In 1972 Paul Berg developed the first technique to clone DNA. He inserted lamda phage DNA into the DNA of SV40, a Simian virus. Shortly after successfully managing to form a recombinant DNA, his experiments had to be halted for safety reasons. What were the implications of what Berg had achieved. Implanting a gene into the Simian virus could transform it into a virus capable of infecting humans, which could have catastrophic consequences. Berg’s experiments were deemed safe and he was allowed to continue. However, what is our guarantee that all other cloning experiments will be safe. Our knowledge of cloning has increased dramatically since Berg’s experiment, and this knowledge is readily available on the Internet for anyone to read up on. How are we to regulate who is able to clone, and what they are able to clone. Is it not possible for an individual to insert the wrong gene in the wrong virus creating a lethal strain in a makeshift laboratory in their backyard?
Cloning of more complex genes and entire genomes has become possible to the extent that in 1996 researchers were able to clone a sheep, dolly. As cloning in humans becomes more and more realistic, we are flooded by an entourage of ethical questions. Cloning in humans would bring about many positive aspects such as elimination of genetic diseases and allowing infertile couple to have children who are biologically related to them. But where do we set our limits? Imagine a situation where prospective parents choose specific genes, tall genes, smart genes, athletic genes etc, for their child from a catalogue. These genes are then cloned and inserted into the DNA of a blastocyst, which is then placed in the mother’s uterus, and nine months later, presto, you have a beautiful baby that will grow to be tall, smart and athletic. Who is to draw the line between cloning that is ethical and that which is not? If we are not careful cloning could bring about a new species of superhumans.
Soucres: Mol214 Lecture, Professor Shenk
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree on how the consequences of cloning can lead to this "new species of superhumans" you mentioned. By introducing cloning and using it to select genes for babies by the parents, humans are playing with evolution, a process governed by nature since the existence of life. Although the immediate benefits are obvious and appealing, the repercussions of human intervention can be detrimental in the long run.
It is one scenario to use cloning for treating the diseased and alleviating suffering, but another for using cloning as a tool to play God and essentially designing the next generations.
I think cloning can be ethical as long as such human intervention does not affect future generations and consequently not altering nature's evolution. Not only could cloning change future generations, one cannot guarantee that the future generations will appreciate and like the changes that were made. For instance, parents could believe selecting babies with traits viewed as advantageous as the right decision now. However, if society's perception changes in the future, their great grandchildren may be at the disadvantageous end.
Post a Comment