Download Human clonning: Status and Ethics

Welcome
Human clonning:
Status and Ethics
Hariom Yadav1, Shalini Jain1 and Mukesh Yadav2
1Animal Biochemistry Division,
National Dairy Research Institute,
Karnal-132001, Haryana, INDIA
2SOS in Chemistry, Jiwaji University,
Gwalior-474011, M.P., INDIA
Corresponding author: Email: [email protected]
Early Successes – Human
Cloning


2001 – First cloned human
embryos (only to six cell stage)
created by Advanced Cell
Technology (USA)
2004* – Claim of first human
cloned blastocyst created and a
cell line established (Korea) – later
proved to be fraudulent
*Hwang, W.S., et al. 2004. Evidence of a Pluripotent Human
Embryonic Stem Cell Line Derived from a Cloned
Blastocyst. Science 303: 1669-1674.
Principle of Human
cloning
Types of cloning

Recombinant DNA technology
DNA/ molecular/ gene cloning

Reproductive cloning
Adult DNA cloning

Therapeutic cloning
Embryo/ Biomedical cloning
Recombinant DNA Technology for Human
Reproductive cloning uses the cloning procedure to produce a
clonal embryo which is implanted in a woman's womb with intent
to create a fully formed living child--a clone.
Therapeutic cloning uses the cloning procedure to produce a
clonal embryo, but instead of being implanted in a womb and
brought to term it is used to generate stem cells.
Applications
What are the risks of cloning?
•
Reproductive cloning is expensive and highly inefficient
•
Cloned animals tend to have more compromised immune
function and higher rates of infection, tumor growth, and
other disorders
•
Genomes of cloned mice are compromised, 4% of genes
function abnormally
The abnormalities do not arise from mutations in the genes
but from changes in the normal activation or expression of
certain genes.
•
•
A process called "imprinting" chemically marks the DNA from
the mother and father so that only one copy of a gene (either
the maternal or paternal gene) is turned on. Defects in the
genetic imprint of DNA from a single donor cell may lead to
some of the developmental abnormalities of cloned embryos.
Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis and Selection (PDS)
Why Cloning Humans is
Ethically Unacceptable

Controlling Someone Else's Genetic
Makeup

Child can reject any aspect of its
upbringing, but it could never reject the
genes that were chosen for it

Such control by one human over another
is incompatible with the ethical notion of
human freedom, in the sense of that each
individual's genetic identity should be
inherently unpredictable and unplanned.
Instrumentality

Cloning raises a number of
concerns arising from its
consequences, of which
instrumentality and risk are of
especial importance.
Infertility - an Exception to
Instrumentality



An exception to this objection
would be the idea of producing a
child from an infertile couple by
cloning one of them.
But this raises other problems.
Instead of being the unique genetic
product of both parents, the child is
a copy of one of them.
It would not be the biological child
of both parents in the normal
sense.
Psychological Effects - Identity
and Relationship




Would the clone feel that he or she
was just a copy of someone else
who's already existed and not
really themselves?
Am I really someone else but put
into a different womb?
What will be my relationship to the
one I was cloned from?
No one can predict with any
degree of assurance what the
response would be.
Physical Risk

To repeat the same thing on humans
would be giving both the mother and the
potential foetus an unacceptably high
risk of damage.

How many abnormal babies would have
to be produced to get one right?

Roslin researchers have said that there
is no experiment that could be done to
prove the safety of human clonig without
casuing serious risk to humans in the
process.
Social Risk

Human cloning would bring grave
risks of abuses to human dignity
and exploitation by unscrupulous
people.
The current law on human
cloning

United Nations
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.
Australia

Australia had prohibited human
cloning, though as of December
2006, a bill legalising therapeutic
cloning and the creation of human
embryos for stem cell research
passed the House of
Representatives. Within certain
regulatory limits, therapeutic
cloning is now legal in Australia.
European Union

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.
United States

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.




1990 – Congress voted to override
the moratorium, vetoed by
President Bush
1993 – President Clinton lifted the
ban
1994 – the Human Embryo
Research Panel favored research,
but Clinton overrode the panel
1995 – Congress banned federal
funding
United Kingdom


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.
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.
Right to Life
The Declaration of Independence of the
United States guarantees “certain
unalienable Rights, that among those are
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”
Christian Arguments and
Response

We may not do evil so that good
will result (Romans 3:8)

Humans are created in the image
of God before birth

The human soul begins before
birth
When Does Ensoulment
Occur?

John the Baptist: "For he will be great in the
sight of the Lord, and he will drink no wine
or liquor; and he will be filled with the Holy
Spirit, while yet in his mother's womb."
(Luke 1:15)

Paul: But when He who had set me apart,
even from my mother's womb, and called
me through His grace… (Galatians 1:15)

Jeremiah: "Before I formed you in the womb
I knew you, And before you were born I
consecrated you; I have appointed you a
prophet to the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5)
Murder Defined by the Bible

People are not to be murdered
because they are created in the
image of God. (Genesis 9:6)

Murder must be intentional, with
premeditation (Joshua 20:3)

Killing of embryos is intentional,
and premeditated
Biblical Arguments:
Summary

The Bible indicates that God
recognizes human beings as
persons prior to development in
the womb

Bible defines murder as being
intentional and premeditated

ESC research destroys embryos
that are considered as ensouled
human beings
Morality of Human
Reproductive Cloning



“Be fruitful and multiply” –
assumed to be natural, but IVF and
cloning not mentioned in the Bible
Problems with cloned animals –
most suffer premature aging and
other genetic problems. Might be
avoidable with better techniques?
Biblical basis to condemn human
reproductive cloning?
Is adult human DNA cloning
moral?

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.

Yes
?
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.

Yes
?
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 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

No
?
There is no guarantee that the first
cloned humans will be normal. The
fetus 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.

No
?
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 a 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 is
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.]

No
?
Dolly was conceived using a 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.]

No
?
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.]

No
?
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.
There are religious
objections to cloning.
No
?

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.

No
?
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
fetus 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.
Fun of Human Cloning
Thanks