http://www.esnips.

com/user/neelabh21

COMPILED BY: NEELABH

HUMAN CLONING
is the creation of a genetically identical copy of an existing, or previously existing, human being or growing cloned tissue from that individual. The term is generally used to refer to artificial human cloning; human clones in the form of identical twins are commonplace, with their cloning occurring during the natural process of reproduction. Although genes are recognized as influencing behaviour and cognition, "genetically identical" does not mean altogether identical; almost no one would deny that identical twins, despite being natural human clones with identical DNA, are separate people, with separate experiences and not altogether overlapping personalities. However undramatic it may sound, the relationship between an "original" and a clone is rather like that between identical twins raised apart; they share all the same DNA, but little of the same environment. A lively scientific debate on this exact topic occurred in the journal Nature in 1997.[1] Ultimately, the question of how similar an original and a clone would be boils down to how much of personality is determined by genetics, an area still under active scientific investigation. (See nature versus nurture and cloning.) Techniques The most successful and common cloning technique in non-human mammals is the process which allowed Dolly the sheep to be cloned somatic cell nuclear transfer. It is also the technique used by ACT, the first company to successfully clone a human embryo (see research section below). An egg cell taken from a donor has its nucleus removed. Another cell with the genetic material to be cloned is fused with the original egg cell. In principle, this process could be applied to human beings. Another way of cloning is by parthenogenesis, where an unfertilized egg cell is induced to divide and grow as if it were fertilized. Even if practical, this technique could work only with females. The other technique known as "embryo splitting", commonly used from 70' to clone pedigreed bovines, has the potential to produce a number of genetically identical individuals, but not individuals genetically identical with a preexisting child or adult. It is often regarded as a cloning technique, but does not meet the definition used in this article. Purposes The possible purposes of human cloning can best be explained by referring to two kinds of cloning that would both normally use the somatic cell nuclear transfer technique. These are commonly referred to, respectively, as "reproductive cloning" and "therapeutic cloning. In reproductive cloning, the cloned embryo is implanted in a woman's uterus. This should develop into a normal baby, its only distinction being that it would be almost genetically identical to the DNA donor. Scientific knowledge of normal and abnormal development could also be found. Therapeutic cloning could be used to provide replacement organs. Or tissue for people who have had theirs damaged. The cloned embryo would contain DNA taken from the transplant patient. After nuclear transfer, the cell would divide to form an embryo and stem cells would be removed. Stem cells could develop into any tissue or organ. These cloned organs would be compatible with the person's immune system, so no immunosuppressant drugs would have to be taken after the operation. However, no therapies have been developed yet from this procedure. Limits of cloning First, none of these techniques provide exact clones they would be 99.7% identical to the DNA donor, because some important genes are present outside the nucleus, in mitochondria for example. Some of the DNA of the DNA donor would be missing for the clone to be an exact copy, and some of the resulting clone DNA would come from the donor egg-cell. How much change this would lead to in the clone is being investigated. Second, difficulties with cloning organisms from their somatic (non germline) cells sometimes leads to (what seems to be) premature aging in higher animals. If a new brain is generated in that body, there is no reason to believe that consciousness, apart from the ethics of the move, can ever be moved from one brain into a new brain even if it is genetically identical. Identical twins often show uncanny parallels in life choices, but rarely do they exhibit any characteristics that would cause one to believe that genetic similarities in brains lead to any kind of compatibility of

HUMAN CLONING

consciousness. Moreover if a brain is moved from an old body to a new one, even a clone, it would continue to lose size and capacity to regenerate cells, and continue to be subject to such degenerative disorders as Alzheimer's disease. Given all this, "immortality" or extended lifespan would be a difficult goal. Claims of success in human cloning beyond the embryo stage

COMPILED BY: NEELABH

In 1978 David Rorvik claimed in his book In His Image: The Cloning of a Man that he had personal knowledge of the creation of a human clone. A court case followed. He failed to produce corroborating evidence to back up his claims, and his claims are now regarded as a hoax. Severino Antinori made claims in November 2002 that a project to clone human beings has succeeded, with the first human clone due to be born [in January 2003.] His claims were received with scepticism from many observers. In December 2002, Clonaid, the medical arm of a religion called Ralism, who believe that aliens introduced human life on Earth, claimed to have successfully cloned a human being. They claim that aliens taught them how to perform cloning, even though the company has no record of having successfully cloned any previous animal. A spokesperson said an independent agency would prove that the baby, named Ev, is in fact an exact copy of her mother. Shortly thereafter, the testing was cancelled; with the spokesperson claiming the decision would ultimately be left up to Ev's parents. A mother in America plans to pay $500,000 to the Clonaid organization to clone her deceased daughter. In December 2004 Dr. Boisselier, claimed in letter to the UN that Clonaid has successfully cloned 13 children, however their identities cannot be revealed to the public in order to protect them. On October 9, 2003, newspaper Le journal de Montral published an article accusing Clonaid and the Raelian religion of maintaining an outright hoax in its claims regarding cloning a human baby. In 2004 a group of scientists led by Hwang Woo-Suk of Seoul National University in Korea claimed to have grown 30 cloned human embryos to the one-week stage, and then successfully harvested stem cells from them. The results of their experiment were published in the peer-reviewed journal Science. On May 30, 2005, Hwang's team announced the creation of 11 lines of human stem cells, using a different technique (Hwang et al. 2005). Later in 2005, a pattern of lies and fraud by Hwang Woo-Suk came to light. Possible advantages Many hopes have been put upon human cloning. Therapeutic cloning could provide needed organ transplants. A cure for cancer by a better understanding of the cell-differentiation process, as well as better treatments for heart attacks and improved cosmetic surgery, is being cited as being possible with the new technology. Dr. Richard Seed thinks that human cloning will help us understand, and eventually reverse, the human aging process. Antinori and Zavos hope to create a fertility treatment that allows parents who are both infertile to have children with at least some of their DNA in their offspring. Some families have high hopes for reproductive cloning. How to Build a Human, a documentary by BBC and The Discovery Channel, illustrated the prospects by showing an American family that wants to make a clone of their third child, who, although genetically healthy, had serious mental and physical deficiencies due to complications at birth and is expected to die soon. Other people hope to clone their already deceased children. Jonathan Colvin, in an interview on the CBC, expressed his desire to clone himself while repairing his genetic defect (cystic fibrosis), thereby creating a version of himself free of the fatal disease. The current law on human cloning In 1998, 2001, and 2003 the U.S. House of Representatives voted whether to ban all human cloning, both reproductive and therapeutic. Each time, divisions in the Senate over therapeutic cloning prevented either competing proposal (a ban on both forms or reproductive cloning only) from passing. President George W. Bush is opposed to human cloning in any form. Some American states ban both forms of cloning, while some others outlaw only reproductive cloning. Current regulations prohibit federal funding for research into human cloning, which effectively prevents such research from occurring in public institutions and private institution such as universities, which receive federal funding.

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

However, there are currently no laws in the United States, which ban cloning completely, and any such laws would raise difficult Constitutional questions similar to the issues raised by abortion. The British government introduced legislation in order to allow licensed therapeutic but not reproductive cloning in a debate in January 2001 after an amendment to the Human Embryology Act. However on November 15, 2001 opposition groups won a High Court legal challenge that effectively blocked cloning of embryos for therapeutic purposes. They discovered a loophole, which allows reproductive cloning to be performed also. Anti-abortion groups say that a new debate is necessary because of recent technologies having been developed that might circumvent the need for embryonic cloning. The government overruled this attempt at the beginning of March 2002 and currently therapeutic cloning is allowed under license of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. The first known licence was granted on August 11, 2004 to researchers at the University of Newcastle to allow them to investigate treatments for diabetes, Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease. Australia has prohibited human cloning, though a government committee is still reviewing issues related to therapeutic cloning and the creation of human embryos for stem cell research. Organizations devoted to cloning humans, such as the Raelians' Las Vegas-based Clonaid, as well as Antinori and Zavos, are very hard to control. Many think these groups would shift their operations to other countries should mainstream legislation impede their operations, as many less developed nations have no such ban on cloning, so human cloning experiments could (theoretically) be easily shifted to more viable areas. On December 12, 2001 the United Nations General Assembly began elaborating an international convention against the reproductive cloning of human beings. Lawrence Goldstein, professor of cellular and molecular medicine at the University of California at San Diego, claims that the United States, unable to pass a national law, forced Costa Rica to start this debate in the UN over the international cloning ban. In February 2005 a vaguely worded and non-binding United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning was finally adopted. The European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine prohibits human cloning in one of its additional protocols, but this protocol has been ratified only by Greece, Spain and Portugal. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union explicitly prohibits reproductive human cloning, though the Charter currently carries no legal standing. The proposed European Constitution would, if ratified, make the charter legally binding for the institutions of the European Union.

ETHICAL ASPECTS OF HUMAN CLONING

REPRODUCTIVE CLONING a.k.a. cell nuclear replacement

What is reproductive cloning (a.k.a.adult DNA Cloning)? Cloning is the production of one or more individual plants or animals that are genetically identical to another plant or animal. Adult DNA cloning involves removing the DNA from an embryo and replacing it with the DNA from an adult animal. Then, the embryo is allowed to develop into a new animal with the same DNA as the donor. It has been used to clone a sheep and other animals. It has not been tried on humans. How reproductive cloning is done: With the exception of the sperm and egg, every cell in the body contains all of the genetic material in its DNA to theoretically create an exact clone of the original body. But cells have been "biochemically programmed to perform limited functions." The other functions are turned off. Most scientists had believed that such differentiated cells could not be reprogrammed to be capable of behaving as a fertilized egg. In the case of the sheep "Dolly" (described below), a cell was taken from the mammary tissue of a mature 6 year old sheep while its DNA was in a dormant state. It was fused with a sheep ovum which had had its nucleus removed. The "fertilized" cell was then stimulated with an electric pulse. Out of 277 attempts at cell fusion, only 29 began to divide. These were all implanted in ewes. Thirteen became pregnant but only one lamb, Dolly, was born. Similar experiments to clone mice were initially unsuccessful. One speculation was that the DNA in sheep may not be used by the cells until after three or four cell divisions have completed. This would give the ovum "sufficient time to

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

reprogram the DNA from [its original] mammary cell functions to egg cell functions." 1 Both human and mouse use the DNA after the second cell division. So, some researchers had predicted that humans as well as mice might not be "clonable". However, mice were successfully cloned later. Thus, cloning of humans might also be possible. Scientists wondered whether "Dolly" would be fertile. Some cloned frogs are infertile. Also, cells seem to have an internal clock that causes them to die off after a normal life. Since Dolly was conceived from a 6-year-old cell, her life expectancy may be reduced from about 11 to only 5 years. This did not take place. Dolly, currently 4.5 years of age, continues to live a normal life. History of cloning using adult DNA: 1997: This was assumed to be impossible in all mammals, until it was achieved in 1996-JUL by a scientist from the UK, Dr. Ian Wilmut of the Roslin Institute in Roslin, Scotland. News of the experiment was communicated to the press on 1997-FEB-23. "Dolly," a seven-month old sheep, was displayed to the media; she is the first large cloned animal using DNA from another adult. Since Dolly's conception, the Institute has successfully cloned seven sheep of three breeds. The technique that they developed can probably be applied to other domesticated mammals, perhaps including humans. On 1997-MAR-4, apparently in reaction to "Dolly", President Clinton ordered a widespread ban on the federal funding of human cloning in the US. Research continues in other countries. 1998: On 1998-JUL-22, Dr. Ryuzo Yanagimachi of the University of Hawaii announced the cloning of mice. The team had produced 22 mice; seven of them are clones of clones from the cells of a single mouse. Japanese researchers from Kinki University in Nara, Japan cloned 8 calves from a single adult cow's DNA. They used techniques similar to that, which produced "Dolly." Four died shortly after birth due to what the researchers called "environmental factors." Their study was published in the issue of Science magazine published on 1998-DEC-9. On 1998-DEC-14, researchers at the Infertility Clinic at Kyeonghee University in Korea announced that they had successfully cloned a human. Scientists Kim Seung-bo and Lee Bo-yeon took an ovum from a woman, removed its DNA and inserted a somatic cell from the same 30-year-old woman. Their report states: "We were able to confirm division up to the fourth cell stage, the stage of embryo development when a test tube embryo is usually placed back in the uterus, where it then further develops into a foetus." The goal of their research was not to clone humans, but to clone specific, genetically identical organs for human transplant. They did not implant the morula into a human uterus because of ethical considerations. They destroyed it. The Korean Federation for the Environmental Movement (KFEM) immediately issued a statement criticizing the study. Members of the Life Safety Ethics Association held a protest demonstration in front of the university. Public opinion is having a chilling effect on cloning research in North America. Dr. Alan DeCherney of the University of California at Los Angeles said that if anyone tried to clone humans, they would "become the Dr. Kevorkian of reproduction." 2000: By the end of the year 2000, eight species of mammals have been cloned, including mice, cows, rhesus monkeys, sheep, goats, pigs, and rats. Between 3,000 and 5,000 cloned animals have been produced to date. Current speculation is that the cloning process seems to create random errors in the expression of individual genes. The egg must have its genes reprogrammed in minutes or hours during the cloning process. Ova normally take years to ripen naturally in the ovaries. It appears that the extremely fast rate of programming can produce random errors in the clone's DNA. Is adult human DNA cloning possible? One of many concerns with human cloning is that cloning of animals sometimes cause foetal overgrowth (aka largeoffspring syndrome.) The foetus grows unusually large and generally dies just before or after birth. They have underdeveloped lungs and reduced immunity to infection. Duke University researchers announced on 2001-AUG-15 that this particular problem would not exist in humans. The DNA of all primates, such as humans, monkeys and apes, have two copies of a gene that regulates foetal growth, whereas almost all other animals have only one. This spare copy should prevent foetal overgrowth in cloned human foetuses. Randy Jirtle, professor of radiation oncology at Duke University in Durham, NC, said: "It's going to be probably easier to clone us than it would be to clone these other animals because you don't have this problem -- not easy, but easier.'' Kevin Eggan, of MIT's Whitehead Institute works with cloned mice. He called the Duke study "interesting from the perspective of the evolution of imprinting

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

genes." But he cautioned that there is no proof that abnormally large babies are born as a result of this one genetic difference. His lab has a "four-times normal size" mouse clone, which has normal IGFR2R genes. He suggests that there are other factors that can contribute to abnormal development in clones. Plans to attempt human DNA cloning: Richard Seed, a physicist from Illinois, attempted to establish a human cloning clinic. 5 He claimed on 1998-JAN-7 that he was "90% complete" in hiring a team of experts to attempt the cloning of a human being, following the experiments on "Dolly." If successful, the resultant child would have identical DNA to one of its parents. Lord Robert Winston, a London based fertility expert who helped produce the first test-tube baby in 1978, said: "My first reaction is that here is somebody who is trying to make a quick buck off of self-advertising, because of course there is no way you could clone a human being safely at this point. I think the man is clearly unhinged and I don't think he is to be taken seriously." Marian Damewood, a member of the board of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine said: "I have very serious reservations about cloning human beings." The Society has declared a 5-year voluntary ban on cloning humans. Mr. Seed responded: "I can't really answer the critics who think it's a bad idea. They'll never be persuaded. As far as I'm concerned, they have rather small minds and a rather small view of the world and a rather small view of God." 6 Dr. Seed apparently did not succeed in his project. As of 2001-AUG, there are two publicized projects underway to clone humans. There may be others, which are secret: Dr. Panayiotis Zavos of the Andrology Institute in Lexington KY and Dr. Severino Antinori, a fertility doctor in Rome announced in early 2001 that they want to proceed with the cloning of humans. Professor Antoniori announced in early 2001-AUG that he intends to start cloning human embryos before the end of 2001. ".. a religious sect called the Raelians insists it will shortly undertake the same project. The Raelian sect believes, among other things, that human beings were created in laboratories by extra-terrestrials, and that the resurrection of Jesus was a cloning procedure! Donors and surrogate mothers have already lined up to pay $250,000 for the actual cloning experiment." "In an effort to stall these attempts, Congress is planning to pass a bill banning human cloning by any organization in the United States. However, it is unlikely that this will prevent these efforts from being made elsewhere." On 2001-AUG-14, Nobel Prize-winning scientist Sir Joseph Rotblat said that our understanding of cloning is "too meagre" at this time to succeed. He suggested that many of the scientists involved are motivated by money. He said: "Inevitably the problems will be overcome, and it's then that the real ethical problems begin." He suggested that ethics evolve: "Ethics are not absolute. Look at in-vitro fertilization. This was originally considered unethical but is now widely accepted..."I feel that this [cloning], too, will become acceptable." In early 2002-APR, Dr. Severino Antinori announced that a woman who joined his program for infertile couples is now eight weeks pregnant with a foetus derived by human reproductive cloning. Although such cloning is banned in Italy where he lives, he was allegedly able to go to another country to perform the experimental technique. If the woman's pregnancy produces a live newborn, it will probably suffer from one or more serious genetic disabilities. Surprisingly, some researchers do not seem to be deterred by the high levels of mortality, deformities and other genetic problems observed in animal cloning. At a National Academy of Sciences, three human cloning researchers spoke. "One Kentucky-based researcher, for example, offered only a vague assurance that cloning for human fertility purposes wouldn't be done if it couldn't be done right, and then angrily objected to being lectured by a scientist who wanted more of an answer. Another, a chemist who directs a Bahamas company and belongs to a [Raelian] religious sect that seeks cloning, made the extreme claim that 'it is a fundamental right to reproduce in any way you want.' " Is adult human DNA cloning moral? Some say yes: Some talents seem to be genetically influenced. Musical ability seems to run in families. Cloning using the DNA from the cell of an adult with the desired traits or talents might produce an infant with similar potential. A heterosexual couple in which the husband was completely sterile could use adult DNA cloning to produce a child. An ovum from the woman would be coupled with a cell from the man's body. Both would contribute to the child: the woman would provide the "factory" for creating cells; the man would provide the "genetic information." They might find this more satisfactory than using the sperm of another man. Two lesbians could elect to have a child by adult DNA cloning rather than by artificial insemination by a man's sperm. Each would then contribute part of her body to the fertilized ovum: one woman would donate the ovum, which contains some genetic material in its mitochondria; the other woman the nuclear genetic

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

material. Both would have parts of their bodies involved in the conception. They might find this more satisfactory than in-vitro fertilization using a man's sperm. Some say no: v There is no guarantee that the first cloned humans will be normal. The foetus might suffer from some disorder that is not detectable by ultrasound. They may be born disabled. Disorders may materialize later in life. Such problems have been seen in other cloned mammals. There is no reason to assume that they will not happen in humans. v Cells seem to have a defined life span built into them. "Dolly" was created from a cell that was about six years old; this is middle age for an ewe. There were some indications that Dolly's cells were also middle-aged. She was believed to be, in essence, about six years old when she was born. She was expected to live only for five years, which is shorter than the normal life span of 11 years. If this were also true of humans, then cloned people would have a reduced life expectancy. The cloning technique could take many years off their life. [These fears proved to be unfounded. "Dolly" has grown into a comfortable middle age with signs of normal aging for her age.] v Dolly was conceived using an ewe's egg and a cell from another ewe's body. It is noteworthy that no semen from a ram was involved. If the technique were perfected in humans, and came into general usage, then there would be no genetic need for men. All of the human males could be allowed to die off. [The author of this essay is a male and does not think kindly of such a future. However, some readers might not object to this eventuality.] v Large scale cloning could deplete genetic diversity. It is diversity that drives evolution and adaptation. It prevents an entire species from disappearing because of susceptibility to a disease. [It is doubtful that cloning would ever be used at a level to make this a significant threat.] v Some people have expressed concern about the effects that cloning would have on relationships. For example, a child born from an adult DNA cloning from his father would be, in effect, a delayed twin of one of his parents. That has never happened before and may lead to emotional difficulties. v There are Religious Objections To Cloning (http://www.religioustolerance.org/clo_reac.htm) Most pro-life supporters believe that a fertilized ovum is a full human person. When its nucleus is removed during cloning, that person is, in effect, murdered. A secondary concern is the whole business of collecting surplus embryos and simply storing them in a deep-freeze as a commodity. Some claim that cloned humans may be born without souls. They speculate that the soul enters the body when a sperm fertilizes an ovum. Since there is no sperm involved in cloning, perhaps the foetus would develop without a soul. There is no way to know whether a soul is present; it has no weight, it cannot be seen, touched, smelled, heard, or detected in any other way. In fact, many people believe that souls do not exist. Speculation on this topic can never be resolved. At the current stage in cloning research using adult DNA, the random appearance of genetic defects, noted above, appears to be an overwhelming problem. Such dangers would seem to put an indefinite halt on all ethical cloning of humans.

ALL THE REASONS TO CLONE HUMAN BEINGS

by Simon Smith
Medical breakthroughs - Human cloning technology is expected to result in several miraculous medical breakthroughs. We may be able to cure cancer if cloning leads to a better understanding of cell differentiation. Theories exist about how cloning may lead to a cure for heart attacks, a revolution in cosmetic surgery, organs for organ transplantation, and predictions abound about how cloning technology will save thousands of lives. Medical tragedies - Many people have suffered accidental medical tragedies during their lifetimes. Read about a girl who needs a kidney, a burn victim, a girl born with cosmetic deformities, a man who needs a liver, a woman who is infertile because of cancer, and a father who lost his only son. All these people favour cloning and want the science to proceed. To cure infertility - Infertile people are discriminated against. Men are made to feel like they are not "real men." Women are made to feel as if they are useless barren vessels. Worse, being infertile is often not considered a "real medical problem" and insurance companies and governments are not sympathetic. The current options for infertile couples are painful, expensive, and heart-breaking. Cloning has the potential to change the world for infertile couples almost overnight. To fund research - People whose lives have been destroyed or have not been able to reproduce in this lifetime due

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

to tragedy could arrange to have their DNA continued and fund research at the same time. For example: A boy graduates from high school at age 18. He goes to a pool party to celebrate. He confuses the deep end and shallow end and dives head first into the pool, breaking his neck and becoming a quadriplegic. At age 19 he has his first urinary tract infection because of an indwelling urinary catheter and continues to suffer from them the rest of his life. At age 20 he comes down with herpes zoster of the trigeminal nerve. He suffers chronic unbearable pain. At age 21 he inherits a 10 million dollar trust fund. He never marries or has children. At age 40 after hearing about Dolly being a clone, he changes his will and has his DNA stored for future human cloning. His future mother will be awarded one million dollars to have him and raise him. His DNA clone will inherit a trust fund. He leaves five million to spinal cord research. He dies feeling that although he was robbed of normal life, his twin/clone will lead a better life. Bad parents - Did your parents destroy your life? Were they alcoholic, child-beating molesters? Did you never have a chance? Interestingly, human cloning allows you the opportunity to participate in choosing the parents for your clone. A Child's right to be better than its parents - It's been suggested that parents have a duty to see that their children have better lives than they do. This may mean making our children live longer, helping them to be resistant to cancer, heart disease, any familial diseases, and all the other problems that can be cured using what we learn from human cloning technology. To take a step towards immortality - Human cloning essentially means taking a human being's DNA and reversing its age back to zero. Dr. Richard Seed, one of cloning's leading proponents, hopes that cloning will help us understand how to reverse DNA back to age 20 or whatever age we want to be. Cloning would be a step towards a fountain of youth. To make a future couple financially secure - With human cloning you could give a couple in the future both a child from your DNA and the financial assets from your lifetime to start out financially secure instead of struggling as most couples do now. Because you believe in freedom - Freedom sometimes means having tolerance for others and their beliefs. In America, some people believe gun control and some don't. Some people believe in one religion and others in another. In a free society we know that we must tolerate some views that we don't agree with so that we all may be free. For this reason human cloning should be allowed. To be a better parent - Human cloning can improve the parent-child relationship. Raising a clone would be like having a child with an instruction manual. You would have a head start on the needs and talents of your child. We are not saying that a clone would be a carbon copy with no individuality. Our talents and desires are genetic, developmental, and environmental. We would have a head start on understanding the genetic component of a cloned child. Endangered species could be saved - Through the research leading up to human cloning we will perfect the technology to clone animals, and thus we could forever preserve endangered species, including human beings. Animals and plants could be cloned for medical purposes - Through the research leading up to human cloning, we should discover how to clone animals and plants to produce life-saving medications. You want your clone to lead the life that was meant to be yours - The Human Cloning Foundation has been surprised by the number of people that write to say that they would like to have a clone so that it may lead the life that was meant to be theirs. Typically, these are people who have suffered some terrible physical or mental handicap and feel robbed of the opportunities they should have had in life. Some see this life as a sacrifice so that the life of their clone may be enriched. To have a better sense of identity - If we had some information about ourselves, perhaps we could sooner or better discovery who we are. A clone would have access to a tremendous amount of information about his or her parent that could greatly help in understanding one's psyche and physical attributes. All of this information could provide a better sense of identity. Because so many people want cloning - Please read the dozens of essays by people from all over the world in support of human cloning and published by the Human Cloning Foundation. (http://www.humancloning.org/essays.htm) Religious Freedom - At least two religions, the Raelian Religion and the Summum Religion, believe in cloning as one of their tenets. Because of the special relationship that twins have - Twins often have very special relationships. While many people go through their lives never having a special relationship with another person, there are stories of twins in

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

which they are so close they are perhaps psychically connected. More than one person has written the Human Cloning Foundation (including a twin that feels close to her identical twin) that since a clone is virtually the equivalent of an identical twin, they suspect a very special relationship would exist between a clone and its DNA parent. Some twins describe their twin relationship as more wonderful and meaningful any other relationship in their lives. Economics - Countries that fail to research human cloning will suffer economically. The industrial revolution and Internet revolutions enriched the United States of America. Biotechnology will lead the next economic revolution. Those countries that jump in first will reap the rewards. Those who fail to begin research right away will fall behind. As an example: Japan failed to jump on the Internet bandwagon and is now playing catch-up. Japan has banned human cloning and will probably suffer by falling behind during the biotech revolution. One day in the not too far distant future, Japan may realize its mistake. Gay couples - From one of our readers: "gay couples go through so much...not to mention all the controversy...when they decide that they are ready for a baby. People question their right to bring a child that technically isn't related to them into a lifestyle that falls below societies views of normal.....human cloning could allow two gay men to take 23 chromosomes from each male and put them into a single egg to truly have a baby of their own. also two gay women could use this technology to conceive a child of their own using their individual 23 chromosomes." (To our knowledge the type of reproduction described here has not yet been done, but someday it will probably be possible.) A cure for baldness - From one of our readers: "But how about the possibility of using cloning technology to get more hair on a balding scalp. For example cloning can be used to get more hair from a few sample hair follicles or grafts from the patient's head and then grow them....later transplant the grafts where it is needed. This will eliminate the need to do an incision in back of the scalp for donor hair and will literally give the patient MORE hair." Because the sick will demand it - Those resisting human cloning research will probably find themselves shouted down by the sick and the maimed who desperately need such research. Human cloning technology promises to cure many or all incurable diseases and the moral weight of the dying and infirm will undoubtedly sway the politicians more than the arguments of the healthy, who often remain ignorant of the potential of human cloning, because they have never been motivated by suffering to look desperately for a cure. Hope - On the Charlie Rose television show on February 14th, 2001, three anti-cloners debated against one reporter. The anti-cloners made the case for stem cell research while alleging that cloning itself would not result in any major scientific breakthroughs. It is likely that the anti-cloners are quite wrong. Learning the process of reprogramming, differentiation, and dedifferentiation is likely to result in just as many medical miracles as stem cell research. The two lines of research go hand in hand and should complement each other. The three anti-cloners came across as people who would destroy hope. The kept alleging that things were impossible. They reminded me of the same types of people who proclaimed that cloning was impossible years ago. Furthermore, they seemed happy and willing to take away the hope of infertile couples and others with severe diseases that human cloning technology might one day lessen their suffering or save their lives. The anti-cloners also seemed to feel that they had the ability to predict the timing and course of science advancement, which history has shown to be folly. Living on through a later-born twin - Some childless people feel that by being cloned by their later-born twin would help them or their DNA to live on in the same sense that people who have children live on.

HUMAN CLONING IS BENEFICIAL

BY TAE HOON H.
Imagine a world full of Mini-Hitlers, genetic replicates of Adolf Hitler, seeking world domination. Picture them starting a second Holocaust on a worldwide scale, killing millions upon millions of people as a final solution to establish a superior race. This scenario is far-fetched, but this is the kind of thing people think about when they hear the word cloning?? Cloning has always been considered science fiction. Millions of people have enjoyed stories about a sinister using cloning technology to conquer the world, probably because they hadnt expected cloning to become reality. The creation of Dolly, a cloned sheep, shocked people, including our federal government. The House of Representatives and the Senate immediately drafted bills to completely ban human cloning. President Clinton instituted a moratorium on federal funds for human cloning experiments. He also established the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) to address the science and ethics of human cloning. It immediately published an article entitled Cloning Human Beings: Report and Recommendations of the NBAC, which basically said human cloning is morally

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

unacceptable. Several states have also established restrictions on human cloning; one state has even banned human cloning. These government actions are irrational and should be immediately revoked. The federal government should regulate, not ban, human cloning. This is because significant benefits can result from cloning technology. The ethical implications are also only temporary. They are induced by misconception. Besides, fanatic biologists are going to pursue human cloning technology with or without government consent. It would be beneficial if I begin by briefly explaining the history of cloning and the processes involved. Dolly was given birth in February 1997. Ian Wilmut and his colleagues at Roslin Institute in Scotland created her. She was created using a technique called somatic-cell nuclear transfer. This is where a nucleus-omitted ovum is injected by a nucleus taken from a body cell. A jolt of electricity allows the reconstructed egg to divide. The egg is then inserted into a uterus to develop. This is the way the first human clone will mostly likely be made. Numerous of remarkable benefits can come from cloning technology. One of these is a treatment for infertility. Infertility is caused by genetic defects, injuries to the reproductive organs, congenital defects and exposure to toxic substances and radiation. Many assisted-reproduction technologies have been developed. This includes surrogate mothers for women without a functional uterus, intracytoplasmic sperm injection for males who cant produce viable sperm, and IVF for women with blocked or missing fallopian tubes. However, these treatments have proven to be highly inefficient and they cant help people whose reproductive organs have not developed or have been removed. Twelve million Americans are infertile at childbearing age. They will pursue years of painful and expensive treatments to have little chance of success. Human cloning can offer infertile people a higher chance of success. Most people are infertile because they cant produce viable gametes. Cloning technology wouldnt require viable sperm or egg, any body cell would do. This technology would be able to bypass defective gametes and allow infertile people to have their own biological children. Cloning technology may even prevent clinical depression, divorce, and suicide among infertile people. This is because infertility often leads to them. Cloning technology can help perfect gene therapy, the actual correction or replacement of defective gene sequences. Gene therapy is currently limited because of inefficient vectors, or viruses that convey new genes into cells. A copy of a defective gene is in every cell of the body. These viruses must infect every one of these cells and replace the defective genes with the normal genes. However, these vectors only infect a frustrating small amount of cells. This deems gene therapy inefficient. Human cloning can change this. Scientists can determine which cells received the desired gene alteration using fluorescent tags; the cells that were affected would glow. Cloning technology would allow scientists to take a cell that had its genome modified and use it to produce an offspring. The resulting child and its descendants would carry the corrected gene in every cell. Cloning technology may be able cure Tay-Sachs disease, cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, and Huntingtons disease. Another benefit of human cloning is that it will allow scientists to better understand cell differentiation. Research on the basic processes of cell differentiation can lead to dramatic new medical interventions. Cell differentiation is where a stem cell, found inside embryos during the first two weeks of development, specializes into cells that perform specific functions. These cells have the potential to develop into any type of cell in the human body. Biologists do not know which internal/external factors induces a stem cell to develop into a specialized cell, whether it be a muscle cell or a nerve cell. A better understanding of cell differentiation will allow biologists to transform stem cell into whichever cell that he/she desires. Burn and spinal cord injury victims might be provided with artificially produced replacement tissues. Damage done by degenerative disorders like diabetes, Parkinsons disease or Alzheimers disease might be reversed. Biologists might be able to create organs for transplant using merely a dead skin cell. Ethical implications involved in human cloning is only temporary. This can be shown in the development of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF). During the 1960s & 1970s, opponents of IVF argued that it was unsafe, children would be deformed, American families would be destroyed or changed, and it was against Gods will. These are the same arguments being used against human cloning. Eighty-five percent of Americans thought IVF should be outlawed during the 1970s. Public opinion changed when they saw Louie Brown, the first child born using IVF. People noticed that he was just a child. Their fears of IVF subsided. It became a routine medical procedure within a few years. This will most likely be the case with human cloning. Many of the ethical arguments against human cloning are induced by misconception. The Mini-Hitler scenario Ive listed above is far-fetched, but that is exactly the kind of thing people think about when they hear the word cloning. People think that cloning technology can produce an exact copy of an existing adult human being. This isnt true. Cloning technology can only produce a cloned embryo. The embryo must develop in a uterus. The developed child must experience childhood and adolescence. People think that a clone will be both behaviourally and physically identical to its donor. This also isnt true. The clone will probably be identical physically, but not behaviourally. Genes contribute to the array of our abilities and limits, but our behaviour and mentality is constantly shaped by

10

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

environmental factors. Even identical twins show differences in behavioural and mental characteristics. Someone trying to clone a future Adolf Hitler might instead produce a modestly talented painter. Ethicists are afraid that a subordinate class of humans will be created as tissue and organ donors. They are afraid that the rights of these clones will be violated. These fears are outrageous and ridiculous. These ethicists have been the victims of misconception. Cloned humans could no more be harvested for their organs than people can be today. Another ethical dilemma is the psychological well being of the cloned child. People wonder what kind of a relationship a cloned child will have with his/her parent that is physically identical. They are curious of how the child will deal with the pressure of constantly being compared to an esteemed or beloved person who has already lived. We need to remember that the single most important factor affecting the quality of a childs life is the love and devotion he/she receives from parents, not the methods or circumstances of the persons birth. Since children produced by cloning will probably be extremely wanted children, there is no reason to think that with good counselling support for their parents they will not experience the love and care they deserve. What will life be like for the first generation of cloned children? Being at the centre of scientific and popular attention will not be easy for them. They and their parents will also have to negotiate the worrisome problems created by genetic identity and unavoidable expectations. However, there may also be some novel satisfactions. As cross-generational twins, a cloned child and his/her parent may experience some of the unique intimacy now shared by sibling twins. Animal research will eventually indicate that human cloning can be done at no greater physical risk to the child than IVF posed when it was first introduced. It would be better if such research would be done openly in the U.S., Canada, Europe or Japan. Established government agencies could provide careful oversight of the implications of the studies for human subjects. The most probable way that it will happen will be, if not yet already, in a clandestine fashion. A couple desperate for a child will put their hopes in the hands of a researcher seeking fame. Advanced Cell Technologies (ACT) has already created the first human embryo. They took DNA from a mans leg and injected it into a cows egg with its nucleus removed. There has also been reports of similar work in South Korea. Someone is going to clone a human with or without government assistance. It would be beneficial if our federal government regulated such experiments, rather than outlaw them. Outlawing something will not necessarily stop it from happening. Regulating human cloning will allow our federal government to closely overlook experiments pertaining to human cloning. ? The federal government should regulate human cloning. Banning it would deprive many beneficial treatments from people who need it. I have mentioned only a few of cloning technologys significant benefits. Cloning technology can lead to a better understanding of cell differentiation. This would allow biologist to produce tissues and organs for transplant. Cloning can help carriers of genetic defects to have healthy children. It can even help to completely eradicate genetic mutations and defects. Treatment of infertility is one of its most promising benefits. Cloning technology can help infertile people to have their own children, one of lifes most powerful biological drives. Besides, ethical implications involved in human cloning are only temporary. They are induced by misconception. Education will change peoples negative attitude towards human cloning. If we give human cloning a chance, it will most likely become a part of our daily lives.

THE BENEFITS OF HUMAN CLONING

BY SIMON SMITH
There are many ways in which in which human cloning is expected to benefit mankind. Below is a list that is far from complete. Rejuvenation. Dr. Richard Seed, one of the leading proponents of human cloning technology, suggests that it may someday be possible to reverse the aging process because of what we learn from cloning. Human cloning technology could be used to reverse heart attacks. Scientists believe that they may be able to treat heart attack victims by cloning their healthy heart cells and injecting them into the areas of the heart that have been damaged. Heart disease is the number one killer in the United States and several other industrialized countries. There has been a breakthrough with human stem cells. Embryonic stem cells can be grown to produce organs or tissues to repair or replace damaged ones. Skin for burn victims, brain cells for the brain damaged, spinal cord cells for quadriplegics and paraplegics, hearts, lungs, livers, and kidneys could be produced. By combining this technology

11

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

with human cloning technology it may be possible to produce needed tissue for suffering people that will be free of rejection by their immune systems. Conditions such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, diabetes, heart failure, degenerative joint disease, and other problems may be made curable if human cloning and its technology are not banned. Infertility. With cloning, infertile couples could have children. Despite getting a fair amount of publicity in the news current treatments for infertility, in terms of percentages, are not very successful. One estimate is that current infertility treatments are less than 10 percent successful. Couples go through physically and emotionally painful procedures for a small chance of having children. Many couples run out of time and money without successfully having children. Human cloning could make it possible for many more infertile couples to have children than ever before possible. Plastic, reconstructive, and cosmetic surgery. Because of human cloning and its technology the days of silicone breast implants and other cosmetic procedures that may cause immune disease should soon be over. With the new technology, instead of using materials foreign to the body for such procedures, doctors will be able to manufacture bone, fat, connective tissue, or cartilage that matches the patients tissues exactly. Anyone will able to have their appearance altered to their satisfaction without the leaking of silicone gel into their bodies or the other problems that occur with present day plastic surgery. Victims of terrible accidents that deform the face should now be able to have their features repaired with new, safer, technology. Limbs for amputees may be able to be regenerated. Breast implants. Most people are aware of the breast implant fiasco in which hundreds of thousands of women received silicone breast implants for cosmetic reasons. Many came to believe that the implants were making them ill with diseases of their immune systems. With human cloning and its technology breast augmentation and other forms of cosmetic surgery could be done with implants that would not be any different from the person's normal tissues. Defective genes. The average person carries 8 defective genes inside them. These defective genes allow people to become sick when they would otherwise remain healthy. With human cloning and its technology it may be possible to ensure that we no longer suffer because of our defective genes. Down's syndrome. Those women at high risk for Down's syndrome can avoid that risk by cloning. Tay-Sachs disease. This is an autosomal recessive genetic disorder could be prevented by using cloning to ensure that a child does not express the gene for the disorder Liver Failure. We may be able to clone livers for liver transplants Kidney Failure. We may be able to clone kidneys for kidney transplants Leukaemia. We should be able to clone the bone marrow for children and adults suffering from leukaemia. This is expected to be one of the first benefits to come from cloning technology. Cancer. We may learn how to switch cells on and off through cloning and thus be able to cure cancer. Scientists still do not know exactly how cells differentiate into specific kinds of tissue, nor to they understand why cancerous cells lose their differentiation. Cloning, at long last, may be the key to understanding differentiation and cancer. Cystic Fibrosis. We may be able to produce effective genetic therapy against cystic fibrosis. Ian Wilmut and colleagues are already working on this problem. Spinal Cord Injury. We may learn to grow nerves or the spinal cord back again when they are injured. Quadriplegics might be able to get out of their wheelchairs and walk again. Christopher Reeves, the man who played Superman, might be able to walk again. Testing For Genetic Disease. Cloning technology can be used to test for and perhaps cure genetic diseases. The above list only scratches the surface of what human cloning technology can do for mankind. The suffering that can be relieved is staggering. This new technology heralds a new era of unparalleled advancement in medicine if people will release their fears and let the benefits begin. Why should another child die from leukaemia when if the technology is allowed we should be able to cure it in a few years time? From e-mail to the Human Cloning Foundation it is clear that many people would support human cloning in the following situations:

12

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

1) A couple has one child then they become infertile and cannot have more children. Cloning would enable such a couple to have a second child, perhaps a younger twin of the child they already have. 2) A child is lost soon after birth to a tragic accident. Many parents have written the HCF after losing a baby in a fire, car accident, or other unavoidable disaster. These grief stricken parents often say that they would like to have their perfect baby back. Human cloning would allow such parents to have a twin of their lost baby, but it would be like other twins, a unique individual and not a carbon copy of the child that was lost under heartbreaking circumstances. 3) A woman who through some medical emergency ended up having a hysterectomy before being married or having children. Such women have been stripped of their ability to have children. These women need a surrogate mother to have a child of their own DNA, which can be done either by human cloning or by in vitro fertilization. 4) A boy graduates from high school at age 18. He goes to a pool party to celebrate. He confuses the deep end and shallow end and dives head first into the pool, breaking his neck and becoming a quadriplegic. At age 19 he has his first urinary tract infection because of an indwelling urinary catheter and continues to suffer from them the rest of his life. At age 20 he comes down with herpes zoster of the trigeminal nerve. He suffers chronic unbearable pain. At age 21 he inherits a 10 million dollar trust fund. He never marries or has children. At age 40 after hearing about Dolly being a clone, he changes his will and has his DNA stored for future human cloning. His future mother will be awarded one million dollars to have him and raise him. His DNA clone will inherit a trust fund. He leaves five million to spinal cord research. He dies feeling that although he was robbed of normal life, his twin/clone will lead a better life. 5) Two parents have a baby boy. Unfortunately the baby has muscular dystrophy. They have another child and it's another boy with muscular dystrophy. They decide not to have any more children. Each boy has over 20 operations as doctors attempt to keep them healthy and mobile. Both boys die as teenagers. The childless parents donate their estate to curing muscular dystrophy and to having their boys cloned when medical science advances enough so that their DNA can live again, but free of muscular dystrophy.

THE TOP TEN MYTHS ABOUT HUMAN CLONING

By Gregory E. Pence
Professor, Dept. of Philosophy & School of Medicine University of Alabama at Birmingham

1. Cloning Xeroxes a person. Cloning merely re-creates the genes of the ancestor, not what he has learned or experienced. Technically, it re-creates the genotype, not the phenotype. (Even at that, only 99% of those genes get re-created because 1% of such a child's genes would come from those in the egg - mitochondrial DNA). Conventional wisdom holds that about half of who we are comes from our genes, the other half, from the environment. Cloning cannot re-create what in us came from the environment; it also cannot re-create memories. The false belief that cloning recreates a person stems in part from the common, current false belief in simplistic, genetic reductionism, i.e., that a person really is just determined by his genes. No reputable geneticist or psychologist believes this. 2. Human cloning is replication or making children into commodities. Opponents of cloning often use these words to beg the question; to assume that children created by parents by a new method would not be loved. Similar things were said about "test tube" babies, who turned out to be some of the most-wanted, most-loved babies ever-created in human history. Indeed, the opposite is true: evolution has created us with sex drives such that, if we do not carefully use contraception, children occur. Because children get created this way without being wanted, sexual reproduction is more likely to create unwanted, and hence possibly unloved, children than human cloning. Lawyers opposing cloning have a special reason for using these pejorative words. If cloning is just a new form of human reproduction, then it is Constitutionally protected from interference by the state. Several Supreme Court decisions declare that all forms of human reproduction, including the right not to reproduce, cannot be abridged by government.

13

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

Use of words such as "replication" and "commodification" also assumes artificial wombs or commercial motives; about these fallacies, see below. 3. Human cloning reduces biological diversity. Population genetics says otherwise. Six billion people now exist, soon to be eight billion, and most of them reproduce. Cloning requires in vitro fertilization, which is expensive and inefficient, with only a 20% success rate. Since 1978, at most a half million babies have been produced this way, or at most, one out of 12,000 babies. Over decades and with such great numbers, populations follow the Law of Regression to the Mean. This means that, even if someone tried to create a superior race by cloning, it would fail, because cloned people would have children with non-cloned people, and resulting genetic hybrids would soon be normalized. Cloning is simply a tool. It could be used with the motive of creating uniformity (but would fail, because of above), or it be used for the opposite reason, to try to increase diversity (which would also fail, for the same reason). 4. People created by cloning would be less en-souled than normal humans, or would be sub-human. A human who had the same number of chromosomes as a child created sexually, who was gestated by a woman, and who talked, felt, and spoke as any other human, would ethically be human and a person. It is by now a principle of ethics that the origins of a person, be it from mixed-race parents, unmarried parents, in vitro fertilization, or a gay male couple hiring a surrogate mother, do not affect the personhood of the child born. The same would be true of a child created by cloning (who, of course, has to be gestated for nine months by a woman). Every deviation from normal reproduction has always been faced with this fear. Children greeted by sperm donation, in vitro fertilization, and surrogate motherhood were predicted to be less-than-human, but were not. A variation predicts that while, in fact, they will not be less-than-human, people will treat them this way and hence, such children will harmed. This objection reifies prejudice and makes it an ethical justification, which it is wrong to do. The correct response to prejudice is to expose it for what it is, combat it with reason and with evidence, not validate it as an ethical reason. 5. People created by cloning could be used for spare organs for normal humans. Nothing could be done to a person created by cloning that right now could not be done to your brother or to a person's twin. The U. S. Constitution strongly implies that once a human foetus is outside the womb and alive, he has rights. Decisions backing this up give him rights to inherit property, rights not to suffer discrimination because of disability, and rights to U. S. citizenship. A variation of this myth assumes that a dictator could make cloned humans into special SWAT teams or suicidal bombers. But nothing about originating people this way gives anyone any special power over the resulting humans, who would have free will. Besides, if a dictator wants to create such assassins, he need not wait for cloning but can take orphans and try to indoctrinate them now in isolated camps. 6. All people created from the same genotype would be raised in batches and share secret empathy or communication.

Pure science fiction. If I wanted to recreate the genotype of my funny Uncle Harry, why would my wife want to gestate 5 or 6 other babies at the same time? Indeed, we now know that the womb cannot support more than 2-3 foetuses without creating a likely disability in one. Guidelines now call for no more than two embryos to be introduced by in vitro fertilization, which of course is required to use cloning. Such assumptions about cloned humans being created in batches are linked to nightmarish science fiction scenarios where humane society has been destroyed and where industrialized machines have taken over human reproduction. But this is just someone's nightmare, not facts upon which to base state and federal laws. 7. Scientists who work on human cloning are evil or motivated by bad motives. The stuff of Hollywood and scary writers. Scientists are just people. Most of them have kids of their own and care a lot for kids. No one wants to bring a handicapped child into the world. Movies and novels never portray life

14

scientists with sympathy. This anti-science prejudice started with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and continues with nefarious scientists working for the Government on The X Files. People who call themselves scientists and grandstand for television, such as Richard Seed and Brigette Boisselier of the Raelians, are not real scientists but people who use the aura of science to gain attention. Real scientists don't spend all their time flying around the world to be on TV but stay at home in their clinics doing their work. 8. Babies created by cloning could be grown in artificial wombs. Nope, sorry. Medicine has been trying for fifty years to create an artificial womb, but has never come close to succeeding. Indeed, controversial experiments in 1973 on live-born foetuses in studying artificial wombs effectively shut down such research. Finally, if anything like such wombs existed, we could save premature babies who haven't developed lung function, but unfortunately, we still can't - premature babies who can't breathe at all die. Thus, any human baby still needs a human woman to gestate him for at least six months, and to be healthy, nine months. This puts the lie to many science fiction stories and to many predictions about cloning and industrial reproduction. 9. Only selfish people want to create a child by cloning. First, this assumes that ordinary people don't create children for selfish reasons, such as a desire to have someone take care of them in old age, a desire to see part of themselves continue after death, and/or the desire to leave their estate to someone. Many people are hypocritical or deceived about why they came to have children. Very few people just decide that they want to bring more joy into the world, and hence create a child to raise and support for life as an end-in-himself. Let's be honest here. Second, a couple using cloning need not create a copy of one of them. As said above, Uncle Harry could be a prime candidate. On the other hand, if a couple chooses a famous person, critics accuse them of creating designer babies. Either way, they can't win: if they re-create one of their genotypes, they are narcissistic; if they choose someone else's genes, they're guilty of creating designer babies. In general, why should a couple using cloning have a higher justification required of them than a couple using sexual reproduction? If we ask: what counts as a good reason for creating a child, then why should cloning have any special test that is not required for sexual reproduction? Indeed, and more generally, what right does government have to require, or judge, any couple's reasons for having a child, even if they are seen by others to be selfish? Couples desiring to use cloning should not bear an undue burden of justification. 10. Human cloning is inherently evil: it can only be used for bad purposes by bad people. No, it's just a tool, just another way to create a family. A long legacy in science fiction novels and movies make the word "cloning" so fraught with bad connotations that it can hardly be used in any discussion that purports to be impartial. It is like discussing equal rights for women by starting to discuss whether "the chicks" would fare better with equal rights. To most people, "cloning" implies selfish parents, crazy scientists, and out-ofcontrol technology, so a fair discussion using this word isn't possible. Perhaps the phrase, "somatic cell nuclear transplantation" is better, even if it's a scientific mouthful. So if we shouldn't call a person created by cloning, a "clone," what should we call him? Answer: a person.

COMPILED BY: NEELABH

15