Cloning Wars and Stem Cell Research

The 1996 comedy film “Multiplicity” stars Michael Keaton as an overworked, stressed out family man who agrees to clone himself. After cloning himself three times he learns that a copy of a copy is not as sharp as the original. With each copy, the clones become increasingly mentally inferior causing Keaton’s character more problems than good. An unscientific and comedic twist on a new age scientific breakthrough, “Multiplicity” is a metaphor of the positives and negatives of cloning. Further global understanding of the medical terms and benefits, health related issues, ethical questions and the cloning processes is necessary to asses the validity of cloning practices. Gaining a rudimentary knowledge of terms used in cloning is needed to successfully judge cloning practices. Depending on the desired outcome, a scientist will conduct a reproductive or a therapeutic cloning experiment. Reproductive cloning is used to make an genetically exact copy of its animal parent. Therapeutic cloning uses body cells with desired DNA to grow new organs or directly inject into a patient and is used for medicinal purposes only. Stem cell research is a subfield of therapeutic cloning and is widely favored to eventually cure Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease.

Cloning provides possibility for great existential medicinal progress. In stem cell research, stem cells are able to be cultured into most any desired body cell, organ or tissue. The most eclectic stem cells are acquired from early or late stage human embryos as the cells have not yet grown into particular organs. The cells are easily able to be coached into most any desired result. Is the loss of an embryo an acceptable quid pro quo for sustaining current human life? This is the challenge of therapeutic cloning efforts to advance medicine. Reproductive cloning, however, does not afford any medicinal benefits. Consequently, the clones are often born unfit to survive without devastating ailments.

Biology textbook author, Neil A. Campbell explains that until the cloning process is perfected, related health problems in reproductive clones are inevitable. In 1997, in the world’s first monumental reproductive cloning experiment, Scottish researchers announced the birth of Dolly, a lamb cloned from an adult sheep. As a result of the errors in DNA-replication, Dolly was born with genetic defects. Along with arthritis, Dolly developed a lung disease more commonly found in much older sheep and was euthanized. In 2004, South Korean researchers reported to have successfully cloned a human cell to one week old. This blastocyst cell was terminated in response to unprecedented ethical uproar. The inevitability of chromosomal abnormalities is too great to ethically allow a human to be cloned using our current cloning methods. Ethical laws to govern cloning practices are currently in place. Embryonic stem cells cannot be gained without loss of the embryo’s vitality. Ethical laws prohibit gaining embryos without donor consent, as with fertility patients, or allowing blatantly excessive embryos to be donated by one donor couple. Most viable embryos are gained by fertility patients who have abandoned their efforts. Laws also demand segregation between a research companies requesting stem cells and the fertility clinics that acquire them. Religious beliefs often prevent many from adopting pro-cloning beliefs. It is helpful to study the gains against the losses in deciding if cloning experiments should be allowed to continue.

Examining the processes of cloning is a required step to making an educated decision on the validity of its practice. All cloning experiments involve a somatic body cell (any non- reproductive body cell) and a reproductive cell (gamete) that has had its nucleus removed.. A somatic cell with the desired DNA is implanted into the enucleated gamete cell and cultured in a lab or in a surrogate animal parent. During the initial DNA implantation and the ongoing division of cells and its DNA, many complications and mutations often occur. These usually translate into an inferior clone with chromosomal abnormalities, severe health problems and a short lived, painful existence. National not-for-profit organizations such as P.E.T.A (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and the Humane Society of the United States have disagreed with reproductive cloning efforts having said that animals are not ours to perform experiments on.

The global decision whether or not to support the cessation or continuation of cloning practices is directly related to future advances in medicine. The decision will effect personal well being and durability of life. Understanding the implications of the different types of cloning experimentations is required to make an sound judgment in this case. Each person needs to decide what role she will play in the future of cloning. Global support in the advancement of stem cell research and withholding support for reproductive cloning is predictable. Can we achieve one without the other? Or is the case all or nothing?