Ethics of cloning

src: i.ytimg.com

In bioethics, cloning ethics refers to various ethical positions regarding the practice and possibilities of cloning, especially human cloning. While many of these views are of religion, some of the questions asked by cloning are confronted by a secular perspective as well. Perspectives on human cloning are theoretical, since human therapy and reproductive cloning are not used commercially; animals are currently cloned in laboratories and in livestock production.

Advocates support the development of therapeutic cloning to produce tissues and all organs to treat patients who can not get transplants, to avoid the need for immunosuppressive drugs, and to prevent the effects of aging. Advocates for reproductive cloning believe that parents who can not produce should have access to technology.

Opponents of cloning have concerns that technology has not developed enough to be safe, which can be vulnerable to abuse (leading to the generation of people from whom organs and tissues will be harvested), and has concerns about how individuals cloning can integrate with families and the wider community.

Religious groups are divided, with some opposing the technology as seizing the place of God and, to the extent that the embryo is used, destroying human life; others support the potential benefits of rescuing therapeutic cloning.

Cloning animals are opposed by animal groups because of the number of cloned animals that suffer from malformations before they die, and while food from cloned animals has been approved by the US FDA, its use is opposed by some other groups concerned about food safety..

Video Ethics of cloning

Philosophical debates

Various forms of cloning, especially human cloning, are controversial. There are many demands for all progress in the field of human cloning to be stopped. Most scientific, governmental and religious organizations are against reproductive cloning. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and other scientific organizations have made public statements showing that human reproductive cloning is prohibited until security issues are resolved. Serious ethical issues have been raised by the possibility of future organ harvesting from clones.

Supporters of human therapeutic cloning believe that the practice can provide genetically identical cells for regenerative medicine, and tissues and organs for transplantation. Such cells, tissues, and organs will not trigger an immune response or require the use of immunosuppressive drugs. Both basic research and therapeutic development for serious illnesses such as cancer, heart disease, and diabetes, as well as improvements in the treatment of burns and reconstructive and cosmetic surgery, are areas that may benefit from the new technology. A bioethicist, Jacob M. Appel of New York University, has gone so far as to state that "children cloned for therapeutic purposes" such as "donating bone marrow to siblings with leukemia" may someday be seen as heroes.

Proponents claim that human reproductive cloning will also produce benefits for couples who can not reproduce. In the early 2000s, Severino Antinori and Panos Zavos sparked controversy when they publicly declared plans to create fertility treatments that allow infertile parents to have children with at least some of their DNA on their offspring.

In the proposed Negysible Negigible Senescence SENSUS, one option considered to improve cell thinning associated with cell aging is to grow replacement tissue from stem cells extracted from cloned embryos.

There are also ethical objections. Article 11 The UNESCO Universal Declaration on Human Genome and Human Rights affirms that human reproduction cloning conflicts with human dignity, that the potential life represented by the embryo is destroyed when embryonic cells are used, and it is likely that the cloned individuals will be biologically damaged, reliable cloning technology.

Ethical experts have speculated about the difficulties that may arise in the world where human clones exist. For example, human cloning can alter the structure of the family structure by making it more difficult for parenting in a family of twisted kinship relationships. For example, female DNA donors would be clone genetic twins, rather than mothers, complicating genetic and social relationships between mothers and children and the relationship between other family members and clones. In another example, there may be hopes that cloned individuals will act as identical to the human being from which they are cloned, which may violate the right to self-determination.

Animals advocate that non-human animals have certain moral rights as living entities and therefore should be given the same ethical considerations as humans. This will eliminate animal exploitation in scientific research on cloning, cloning used in food production, or as another resource for human use or consumption.

Maps Ethics of cloning

Religious view

Religious views on cloning vary.

Christianity

The Roman Catholic Church, under the pontificate of Benedict XVI, condemns the practice of human cloning, in the magisterial instruction of Dignitas Personae, states that it represents "a grave breach of the dignity of the person and the basic equality of all.". "Many conservative Christian groups have opposed human cloning and human embryonic cloning, because they believe that life begins at conception.Other Christian denominations such as the United Church of Christ do not believe that fertilized eggs are living creatures, but they still oppose the cloning of embryonic cells. The World Council of Churches, representing nearly 400 Christian denominations worldwide, opposed human and human embryonic cloning in February 2006. United Methodist Church opposed reproductive research and cloning in May 2000 and again in May 2004.

Islam

Leading Qatari expert Yusuf Al Qaradawi believes that cloning certain parts of the human body for medical purposes is not banned in Islam, but cloning the entire human body will not be permitted under any circumstances. On the subject of animal ethics, he takes a softer position.

The late Grand Ayatollah of Lebanon, Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah did not see cloning as invalid. He also stressed that Islam encourages the pursuit of science including medicine. Ayatollah however warned against the cloning of all human beings for the purpose of harvesting his organs.

Sunni Muslims consider human cloning to be banned by Islam. The Islamic Fiqh Academy, in the Tenth Conference, held in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia in the period from 28 June 1997 to 3 July 1997, issued Fatw? states that human cloning is haram (sinful).

Judaism

Judaism does not equate life with conception and, despite some questions of cloning policy, the Orthodox rabbis generally find no compelling reason in Jewish law and ethics to refuse cloning. Liberal Jewish thinkers have warned against cloning, among other genetic engineering efforts, although some prizes have potential medical benefits.

RaÃƒÆ'Ã‚Â« lism

RaÃƒÆ'Ã‚ Â«lism is the only religious group in which every part (specifically, the medical arm of Clonaid religion) has claimed to have successfully cloned humans. Clonaid claims that cloning will bring humans closer to immortality.

After the announcement, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan spoke on behalf of President George W. Bush and said that human cloning is "very disturbing" to most Americans. The Kansas Republic's Sam Brownback said that Congress should ban all human cloning, while some Democrats fear that Clonaid's announcement will lead to a ban on therapeutic cloning. FDA's head of biotechnology. Phil Noguchi warns that human cloning, even if successful, risks transferring sexually transmitted diseases to newborns. Clonaid claims that it has a list of couples ready to have a cloned child.

Biologist from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Alta Charo says that even in other ape-like mammals, the risk of miscarriage, birth defects, and life issues remains high. Robert Lanza of Advanced Cell Technologies says that Clonaid has no record of achievement for any cloning, but he says that if Clonaid really works, there will be public unrest that could lead to the prohibition of therapeutic cloning, which has the capacity to heal millions of patients. The Vatican says that the claim states a brutal mentality and has no ethical considerations. The White House also criticized the claim.

These Pros and Cons of Cloning are Both Fascinating and Scary

src: media.buzzle.com

Use of cloned animals for food

On December 28, 2006, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the consumption of meat and other products from cloned animals. Cloned animal products are said to be indistinguishable from non-cloned animals. Furthermore, the company will not be required to provide a label informing consumers that meat comes from cloned animals. In 2007, several meat and dairy producers proposed a system to track all cloned animals as they moved through the food chain, suggesting that a national database system integrated into the National Animal Identification System could eventually enable labeling of food. However, in 2013 there is no tracking system, and products from cloned animals are sold for human consumption in the United States.

Critics have objected to FDA approval of cloned animal products for human consumption, arguing that FDA research is inadequate, limited, and scientific validity questionable. Some consumer-support groups work to encourage a tracking program that will allow consumers to become more aware of the cloned animal products in their diet.

A 2013 review notes that there is a widespread misunderstanding of cloning and livestock, and found that cloned animals that reached adulthood and entered the food supply were essentially equivalent to conventional cattle with respect to the quality of meat and milk, and with respect to their reproductive capacity.

Cloning ethics still murky 20 years after Dolly - YouTube

src: i.ytimg.com

References

Therapeutic Cloning in Humans: Therapeutic Cloning

src: 3.bp.blogspot.com

Ethics of cloning

Rabu, 27 Juni 2018