Risks Of Cloning Research Paper

Cloning is inhumane and unethical because it creates animals and embryos that will be used for painful research experiments. Additionally, a painful surgery is required to remove the eggs from the breeding stock and implant the embryos back into them. Also, a good deal of the animals that survive past infancy have abnormalities and health problems that include respiratory distress, brain lesions, metabolic problems, skeletal malfunctions, and

. . concerns can be addressed when reproductive cloning has been shown to be safe in animals, which it has not yet." (Paulson) The success rate by means of reproductive cloning remains pale in comparison to natural procreation, and thus does not justify cloning as a form of procreation for the time being. The current success rate for reproductive cloning stands at one or two viable offspring per 100 experiments, and until the success rate drastically increases, cloning humans would be potentially dangerous and unethical.

Secondly, cloning kills another animal. Cloning takes chromosomes from an egg and destroys them. That cell was going to be a new animal. Take Dolly it took 277 tries, that is 277 baby sheep killed to make another already existing sheep. If we were to clone humans any scientist who clones is technically a murderer. Other examples is the dog Snuppy they used 97 eggs to get 3 puppies. That means 97 individual puppies dead to make a clone’s clones. This is another, more grim, reason why cloning is not a good thing.

     As soon as you mention the word cloning, you are most likely to ignite a debate. This is because people are greatly divided on whether it's good or bad. A way to reach a conclusion is to look at cloning from ethical, risk, and religious perspectives. The reality is, cloning is unethical, very risky, and irreligious. The arguments I will make will hopefully convince you that cloning is not good for the future.

Animals like mice have been successfully cloned and will more than likely facilitate the discovery for new treatments for human disease. Therefore by cloning animals like mice and then them getting a human disease scientist will be able to do test and research on the disease that the animal has and they can then try and find a cure for the disease and if it works on the animals it would work on humans. Also if you clone maybe 100 mice and they have different diseases you can find different cures for all of those diseases. Now my partner is going to talk about the cons on cloning and explain why the cons are

It seems to be as if cloning is the new topic society can not stop talking about. Some people do not know what it is or they confuse the difference between the different type of cloning. There are two types of cloning therapeutic and reproductive cloning and there is a big difference between the both. Reproductive cloning is cloning a whole new organism while therapeutic cloning focuses on cloning an organ such as a heart, a kidney, a liver, and so on. Cloning of a body part is extremely helpful and essential to the survival of the human race. Cloning body parts also known as therapeutic cloning is the key to live a longer happy life because this procedure creates vital organs that can help people from suffering, it prevents other diseases, and it is much safer than reproductive cloning.

According to Gary Wickman, Human cloning can give rise to certain medical issues. Technically, human gene grows older with age. It’s feared that the cloned individual would retain the age of the donor’s genes. Imagine what will happen if a 40 year old gene is manifested into a newborn baby (Wickman, 2017). The health risks involved with human cloning is something that cannot be sidelined on all accounts. There is a possibility that the cloned individual might carry certain abnormalities, and may die sooner than the standard life expectancy.

There are many arguments against cloning. Leon R. Kass bases his argument on repugnance in his article The Wisdom of Repugnance. He is a well-known physician, educator and scientist. Kass perceives cloning as offensive, grotesque revolting, repulsive and wrong. To establish his argument he states, “Most people recoil from the prospect of mass production or human being, with large clones of look-alikes, compromised in their individuality.”1 His rationale is cloning is unnatural, because it is asexual and requires only one parent. Kass believes that cloning turns natural procreation into a manufactured process, which is not natural or moral. In his essay he also points out that cloning will also change the way we see ourselves through our

Cloning is a controversial topic because new areas of science often raise questions about safety. Early experiment performed on animals showed potential dangers. For example, cloned cows developed faulty immune systems. In some studies, cloned animals seemed to grow old faster and die younger than normal members of the species. According to Encarta online

While some believe cloning to be acceptable others feel equally strongly that human cloning is completely wrong. With the state of the science as it is at the moment it would involve hundreds of damaged pregnancies to achieve one single live cloned baby. What is more, all the evidence suggests that clones are unhealthy and often have a number of built-in genetic defects, which lead to premature ageing and death. It would be completely wrong to bring a child into the world knowing that it was extremely likely to be affected by problems like these. The dignity of human life and the genetic uniqueness we all have would be attacked if cloning became commonplace. People might be

One very beneficial thing about cloning is that it can be used for organ replacement which would not only minimize the waiting list for organs, but also there is a smaller risk of rejection from your body. Another is that it can be used to save an endangered species from dying out. Also something that would be incredibly useful is genetic research. If scientists were able to clone people easily and effectively, they would no longer need to use humans and they could solve genetic diseases. One thing that can be very risky with cloning is about 95% of animal cloning has ended in failure due to genetic defect. Clones are a lot more likely to get diseases and other various things like that. Also there would be a lack of uniqueness among clones and violate convictions regarding human individuality and freedom. Clones could be seen as less than human compared with non-clones. Other obvious risks are lack of diversity among clones and faster ageing causing them to die faster than a normal living thing would. Cloning is a process that we have to work on and is very tricky to work with but could be very helpful when done

To begin, cloning may present major health risks to the human clone itself. Firstly, cloning a human can cause horrifying birth defects in the newborn. To elaborate, Steve Connor journalist for independent newspapers

Imagine a future where humans are manufactured, a future where humans are created by science, a future where humans are the new lab specimen. Human cloning is like opening Pandora's Box, unleashing a torrent of potential evils but at the same time bringing a small seed of hope. No matter how many potential medical and scientific benefits could be made possible by human cloning, it is unethical to clone humans.

First of all, what is cloning? Cloning is the process of reproducing an identical piece of ourselves at a subatomic level (Thompson). We can produce a replica of ourselves ranging from our full body to just copies of our organs or an appendage like a toe or finger. The problem with cloning is that modern science has not yet learned how to separate all of the unhealthy items from the healthy ones. When this process is complete we have a perfect copy of ourselves, but our other self is not immune to normal defects such as cancer, lung or heart failure, blood disorders, or even seizures (Kilner). We can spend all of our money on making another us but end up with contaminated goods. Now we have another us that has to be fixed or discarded.

There are also many negative aspects of cloning. To create different organs or limbs in order to help a person to live longer or more comfortably seems to go against nature. The way human life should be created is through sexual intercourse. Harmond Varmus, a schoolteacher, said it best; “Human cloning represents a grave attack on the dignity of conception and on the right an unrepeatable, unpredetermined set of genes.” To clone an animal is almost the same thing. We are playing with the way humans and animals have reproduced for years. Is it fair that we clone and then kill an animal just for its organs in order to save a person’s life? Scientists are not even sure that the animal’s organs will be compatible with the human body. According to the Medical Research