Cloning should be regulated but further research should be allowed. Cloning has the potential to save many lives if regulated. It could possibly be used to recreate an organ of a human that has the same D.N.A. of the human.

This is wonderful because this would allow for the least amount of problems with a transplant. It could also have the ability to fix spinal cord injuries. It would possibly be able to reverse the effects of being paralyzed. It also could help stop genetic diseases being pasted on to the next generation. This is why research should be continued.

The world cannot just ignore this because it could have the ability to help so many people and save many lives. This is no different than surgery, at one point surgery was very dangerous and if the government prevented doctors from practicing with surgery we would never be where we are today.

We need to allow cloning for the best interest of the world and all people in it. This is why research should be continued (“Back to the Future: Should Science Try to Revive Extinct Species?”). The world cannot just ignore this because it could have the ability to help so many people and save many lives. There is too much good that can come out of this research that it should be allowed to happen.

It should however be restricted and controlled because of the need for human embryotic cells. They should be certain ways for people to donate and certain amounts of cells researchers can obtain in an amount of time.

This will have two benefits. The first will be that the scientists will not be able to use the embryotic cells for everything. They will still have to find other ways to test theories before using the human cells. The second reason this will help is it will also make researchers quickly find safer, more effective ways to use these human cells (Biggs, Alton).

This will help further the research in a safe controlled atmosphere allowing for the best future results with the least amount of problems. Imagine a group of researchers announcing a breakthrough that allows stem cells to be harvested without hurting the embryo. This would be amazing. It would allow for all the benefits of stem cells without the harm. This may be possible if we allow cloning research to happen. The research just needs to be regulated.

Counter Claim

Another claim that exists is that cloning should be banned completely. This is because of the theory that cloning is playing god. That is bad because the scientists that are doing this research have control over life. This is how it was termed the “Playing God Theory”. Most people also want cloning to be banned because of the use of human embryotic stem cells. This follows the belief of a baby is life from conception. This is saying that when the scientist gets the cell needed for the research that they are also killing life when they do this. The current success rate is a problem with cloning (Dudley, William). This rate is very low so there is a lot of wasted cells that where killer by the scientists.

The final claim that exists is the cloning should be unlimited and uncontrolled. This is because cloning has the ability to save so many lives once full understood. They say scientists should be able to harvest all the stem cells they need so they could quickly find way to utilize them in a safe and effective way.

They need to make this field of study open just like any other medical research takes time. It also takes to ability to fail to see what does not work (Leone, Bruno). If every time there was a failure in the medical field the government restricted that research we would have no medicine at all.

Rebuttal

The first problem with the other argument is that the playing god theory is an overgeneralization. They simplify life to the point of conception and they that the life that was just conceived would live anyway if not interfered with.

They also do not include the fact that at conception there are just cell that have no type they are stem cells. They turn into types or cells in future. What is considered a human? According to the other side of the argument a human is cell made for reproduction.

That however, is not completely accurate. A human has a mind and has feelings, but the stem cells that are being used have neither or those things. This is also not completely true because the baby that could have resulted had the possibility of death in the womb. It also has the chance for many birth defects and possible death as an infant.

These experiments in the future could save the baby from death and from defects. It could overall improve life. They also imply through the god theory that the scientists are creating and destroying life. This is wrong. They are simply changing life and manipulating living cells to get and outcome.

It is very similar to many other types of medical procedures. The success rate is one problem that can only be solved by allowing research to happen (“WHAT IS CLONING?”). If they are not allowed to figure out how to solve the problem how can they solve the problem? Denying scientists the ability to research this topic is bad for everyone.

The second claim is that it should be unrestricted. This is also wrong. This could allow for the scientist to stop trying to solve the problem of the success rate. They would be able to get as many of the stem cells as they could so they have no reason to rush to find a safer more effective way to clone.

They can just keep trying to improve current ideas and not come up with new procedures and practices that could make cloning not only safe but more effective as well. A restriction will not stop progress in this field it will make the scientists solve the effectiveness problem first. Once that problem is solved there may be fewer objections to cloning because it will not kill as many cells and the success rate would be higher also allowing for further research into other procedures to make it more useful for the overall population.

I have interviewed an average person and they agreed that it is in the world’s best interest to allow cloning but restrict it for safety concerns (Stone, Don.). If a young child obtained a disease that affected his heart and he needed a transplant. How long would that take? It would take months even years. But with this research he could have his own heart repaired or he could get I new heart that was made with his own cells. This could save that child’s life. Why would you want to prevent that?

Call to Action

There are many people on all sides of this issue. They can use all the help they can get to make their points get across. Your help could make the change to regulate cloning not just eliminating cloning or allowing it to be unlimited If you would like to get involved with regulating but making it legal please contacts the human cloning foundation at 571 422 9150 you can also send e-mails to simon.humancloning@gmail.com (“Human Cloning Foundation Home Page.”).

This is the possible outcome from further research with cloning, it saving lives.
This is the possible outcome from further research with cloning, it saving lives.

One Reply to “Regulate Cloning – Guest Editorial by Dylan Stone”

  1. It’s hard to think that CLONING is an issue we are having to deal with now. To think, back in the old days the biggest problem was little Timmy falling down a well, next thing you know its gonna be little Timmy and his identical twin clone fell down identical twin wells.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.