Is Cloning Wrong Research Paper

One thing about cloning is it won’t be like the original animal. Yes it may look identical, but the behavior won’t be. As the article, “Should you clone your pet?” stated (paragraph 9), “ In other words each clone has a unique personality… Just ask Sandra and Ralph Fisher. They had a bull named Chance, an unusually gentle animal who posed for photos with kids. When Chance died,

First, cloning is a bad thing because most things that undergo cloning have many medical disorders and die an early death. On https://listontap.com/10-reasons-human -cloning-bad-society-large/ they gave marvelous examples why. It took exactly 277 eggs to make a clone of Dolly. That shows how little attempt at cloning fail. Another thing is Many cloned animals have under formed hearts lungs and other organs. That just goes to show how cloning animals is not very practical for the animals only live around half the lifespan of their breed of animal. Take Dolly's clone her clone died at, 6 years old, half of what sheep of her breed live. Over all cloning is mostly unsuccessful.

     Cloning animals or humans would be very risky. Cloning is very unpredictable. Therefore no one can estimate exactly how risky cloning can be. We have already used a lot of animals in crazy experiments and none of them succeeded. Yes, even Dolly. Many of you think Dolly, the first animal to be cloned wasn?t really successful. Dolly became sick and was put to rest. Another point which often people overlook or try to hide is that in the making of Dolly, about 277

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.

Animal cloning started without the world even knowing. First, an animal clone is “an exact physical copy of one ‘parent’” (Newman 12). “Animal cloning experiments began in the 1960’s. Frogs were the first subjects. By 1987 scientists had begun cloning cows and other mammals” (Newman 12). Dolly the sheep was the first big cloning success, credited to Ian Wilmut in 1996 (Praded 21). This sheep was a scientific breakthrough, but it also caused many people to question the intents of scientists. Many people wondered if scientists would clone humans next. The original intent of animal cloning was not for the food industry. The reason animal cloning started was to find a way to help cure currently untreatable diseases (“Why Do Scientists Clone?”). By cloning cells, scientists will be able to manipulate the cells to become something new.

that goes into creating a clone. First, scientist remove a somatic cell from an animal that they

Although the clone has the DNA of the donor, the clone will have epigenetic effects. Epigenetic disturbances refer to the altered physical structures of the DNA, but not the DNA sequence itself (Epigenetics). Cloning technology has produced clones of several mammals, including sheep, mice, goats, and horses (AMA). Cloning humans is technically more difficult than cloning other mammals (Cloning Fact Sheet). The process is still extremely inefficient and rarely produces viable cells. Those usable cells are unlikely to survive until birth (AMA). So far, animal cloning research has caused death and deformities of the clone (Kilner). Dolly, a cloned sheep, aged rapidly and had to be euthanized at six years old (Glannon, p91). We can assume that human cloning will also have a dismal failure rate (AMA). It would be considered unethical to attempt to produce human clones due to the potential physical harm to the cloned child

Would you risk so many problems to have another pet identical to the one you already have or already had? There are so many pets in the world, why would we clone to make more? Things could wrong with cloning and it would be weird. For instance, I don’t understand why people would clone their dog, Sally, to help with grief. When they are grieving because Sally died. That would be weird most of the time.

This was the case for a couple living in Texas: they cloned their beloved pet Chance, a Brahman bull, but the results were quite a surprise. Chance was a kind, and timid bull, unlike others of his kind, and loved to take pictures with children; when he died, it greatly devastated the couple. Eventually, they payed to clone Chance. In contrary, the cloned Chance didn’t have the gentle manner the previous Chance had; the clone was restless, and very violent. Furthermore, the husband had to be hospitalized several times after quite a few violent encounters with the pet. Cloning has this aspect and effect on animals, which is one reason why people are strongly against human cloning. In addition, although there aren’t any studies uet that specifically study the behavior of cloned animals and pets, research on cloned cows and pigs prove that there are behavioral differences and even some difference in the phenotype. Therefore, cloning truly doesn’t bring back one’s pet, for that they are different

It takes multiple puppies to get the cloning process correct. Which is usually around 5-6 puppies. (Lewis 22) Some puppies are born with thick muscles in their necks which renders them from breathing. That means they slowly suffocate. The same goes for birds. When some birds are cloned they lose their instincts for things such as nest building, or getting food, or staying away from certain animals. (Lewis 22) The animal won’t live as long either.

To clone or not to clone that is the question. More than six-hundred dogs have been cloned...but that doesn’t mean it’s one-hundred percent safe. Reasons for this is that it is too expensive, the dog could have a change in personality, and it could disrupt the life VS. death pattern.

If that was myself and the cat, dog, etc died I wouldn’t want to clone it because I know it would come back with problems and then it wouldn’t be the same as the first cat, dog, etc.

If the scientist didn't clone that animal right the animal will die and nobody want your favorite animal to die off that and they knew is dangerous. Some people say its ok to clone but they don't know what will happen. Scientist are working on cloning so it will work and to be safe for humans. The people that are for cloning might be right but i think they not right. So cloning might work if the scientist keep working on it and so the people that want to clone they can be safe about it.

Although the word itself has only been around for only four decades, the idea of creating an organism identical to another has been around for centuries. Even nature has utilized this process. The actual process of artificially cloning has been around since before 1900s, even though it is heard of more often in the modern world. Cloning began in 1894 with the first clone of an organism. Hans Dreisch was able to clone a sea urchin, and his research led to Hans Spemann’s multiple attempts and successes of cloning throughout his science years. As technology advanced, Robert Briggs and Thomas King used Spemann’s results to create the process of nuclear transfer used in modern cloning techniques. After many debates over

What is Animal Cloning? It is defined as a cell, group of cells, or an organism that is produced asexually from and is identical to a single ancestor. Cloning is also known as the nuclear cloning methodology using the nuclear transfer in early 1950’s. Animal Cloning was first tried in amphibians. The main problem in animal cloning up to this time is the efficiency of the process, how effective it is for us. The recent effectiveness of Nuclear Transfer is underprivileged. The result of nuclear transfer is not really a clone because it possesses larger differences from monozygotic twins. The public has a great dissatisfaction against cloning for it is not fair to the animals and is in opposition to the law of