never morally or ethically acceptable to kill one human in order to possibly save another. A cloned embryo is genetically an identical twin of the donor at a different age, and is therefore fully human. Human embryos merit the same protection as humans in other stages of development. Every human life starts out as an embryo and hopefully grows from there into other life stages: fetus, infant, toddler, and so on. Size and location do not determine humanity.Q. What about those who do not view human embryos at this early stage of development as persons who merit protection?A. This is not an issue of personhood; it’s a question of whether we will protect the weakest humans among us or allow young humans to be used as raw material for scientific experiments.Another consideration is the distinct possibility that scientists will fail in their attempts to use cloned embryonic stem cells in research. Currently, a general definition of “therapeutic” cloning, as proposed in public policy, involves destroying the cloned embryos within the first 14 days of existence. What will happen if scientists discover that the stem cells of an eight-week old fetus hold more promise than those of a two-week old embryo? This question is not entirely speculative: Recently, researchers at Advanced Cell Technology reported implanting cloned cow embryos into wombs, allowing the embryos to grow up to eight-weeks before destroying them for more developed stem cells. The researchers say this experiment was successful, thanks to the more mature fetal cells.(For more information on the likelihood that science will not be satisfied with cloned embryonic stem cells, refer to the testimony of Stuart Newman, Ph.D. presented to a U.S. Senate committee earlier this year. You can access this testimony at http://www.gene-watch.org/programs/cloning/senate-testimony-stuart.html)Q. How do you respond to claims by some advocates of “therapeutic” cloning who argue that cloned embryos are only “unfertilized eggs,” making it morally acceptable to destroy them for embryonic stem cells?A. This is a misnomer. Advocates of “therapeutic” cloning are attempting to correlate the organism cloned by SCNT with pre-fertilized ova. The female germ cell used in SCNT is not fertilized with sperm, but that’s the point of cloning — to bypass sexual reproduction and create embryos without fertilization. However, the result of SCNT is not “eggs” (pre-fertilization or otherwise) but embryos, containing all the genetic material necessary to be a developing human. By using the term, “unfertilized eggs,” proponents of cloning for embryonic stem cells also defeat their own argument because pre-fertilization ova are not, nor do they contain, stem cells; stem cells only exist in genetically complete humans. The fact that the end result of human cloning is an entity with stem cells validates the humanity of the embryo. If the cloned organisms were unfertilized eggs, there would be no stem cells to harvest for research.Q. Proponents of “therapeutic” cloning also say that the products of human cloning are not capable of becoming a human being. What is your response?A. If this were true, there would be no need to prohibit “reproductive” cloning. In reality, SCNT creates a human embryo that if implanted in a womb will develop into a fetus and be delivered as a newborn human.Q. Why not ban only “reproductive” cloning, since there seems to be widespread support for a prohibition on this form of cloning?A. A ban on “reproductive” cloning does not ban cloning; it only prohibits the implantation of a cloned human embryo into a woman’s womb (or an artificial uterus). If “therapeutic” cloning for embryonic stem cell research is allowed, a human embryo created for research will inevitably be implanted in a woman’s womb — demonstrating that there is no practical way to enforce a ban on cloning embryos for one purpose but not for the other. An embryo created for research is identical to one created for a live birth. Only a comprehensive and total ban on all human cloning - by the U.S. Congress and United Nations - can prevent the birth of live human clones.
This Message is being posted for educational purposes, as well as for comment and criticism, by the visitors to the HumanCloning.org Foundation website (www.HumanCloning.org ).
Disclaimer: Information provided on this web site is for educatonal purposes only. It is not a substitute for, nor can it replace advice from your own physician.
HumanCloning.org™ Established December 11, 2002.
Who's Afraid of Human Cloning?
Disease Prevention and Treatment