Cloning Animals

John Wiens, an evolutionary biologist at Stony Brook University in New York says, “There is a terrible urgency to saving threatened species and habitats.” He continues in saying “As far as I can see, there is little urgency for bringing back extinct ones. Why invest millions of dollars in bring a handful of species back from the dead, when there are millions still waiting to be discovered, described, and protected?” This is a problem for many scientists and Paul R. Ehrlich states in his article, The Case of De- Extinction:It is a Fascinating but Dumb Idea, says that “It is much more sensible to put all the limited resources for science and conservation into preventing extinctions, by tackling the causes of demise….” This is proving that de-extinction is a bad idea because of the facts that it is more important to put money and research into conservation efforts. By focusing on de-extinction. We are tearing away our focus on these efforts and putting it into something that may or may not work. Something never tested that could possibly hurt not help the environment. Paul R Ehrlich also states that “De-extinction seems far- fetched, financially problematic, and extremely unlikely to succeed.” With de- extinction hindering conservation efforts and being unlikely to succeed it is clear that we should not even attempt de-extinction. However hindering conservation efforts is only one way that de-extinction is a bad

back extinct animals is very controversial but we need to bring them back to restore ecosystems

There are some people that have been very anxious with cloning because they believe it is something new, but in reality it was introduced in the 1950s. It started with cloning food and has moved onto cloning animals. It has been successful on many different cases and a famous one is the cloning of a sheep named Dolly. Dolly lived to be six and a half years old and she had six kids. People believe that cloning should be illegal but we believe that scientists should clone endangered or extinct species in order to preserve them, here’s why.

Everything in life happens for a reason, and this includes the extinction of species with and without human involvement. To reverse the process of de-extinction as some people put it “amounts to playing God” (96). Although the science behind bringing a species back is admittedly amazing, there are other ways the time and money could be spent. Spending money on animals that are on the brink of extinction, and developing techniques for successfully growing their population, are much more viable options. Frankly, de-extinction, although very remarkable, is not something that should be heavily pursued. Apart from observing a woolly mammoth lounge around behind a thick pane of glass, there is very little reason to use de-extinction to revive one. Our efforts should be turned to the millions of species that currently inhabit the earth, known and

In nature, there are cases where species go extinct due to humans or for uncontrollable reasons. Recent scientific development has allowed a new idea called de-extinction the act of cloning extinct species using DNA samples from the past and biotechnology. However, extinct species should not be brought back to existence as the idea of de-extinction diverts attention and funding from protecting many endangered species that can still thrive in their environment. Another issue that arises with de-extinction is that resurrected species could become pests in their new environment.

Over the past decades, scientists have developed numerous approach to de-extinct species through back breeding, cloning and genetic engineering. Bringing back extinct species has advantages for both humans and animals. The de-extinction of species such as woolly mammoth and saber tooth tigers would not only advanced scientific knowledge but also have environmental benefit such as restoring environment that are damaged or threatened with the help of certain now-extinct species. But the consequences to bringing extinct species back greatly outweighs the positive. While Victor Frankenstein pursuit for knowledge in itself is justified, playing with the boundaries between life and death is something that should not have tempered with. Extinct species could carry diseases that could potentially wipe humanity from the face of the planet or result in other unforeseen consequences. The de-extinction of species should not be tolerated in order to avoid consequences that could endanger the lives of humanity as well surrounding species.

For the longest time, in our history and modern times, people have thought of animals as friends and even sometimes sacred beings. Cloning would allow you to keep your friend back from the dead as a new being. The article states that certain labs are using cloning to help bring back endangered species, as well. This is important because there are many animal species that are endangered, soon

De-extinction: a scientific breakthrough and a process in which humans can use genetic engineering to bring back a species that was once extinct. Despite how intriguing it is that humans can accomplish this, the act of using de-extinction to bring back different species can be detrimental to the environments that they are introduced into. Humans can control how they create and modify a species that they bring back from extinction, an example being which species they use to replicate another species and the modifications they make for it to be able to thrive. However, once they are let out into an environment, the control lessens and the species can kill off different creatures and bring diseases to others, overall having a negative effect. There is no telling what a species will do if it is brought back from extinction, especially if that particular species died off decades or centuries ago and their habitat is no longer what it once was. There would be a chance that they would be brought back from extinction only to go extinct again. De-extinction should be avoided because there are too many risks such as costs, diseases, and the ideology that any species can come back after going extinct.

This article focuses on the arguments for and against the idea of cloning or bringing back the extinct species of Woolly mammoths. The term scientists and researchers use for bringing an extinct species back to life is called de-extinction. George Church concludes that introducing these extinct mammoths into its native regions like the tundra, could possibly reduce the amount of heat released from the ancient grasses that previously grew in the Artic ecosystems. Church's ideas are directly from the followers who believe that cloning these animals and reintroducing them into the ecosystem will not only benefit humans, but also allow geneticists to protect part of the elephant family. Some opponents argue that de-extinction ethically isn't right.

Just imagine if scientists cloned an endangered or even an extinct animal. If they ever cloned an extinct animal, the world will be like Jurassic Park in real life. All the dinosaurs and extinct plants that inhabit the earth before all of us were even created would be able to come back. That would be really insane. I chose this benefit because it really caught my attention. Think about all the possibilities if this ever happened. But what is required to be able to do this? According to Apecsec.org, “Genetic engineering is required to clone extinct animals. The field of genetic engineering is just in its infancy stage. By focusing on bringing back extinct animals, we could develop technologies that would help treat genetic diseases and mutations that occur in humans.” (Apecsec). With genetic engineering we will be able to clone endangered and extinct animals. Other researchers say, “With the modern technology nowadays, it is possible to address the problem of endangered species, or even recreate the extinct species of animals.” (Occupytheory). Teachers could use the animals they clone in science classes when they teach about them. In the article, “Pros and Cons of Animal Cloning”, scientists can pick and choose the best specimen for the process. Scientists in Midlothian, Scotland, cloned a sheep they named Dolly. Dolly was the first animal to be successfully cloned by a process of nuclear transfusion

In 2008, The U.S. Food and Drug Administration declared it safe for humans to consume cloned animal products, such as meat and dairy-based products. This has captured the attention of many people throughout the entire world and has ignited debates about the many issues that accompany animal cloning. There are many ways that animal cloning can affect us, but we will focus on the more serious conflicts. Cloning can pose serious health risks to the animals involved in the process, creating complications for animal welfare. Cloning animals will also impact the consumer and agricultural industry, and the breeding stock industry. Finally, cloning animals will bring about the morals and ethics of cloning itself and if it should or should not be allowed.

If you thought that cloning was a good and cool thing then you are wrong and I am going to tell you why.Cloning means to portray various distinctive procedures that can be utilized to deliver genetically indistinguishable duplicates of a natural element. The replicated material, which has the same hereditary cosmetics as the first, is known as a clone.There are three different types of artificial cloning and they are called gene cloning, reproductive cloning, and therapeutic cloning.The most common cloning happens in the wild to wild animals and sometimes even plants or flowers.I know you might be thinking that that is good because it will keep animals from going extinct but it doesn’t.If it did then why are animals getting close to being extinct now?

Cloning is a vital technology that humanity should strive to perfect, despite the many obstacles it currently faces in development and application. Approximately 100 species become extinct a day. Among them are flora and fauna that could hold the cures for cancer, HIV, or any other disease. Cloning technology could preserve and restore these vitally important animals. As of now, the technology is far from usable. Most experiments have resulted in the death of the cloned embryo. However, a few have yielded incredible results. Sheep, mice, and dogs have been successfully cloned and are the first steps towards a huge advancement in biology. However, the advent of cloning is not without opposition. Many believe that the cloning of animals is unethical and of humans taboo. (Hartl) The protesting of stem cell research has already caused enough problems for researchers, and they expect many more when cloning becomes commonplace.

Technology is the sole reason cloning is even possible, but it is not enough to save endangered species on its own. Due to technology, extinct species may even possible be brought back into existence. A closely related species, currently living, that could serve as a surrogate mother and a well-preserved source of DNA from the extinct

In the argument of “Should We Bring Back Extinct Species” by Joseph Bennett and Ben J. Novak it is discussed whether or not species that were once dead could be brought back to life. Scientist should not bring back extinct species.This all sounds like a real jurassic park dinosaurs could make a come back but why should scientist bring back an extinct species when we can’t even keep our still living animals alive. Joseph Bennett the assistant of biology from Carleton University states “Those who support bringing back extinct species will say that doing so will help support other species. But scientist already have important species-such as elephants tigers, and rhinos-that are in serious trouble.” If scientist were to concentrate on resurrecting