Sean Patrick Ryan

ASC 128

Oral Write Up

January 25, 2001

 

 

Animal Cloning

 

 

Cloning is one of the most widely spread “hot topic” issues of the new millennium.    There are many different views on the matter, all dealing with the justifiability of cloning, and how far it should go.  Religious overtones are common, as well as ethical concerns.  It is an issue that is getting more and more attention, as the science of cloning is further perfected.  In order to appropriately discuss the idea of cloning, it is first necessary to understand what the word ‘clone’ means.

 

Animal cloning taken under context of this definition would be the creation of a new genetic replica of an original animal.   And basically, that is what it is all about.  Animal cloning is making a biological copy of another organism with the identical genetic makeup of the founding individual. Natural examples of cloning include identical twins and organisms such as bacteria, yeast, and some snail and shrimp species that reproduce by cloning.   Cloning is accomplished through a process called nuclear transfer. Researchers remove an unfertilized oocyte (egg cell) from an adult female and replace its nucleus with the nucleus of an adult mammary, fibroblast or other cell type. The egg is then implanted in another adult female for normal gestation and delivery.

 

The process explained there is much “easier said than done.”  To actually clone a living thing is a complicated procedure that is not only confusing, but also mesmerizing at the same time.  The following few pages will go over the procedure in detail.  It is mind-boggling however, that such a complex procedure which produces life, starts out with the simple requirement of a petri dish.

 

Once you are able to understand how the clones are created, you can then look deeper into the issue, and question why there would be any interest, or even a need, as to why we would want to clone animals.  The reasons supporting this endeavor are as many as the reasons that are against cloning. 

 

As far as the proponent reasons, the most widely believed reason has to deal with getting the ball rolling into other endeavors (i.e.:  human cloning).  It is believed that marijuana is the gateway drug into the regular use of more harmful drugs.  Such is true of animal cloning.  It is believed by the majority of society who is opposed to cloning, that animal cloning is simply the start of something more.  Some people are skeptical to agree with the benefits of animal cloning based upon the fact that they do not want it to lead to human cloning.  However, science has to start somewhere in order to learn more and perfect its practice. 

 

Some other benefits of animal testing include the hopes that cloning research will help contribute to disease treatment by allowing scientists to reprogram cells.  It is also believed that through cloning, organ transplantation may become a more successful process.  This would be a miraculous improvement in the healthcare industry.  Imagine how beneficial it could be if humans could learn how to harvest organs that are considered rare, ultimately making them impossible to obtain for those in desperate need.  This alone, is a strong supporter for the cloning cause.  It is a hard aspect to argue, since so many people have been affected by someone who, at one point needed a transplant, but was not able to get one, and risked their health based upon the scarcity of an organ. 

 

 

 

With all of these rewards of cloning, it may be seen as a “win-win” situation.  However, there are ethical concerns on animal cloning that instigate the justifiability of using animals in such research and scientific experiments.  Since there are two sides to every story, it is important to understand some of the moral concerns that are stirred up by animal cloning.

 

Is animal cloning unethical?  If an ethical case can be made in favor of Roslin's limited and indirect application of cloning, it is a different matter to apply cloning directly in routine animal production, to accelerate or side-step natural methods. For many, this would be unjustifiable, quite apart from the welfare concerns. What's the problem, you might ask, since we already intervene in nature in selective breeding, and use methods like artificial insemination and embryo transfer? If there was a clear benefit to the farmer to start off with prime stock, to produce the best beef or pork, this might seem to have its attractions. But the answer might lie in a wider question about where we have reached in our human use of animals.

 

One such answer could result from the question of whether or not cloning takes away an animal’s rights.  Even more basic, it challenges us to determine whether or not an animal has rights to begin with.  Since there is no possible way to communicate with animals, no one can be certain if they approve of being used in such “benefit-to-society” experiments.  It is vital to realize that there will be an animal that will “crack the code” and unravel all the mysteries to this new science.  But little is said of the animals prior to those, who were used to further the efforts of science, but were harmed, maimed or even killed. 

 

Once that is in mind, you can also investigate if cloning exploits animals that possess desirable traits for research.  If you are an animal rights’ activist, or an avid animal lover, this statement would act as your direct quote.  The issue of permission from the animal in question comes into play again.  Humans conduct their experiments, and just take the understanding of consent as common knowledge.  The animal is given no consideration.  Cloning is seen by some to be just another means of keeping animals unjustly enslaved and subjected to pain for selfish human purposes.

 

Religious leaders voice mixed reactions to the news of recent animal cloning activities, and how it relates to cloning humans.  Contrary to what many people think about religious views and cloning, the statement preceding holds true.  It is considered to be morally “right” for an animal to be used as the subject to experiments if its purpose is to benefit the health and well being of man kind.  This is not to be misconstrued however.  It is not acceptable for the scientific studies of cloning to proceed and culminate in the making of identical “new” human beings.  The consent of the church is given to the aspects of animal cloning that will directly benefit the human race.  One such example can be taken from the benefits discussed previously.  The ideas of harvesting organs to be used for life-saving transplants is a practice that is designed to promote and sustain current life, not to generically duplicate it for personal gain.

 

Future research in general may benefit from cloning.  Animals can be cloned, especially for research.  Genetically identical animals would reduce variability in experiments.  Consequently, scientists would then need fewer animals for an experiment.  Recently, scientists at the University of Hawaii have developed a new cloning technique that has proved to be more reliable than the method used to create Dolly.  Three generations of genetically identical cloned laboratory mice have been produced, indicating that cloning will be an indispensable tool to the research biologist in the future.

 

 

 

With the advancements of cloning in mind, people can discover the numerous possibilities of cloning in the future.  Although there are many debates over the ethics of cloning and its future, there are beneficial uses of cloning.  These uses include bringing animals back from extinction, such as the Wooly Mammoth; repopulating endangered species, such as the Bald Eagle; creating organs for transplants through donor pigs with human DNA; producing medicine through the milk of cloned animals, and other endless possibilities.

 

Animal cloning based on the information provided in this paper, is indeed a very controversial issue.  The thought of “creating a pre-existing” life form is an intriguing idea for not only the everyday person, but for scientists as well.  The idea is so intriguing that it stirs up many emotions, both for and against the science.  These emotions lead to ethical considerations, which challenge the very basic idea behind cloning.  The question that remains for the individual asks him/her to weigh the advantages that are possible with cloning, with the means that are necessary to further the science.

 

 

Bibliography/Books

1.         Clone, Gina Bari Kolata, Morrow, William & Co., 1997

2.         Cloning and the Constitution, Ira H. Carmen, The University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.

3.         Cloning of Frogs, Mice, and Other Animals, Robert G. McKinnell, University of Minnesota Press, 1979.

4.         Gene Cloning and Manipulation, Christopher Howe, Cambridge University Press, 1995.

5.         Understanding DNA and Gene Cloning, Karl Drlica, John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1992.

 

Sources/Websites

1.   Anunson, Mark, Dan Baker, and Josh Cracraft. "The Gene School - Cloning." Retrieved, from the World Wide Web: http://hyperion.advanced.org/19037/clone.html

2.   Beardsley, Tim. "A Clone in Sheep's Clothing." Scientific American. March 1997. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://www.sciam.com/explorations/030397clone/030397beards.html

  1. Bendixsen, Eileen, and John Halse. "SchoolWorld Endangered Species Project: Giant Panda." June 1999. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://www.schoolworld.asn.au/species/gpanda.html

 

I found this assignment to be very enlightening.  I was so interesting in learning about cloning, that it didn’t seem like schoolwork.  I enjoyed sharing what I learned with the class also.  I was not only able to brush up on my power point skills, but I was also able to work on my public speaking.

 

I was very happy with the comments I received.  I felt a warm reception from the entire class.  Not only were my written comments so flattering, but I was given so many personal “face-to-face” comments as well. 

 

I was also able to take note of areas that I can still improve upon.  One of them being the rate at which I presented the oral.  I have always had a tendency to rush through my material in fear of it becoming boring to the group I present it to.  However I did receive a couple comments on how my presentation would have been improved if I were to have slowed down. 

 

After all my research I realize that I do support cloning.  Especially when it comes to dealing with improving the life of humans.  This is directly related to quality life, and how it eliminates the wait for organs for life-saving surgeries.

 

 

 

 

The following are the results I received from the in-class survey I conducted:

13 people participated, and all votes were accounted for.

 

 

Question 1

In your own opinion, do you support the cloning of animals?

Yes:  7             No:  5              Unsure:  1

 

Question 2

What if the cloning was to further promote research of life-saving medicines for humans?

Yes:  10           No:  1              Unsure:  2

 

Question 3

Would you consider having an animal to human organ transplant if you so needed it?

Yes:  8             No:  5

 

To my surprise, the class was significantly divided up in their opinions with cloning of animals.  Although the majority did support it, there is a large portion that was against.