Cloning has remained one of the most controversial issues in medicine for many years: many are in favor and against this procedure. The first mention of clones dates back to 1963. It was then that the term was used by a geneticist from the UK.
Required Terminology
Biologists use several definitions for the word "clone". Most often, this term means a specific organism that appeared through out-of-sex reproduction and retains hereditary information from its ancestor. In the process of cloning, the gene structure is reproduced. It cannot be said that these are absolute copies. Their genotype is exactly the same. But clones can vary in their supragenetic properties. They may have a different size, color, susceptibility to disease.
So, for example, the well-known sheep Dolly was not a completely phenotypic copy of the sheep whose cells were used to obtain it. She had a lot of pathologies, because of which she died at an early age. And the parent sheep did not have any diseases. After the birth of Dolly, many began to talk about the possibilities of out-of-sex reproduction of a person. Few supporters of this branch of biology are stopped by the fact that about 85% of attempts to make clones fail. But the lack of knowledge of this sphere is far from the only arguments against cloning.
Potential opportunities
It is still too early to talk about the reproduction of replicas of people. But cloning is not only necessary for this: for and against continuing research in this area, you can now find many arguments. But do not forget that this industry provides a lot of opportunities.
So, one of the promising areas is transplantology. For an organ transplant, you don’t have to look for a donor, check compatibility, wait for surgery and pray that the rejection process does not begin. Cloning would allow to grow an absolutely identical organ and transplant it.
Also, many say that this is a chance for childless families who do not want to take an adopted child. In addition, cloning will avoid a number of hereditary diseases. Many people want to use these technologies in order to avoid old age and natural death.
It's hard to say what the future holds for cloning. The pros and cons are strong on both sides. But the adherents and opponents of such a reproduction of man speak about different sides of the coin.
It is believed that once scientists can make neurons that can replace nerve cells in the brain that die as a result of the progression of Parkinson's disease. Also, plans to create pancreatic cells that can produce natural insulin in the body of diabetics.
Test bans
Despite the fact that scientists are still very far from creating a full-fledged healthy copy of a person, this is already prohibited at the legislative level. So, for example, the UN developed a special declaration, which indicates the inadmissibility of conducting such experiments on the reproduction of man, as cloning. Against (the composition of the legislators, fortunately for researchers, is only of a recommendatory nature), only 84 members spoke out of the development of these technologies. But the declaration is actively supported in the USA, in the East in the
Arab countries, in Latin America and Africa.
Many spoke out in order to continue to develop technology, to conduct experiments with cloning. But at the same time copying people remains unacceptable. Reproductive technology through cloning has been banned in more than 30 countries. Among them are Russia, many European countries, Japan, China, and Israel.
True, scientists continue to clone embryos. It is believed that this direction should revolutionize medicine. According to them, doctors using these modern technologies have a chance to defeat a number of diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease or diabetes. Genetics believe that any prohibitions, perhaps, protect morality, but they doom the death of people living now. To understand your attitude to this issue, you need to know all the arguments of the militant camps. Then everyone will be able to make a choice for themselves and understand how he relates to modern technology. Many still at school disassemble all the nuances and determine both sides of the coin under the name "cloning: the pros and cons." An essay on such a topic helps to understand your attitude to this issue.
Imminent danger
Speaking about the need to ban any artificial reproductive technologies, people are afraid that doctors can not competently handle any scientific discoveries. Even the most secret developments become known to a wide range of people. So, for example, happened with atomic weapons. Therefore, it is impossible to control scientific knowledge and its dissemination.
Despite all the possibilities offered by human cloning, the pros and cons must be well appreciated. For example, the development of these technologies can untie the hands of aggressive states and terrorist groups. They will be able to create armies of physically hardy people who are not burdened with intelligence. In addition, it will be possible to create clones of world rulers and undermine their authority, to bring chaos into political life.
But talking about this, many forget that in order to get a clone of a person aged, for example, 40 years old, it is necessary that these 40 years have passed. After all, they grow in the same way as ordinary people. In addition to this, you also need to find parents who agree to give birth and raise a cloned child. So, in order to get an army of clones, it is necessary that at least 20-25 years pass.
Another impending danger is that people will be able to program the desired gender of the child. For example, in China or Muslim countries, where the birth of a boy is preferable, a huge imbalance can occur.
Also, do not forget that these reproductive technologies are not yet perfect. Scientists have learned to take and reproduce genetic material, but to create viable copies from it is too difficult for them. For geneticists - this is not a reason to stop. It is impossible to develop this industry without further research.
Other objections
Many people oppose reproductive technology simply because they don’t understand what human cloning is for. The pros and cons of the arguments are not clear to them. Opponents say that man is a unique creation and it is unacceptable to make a copy of it. In their opinion, this is below the dignity of people. But at the same time they forget that identical twins have identical codes . There are about 150 million of them on the planet.
The idea of cloning is disgusting to many. But this is not a reason to prohibit research in this industry. The decision to reproduce their own kind should be made only by the people themselves. Otherwise, humanity is deprived of the right to propagandized freedom of choice. Supporters sincerely wonder why cloning is more disgusting than, for example, gender reassignment.
But there are other arguments against human cloning. So, copying the code will reduce the genetic diversity of people on the planet. Cloned offspring will become weaker, more susceptible to various diseases. And this will be the impetus for the development of epidemics. But for this it is necessary that cloning in the literal sense be put on an industrial stream. About 6 billion people live on the planet. Even if 1 million clones appear, this number will be negligible in order to affect non-genotypic diversity. But even if you copy each person, you get 6 billion different copies.
To understand what cloning is, for or against this phenomenon, we must also take into account that this process is not comparable with genetic engineering. In the process, genes are not modified or changed in any way, but simply copied. This leads to the fact that an exact copy of a person appears without any changes. He cannot become a freak or a monster. Only genetic engineering technologies where DNA is modified can lead to such results.
Ethical aspects
Opponents of the idea of human cloning emphasize that reproduction of copies of people is unethical. The church is also actively opposing this. But most religious people are opposed to all reproductive technologies, including IVF. They say that the creation of man, the mystery of his birth should be subject only to God. Man should not interfere in these matters.
But representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church say that certain organs, tissues, animals can be reproduced. But they also oppose the full reproduction of man. However, they do not consider this issue as scientists, do not scientifically evaluate cloning. The pros and cons of their own. Orthodox speak about the ethical side of the issue. First of all, they ask about how a person will feel when he finds out that he is completely someone’s copy. Legal aspects are also important. Will the clone be the heir to the person who became the donor? Will he have to continue his journey?
In addition, it is obvious that people are unlikely to stop at simple cloning. They will want to combine it with genetic engineering. That is, if this industry is developed, many will want to make improved copies of man. For example, they will strive to increase physical stamina, improve mental abilities, stimulate individual organs, and influence appearance.
Generally accepted moral standards
Speaking about the advantages of cloning and impending dangers, few people think about how exactly this process occurs. So, embryonic stem cells are best suited for organ growth . Indeed, at approximately 14 days, all organs and systems of the body begin to form from them. Scientists believe that 3-4 day old cells are ideal for cloning technology.
For cloning, stem pluripotent cells are most suitable. All organs and tissues are formed from them, but a single organism cannot be recreated. It is at this stage that geneticists are maximally opposed. For many years there has been an active discussion, an assessment is given of how ethical the cloning of human embryos is: the pros and cons of each camp are quite substantial. So, opponents do not get tired of remembering that abortive embryos are used to obtain these cells.
To obtain organs, this cloning option is considered. The embryo is grown up to three months of age. After that, he is removed from the artificial uterus and placed in a sterile space, where his life processes will be supported. According to adherents of the theory, a body grown in this way cannot be called either a person or a full-fledged clone. They call them simply a group of interacting organs, because the consciousness of a living being ceased activity during the abortion period. Opponents of cloning strongly disagree with this scheme of development of reproductive medicine.
The opinion of geneticists
Experts involved in the technology of growing living cells artificially argue that it is impossible to obtain an identical copy of a person. After all, it is formed not only by genes, but also by the circumstances in which he grew up. And to recreate it is impossible. People think about reproducing famous people, outstanding athletes, geniuses, but they forget that only the external resemblance will be common. It is impossible to create the same copy as the original.
In addition, talking about such opportunities is too early. Therefore, it is useless to argue about ethical aspects and hold discussions on the topic "Cloning: the pros and cons." Now scientists can take donor tissue, place it in an egg, devoid of their own genetic material, grow blastocil from it. But after that, it must be planted in the uterus. When growing Dolly's sheep, 277 clones were created, of which only 29 took root in the uterus. Of this number, only one viable sheep was obtained.
Experiments on mice made it clear that you can get offspring in this way. But at the same time, a certain hidden defect appears in the animals. Outwardly, they are absolutely healthy. But with each generation they succumbed to cloning even worse.
Even experts do not undertake to claim that these technologies are safe. They themselves can tell everything they know about the advantages and dangers of cloning (“for” or “against”). An essay on this topic for each of them will be able to show what additional dangers await the experimenters.
Cons through the eyes of experts
Genetics calmly relate to the fact that they use embryos for research, they are not worried about the religious side of the issue or moral and ethical aspects. They may name other arguments against cloning. But, in their opinion, they are connected only with the fact that this industry requires additional research.
So, while it is clear to specialists that cloning cannot be a substitute for the natural reproduction of offspring. But the reason why the process is becoming increasingly difficult with each generation of clones is still not clear. There are two main versions. According to one of them, with each cloning, the end of the chromosome called “telomere” is “mucous”. And this makes further copying impossible. But this assumption was refuted as a result of experiments on mice. According to another version, this is due to the fact that the health of clones is deteriorating with each generation. But this also could not be confirmed.
Right choice
Talking about whether to reproduce a person or other living creatures, you can endlessly. After all, there will always be opposing parties who can argue on the topic "Cloning: the pros and cons." A table showing all the potential advantages and disadvantages of this method is unlikely to help reconcile them. Although it will give each person the opportunity to determine their point of view.
It has been experimentally established that even copying DNA will not make it possible to obtain an identical living being. So, for example, a cloned cat had a different color than her mother, a donor of genetic material. Many thought that this technology would "resurrect" pets, the most daring even hoped to reproduce the departed people.
Therefore, to consider cloning as a branch of reproductive medicine, at this time no one is taken. But you can develop its potential in the therapeutic field. If we go exclusively this way, then the number of opponents decreases sharply. To do this, you can consider all the nuances that affect a process called cloning. The pros and cons can be summarized as follows. The main advantages include the opening opportunities for the treatment of many serious diseases, restoration of the skin damaged by burns, and organ replacement. But opponents insist that it is necessary to remember the moral and ethical side of the issue, that these technologies are designed to kill the nascent life (embryos from which stem cells are taken).