“It would be like sending a baby up into space in a rocket that has a 50-50 chance of blowing up” (Choi 1), says Robert Lanza on cloning. Cloning is one of the more risky ways to reproduce and has mostly negative results. Although not always successful, the most common method of cloning is called Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer. During this process, the genetic material from an egg of the first test subject is removed. The genetic material from the subject that wishes to be cloned will be injected into that egg and then implanted into the second organism. The cloning of organisms should not be seriously considered based on ethical reasons, biological conflicts, and ideas presented by Stevenson in The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
…show more content…
Cloning has been practiced over a span of multiple decades, but the technology comes with an alarming amount of risks. The author of “Cloning of a Human” states, “Even with practiced efforts, some 25 percent of cloned animals have overt problems… minor slip ups during reprogramming, culturing, or handling of the embryos can lead to developmental errors” (Choi 1). These studies show that even the smallest of errors could cause monumental problems for clones of animals. Those problems will continue to have short term and long term effects on the life of the animal. The author of “The Science of Human Cloning: How Far We’ve Come and How Far We’re Capable of Going” also remarks, “Cloning has an extremely high failure rate, with only one out of 100 cloning attempts ending in a viable animal” (Dovey 1). With the technology for cloning still being fully developed, the chances of producing a successful clone are extremely slim. Even if a suitable clone was produced, it would likely have poor health and biological issues. On July 5, 1996, Dolly the sheep was born as the first mammal to be successfully cloned. The author of “20 Years after Dolly the Sheep Led the Way-Where is Cloning Now” states, “Dolly’s birth was transformative because it proved that the nucleus of the adult cell had all the DNA necessary to …show more content…
This is believed due to the idea that if man could actually duplicate itself, than technology would be the most advanced it has ever been. While this view is popular among many, the facts do not support it. Studies show that society is still many years away from generating a successful clone. Right now, cloning a living, breathing human, is just not possible. Another argument that could be brought up is that cloning would allow couples who cannot have their own children or women in a homosexual relationship to have a child without the help of a donor. This is seen as useful to many because the pregnancy process would be far less difficult or complicated. What this argument fails to consider is that cloning is immensely dangerous for both the mother and the child. Reproductive cloning ends in miscarriages or stillbirth more often than not. In addition, another argument that is frequently brought up is the possibility of cloning a loved one or pet that has passed away. Cloning would make it feel and look like that individual never really left. This view seems like a good idea at first, but the reality is that you are never really going to get that person or pet back. The clone would not be equally the same as the original and would still cause grief.
In conclusion, cloning should not be risked because of ethical reasons, conflicts with natural biology, and
Cloning has been practiced over a span of multiple decades, but the technology comes with an alarming amount of risks. The author of “Cloning of a Human” states, “Even with practiced efforts, some 25 percent of cloned animals have overt problems… minor slip ups during reprogramming, culturing, or handling of the embryos can lead to developmental errors” (Choi 1). These studies show that even the smallest of errors could cause monumental problems for clones of animals. Those problems will continue to have short term and long term effects on the life of the animal. The author of “The Science of Human Cloning: How Far We’ve Come and How Far We’re Capable of Going” also remarks, “Cloning has an extremely high failure rate, with only one out of 100 cloning attempts ending in a viable animal” (Dovey 1). With the technology for cloning still being fully developed, the chances of producing a successful clone are extremely slim. Even if a suitable clone was produced, it would likely have poor health and biological issues. On July 5, 1996, Dolly the sheep was born as the first mammal to be successfully cloned. The author of “20 Years after Dolly the Sheep Led the Way-Where is Cloning Now” states, “Dolly’s birth was transformative because it proved that the nucleus of the adult cell had all the DNA necessary to …show more content…
This is believed due to the idea that if man could actually duplicate itself, than technology would be the most advanced it has ever been. While this view is popular among many, the facts do not support it. Studies show that society is still many years away from generating a successful clone. Right now, cloning a living, breathing human, is just not possible. Another argument that could be brought up is that cloning would allow couples who cannot have their own children or women in a homosexual relationship to have a child without the help of a donor. This is seen as useful to many because the pregnancy process would be far less difficult or complicated. What this argument fails to consider is that cloning is immensely dangerous for both the mother and the child. Reproductive cloning ends in miscarriages or stillbirth more often than not. In addition, another argument that is frequently brought up is the possibility of cloning a loved one or pet that has passed away. Cloning would make it feel and look like that individual never really left. This view seems like a good idea at first, but the reality is that you are never really going to get that person or pet back. The clone would not be equally the same as the original and would still cause grief.
In conclusion, cloning should not be risked because of ethical reasons, conflicts with natural biology, and