For decades the subject of human cloning has aroused feelings of fear and suspicion. Policymakers, social activists and religious leaders condemned the birth of Dolly the sheep, the world’s first successfully cloned mammal, in 1997. People feared that this event marked the first step towards creating a cloned human child. At the time, ethical concerns could be pushed aside as science had not progressed to the point where human cloning was remotely possible. However, the pace of scientific research has been astounding. Just ten years later, scientists successfully cloned 20 monkey embryos. Finally, in October 2012, researchers at the New York Stem Cell Foundation Laboratory produced human embryonic stem cells using a novel technique. The stem cells were grown from a mixture of donor eggs with skin from patients with type-one diabetes.
This
technique is expected to be useful in therapy for diseases such as diabetes,
Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. Embryonic stem cells grown from the body are special
for two reasons. First, they can develop into different types of tissue—brain,
heart, even bone. Second, since the tissues are derived from a person’s own
cells, the body’s immune system will not reject them. To date, scientists are still
improving cloned embryos and experimenting with stem cells for treatment.
Meanwhile, several ethical debates have arisen concerning cloning and embryonic
stem cells. For some opponents, the issue lies in the potential of using cloned
embryos for reproduction. Others claim that it is morally wrong to create
embryos and then destroy them to harvest stem cells for therapy. However,
neither of these arguments is sufficient to justify a ban on cloned human
embryos.
The
phobia surrounding human cloning is based on “genetic determinism,” the idea that
genetic makeup defines all aspects of a person’s identity (Hanna). Genetic determinism undermines
the interplay of genes and the environment that factors into a person’s
physical and behavioral traits. But this concern is also impractical, since
scientists have no intention of implanting cloned embryos into the womb. The embryos
produced in the lab have no potential of becoming human beings, due to defects
that would keep them from sustaining a pregnancy. The purpose of these embryos
is to grow tissues for treatment of disease; to develop a human clone fit for
reproduction would perhaps require further decades of research. It seems
unlikely that scientists could ever see cloning for non-medical purposes as a
worthy undertaking.
In
addition, the argument that producing stem cells entails destroying cloned
embryos is problematic. This view assumes that a cloned embryo is entitled to
the full rights of a person. Such a position is hard to maintain, considering
cloned embryos do not have the potential to develop into functional human beings.
Furthermore, compared with the alternatives, using cloned embryos as sources of
stem cells seems to be the most ethical option. Other ways to obtain stem cells
could be creating embryos from egg and sperm or “recycling” embryos left over
from in vitro fertilization. Such methods would invoke outrage. Taking stem
cells from an embryo derived from a patient’s own tissue seems much more humane
than exploiting embryos designed for human life.
Cloning
embryos for stem cells is an innovation with potential to turn the tide on
human disease in the world. Winding ethical arguments tend to detract from the
crux of the matter—that this technology is intended to rebuild damage from
illnesses, a mutually agreeable end.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/21755931/ns/health-health_care/#.UUx80leReYF
http://www.genome.gov/10004765
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dfc44dfc-efa3-11e0-941e-00144feab49a.html#axzz2OIKSBonX
No comments:
Post a Comment