Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An essay

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • An essay

    I originally posted this over at CYS, but I didn't get much discussion. Feel free to read or not read this, it's an essay I wrote for my honors class.

    Jordan Roth
    March 30th, 2011
    Calloway – ENGL 112.04C
    Total Word Count: 1299
    Quotation Word Count: 94

    Moot Point: You Can’t Stop Science Anyway
    Cloning may be the most controversial topic currently being discussed on the world stage. More relevant to government and culture: Human cloning is being simultaneously attacked and defended by everyone from the world’s politicians to regular men with strong opinions [4]. Human cloning is a blanket term used to describe the process of creating genetically similar copies of a single human using DNA duplication [5] and it does not account for specific intentions, difficulties or expected results. Scientists determined that it was important to narrow down human cloning to two distinct cases: Reproductive cloning and Non-Reproductive (also called therapeutic) cloning. Reproductive cloning is the cloning of a human for the purpose of creating a new, sentient human. Reproductive cloning by definition yields a second individual with similar to identical genes. Non reproductive cloning is cloning a human for the purpose of harvesting stem cells or for research. Non reproductive cloning never yields a sentient being [6]. The distinction is important because the laws regulating the cases vary drastically. All countries with established laws about cloning have outlawed reproductive cloning but non-reproductive cloning is not so uniform across the board. Among others; Britain, Belgium, Sweden, Finland, Singapore and The United States have banned reproductive cloning but not therapeutic cloning. Only 23% of nations have laws on cloning but they all ban reproductive cloning. [7]. Non-reproductive cloning should be legal in Canada because it has the potential to be extraordinarily useful to science (and thus society) while also being less morally dubious than other already established laws. Non-reproductive cloning could help to solve a variety of genetic, chronic and misunderstood conditions while also potentially revealing numerous secrets hidden in genome sequencing and gene therapy.

    Before delving into the social consequences of non-reproductive human cloning, it is important to examine the scientific advantages that might make the controversial research worthwhile. Beginning with gene therapy: research shows that advances in non-reproductive human cloning will lead to the ability to “direct” cells to “compensate” for faulty or missing gene products [3]. What does that mean? It means significant improvement in medicine with respect to genetic conditions and disorders. What about physical ailments? The science behind using cloned stem cells to repair damaged tissue isn’t set in stone at this point but is it possible that these stem cells could be used in that fashion? Vassiliadis et al say “It would not be surprising if the answer was yes” [3]. So far, most of what has been discussed is largely just theory but science is also showing real results. A team of scientists used stem cells (which could be produced with non-reproductive cloning) to cure a Parkinson’s like disease in mice [1]. That experiment is a really, really, really big deal. Parkinson’s is an otherwise untreatable disease. We have literally no idea how to cure it and anyone who happens to have it, has a brutal end in front of them. With time and patience, non-reproductive cloning has the potential to be the answer to many other absolutely ground-breaking new discoveries that could ease a considerable amount of human suffering.

    Therapeutic cloning seems to be all roses and yet, it’s an incredibly controversial topic. How can this be? Naysayers of cloning generally argue from a philosophical or utilitarian standpoint and although there are many objections to reproductive cloning, the main “philosophical objection is that cloning is contrary to nature.” This is very often stated by non-religious folk and seems to arise from a sense of disgust that is inherent to the thought of something so new. As legitimate as these feelings are; they don’t seem to have much grounding in logic. The utilitarian side to the debate is very difficult for reproductive cloning but for non-reproductive cloning: the main objection is the wrath of God [2]. Since only antidisestablishmentarians would argue that laws should be instated based on religious ideals and since currently government and church are separated, this argument (while potentially carrying moral significance) can’t be justly used to argue the laws on cloning. There is another - more utilitarian - argument against non-reproductive cloning: If our medicine advances to a state where individuals can be kept alive for longer than is currently possible, dictators could seize control of their realms for greater periods of time and cause more devastation than they currently can. In short: yes, agreed. In fact though, this same argument could be used to argue against any major advancement in medicine. Should we stop cancer research because dictators with cancer will be able to live longer?

    The utilitarian argument against non-reproductive cloning is weakened further by a worldly perspective. Suppose for an instant that Canada (and perhaps the west) illegalizes research on non-reproductive cloning, “other countries [will still be] free to pursue their own strategies. If cloning is illegal in [the West] but legal in Japan or China, [westerners] will go to those countries as cloning techniques are perfected. Science cannot be stopped. We should have learned that from the way we regulate drug treatments. We can ban a risky but useful drug, but it’s only effect is to limit its use to those who are willing and able to pay the airfare to Hong Kong.” [2] Essentially, by outlawing the research that goes into cloning, all that will be effectively accomplished is a loss of standing with relation to science in the world. It is difficult to stop science, but it is not difficult to get left behind by it.

    Furthermore, non-reproductive cloning poses no major threat to society and is actually a less invasive law than one which is already passed in Canada: abortion [8]. Abortion is the act of terminating a fetus in order to prevent pregnancy. In Canada, to get an abortion, a person does not need to provide the motivation behind the surgery and the surgery is fully legal. As we’ve already established; non-reproductive cloning is the act of creating an embryo for the purpose of harvesting it for its stem cells or to study it for research. Since Canada has laws against murder, it follows logically that terminating a fetus is not the same as killing someone. If terminating a fetus isn’t murder, then a fetus is not a person. If a fetus is not a person, then creating it with the intent of using it for medical/research based purposes is not an immoral endeavour. As long as abortion is legal, it doesn’t follow to ban non-reproductive cloning.

    The risks of non-reproductive cloning (for a person who does not fear that legalizing it will invoke the wrath of God) are virtually non-existent. Non-reproductive cloning doesn’t open the Pandora’s Box of creating new humans to be integrated into society, nor does it introduce any idea more morally suspect than laws already legal in Canada. Additionally, legalizing non-reproductive cloning will inevitably lead to numerous advances in the fields of health care and in biological science in general. Using the knowledge that can be gleaned from such procedures, we could very well unlock the secret to curing Alzheimer’s disease [3] and a whole plethora of other conditions. But all of this logic aside, what would banning the research on non-reproductive cloning entail? It would lead to a brain drain as Canada’s best scientists head to countries where they can properly research their chosen fields. It would lead to a society where the rich and willing could travel internationally to get the superior treatments that non-reproductive cloning will lead to, while the poor would be unable to access the same medical miracles. All in all, regardless of one’s personal ideals and beliefs on the topic and irrespective of the immediate sense of foreboding that one might feel when they think about the prospect of creating a copied embryo; it is neither practical nor just to ban non-reproductive cloning in Canada.

    BIBLIOGRAPHY
    [1] "Therapeutic Cloning Treats Parkinson's Mice." The New Scientist 197.2649 (2008): 6. Print.
    [2] James Q. Wilson. "The Paradox of Cloning." The Ethics of Human Cloning. Washington, D.C.: AEI,
    1998. Print.
    [3] Vassiliadis, S., M. Kalmanti, and I. Athanassakis. "Plasticity: Advantages over Cloning and Gene
    Therapy." Haematologia 32.4 (2002): 337. Print.
    [4] United Nations. Ad Hoc Committee on an International Convention against the Reproductive Cloning
    of Human Beings. General Assembly. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on an International
    Convention against the Reproductive Cloning of Human Beings, 25 February - 1 March
    2002. New York: United Nations, 2002. Web.
    [5] Fielder, John H. "Cloning." IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine 21.4 (2002): 120-22.
    Print.
    [6] Xu, Jie, and Xiangzhong Yang. "Science, Technology, and Potential Applications of Therapeutic
    Cloning." IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine 23.2 (2004): 43-46. Print.
    [7] Fox, C. "Cloning Laws, Policies, and Attitudes Worldwide." IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology
    Magazine 23.2 (2004): 55-61. Print.
    [8] Coyne, Andrew. "It's Time to Talk about Abortion." Maclean's 21 July 2008: 16. Print.
    Last edited by JJJ-thebanisher; 04-09-2011, 10:57 PM.
    How we paid such close attention
    To each sweet and stuttered breath,

  • #2
    If Apoth, Xnull, or Ryan were around they'd probably discuss this stuff in great detail. If you're really lucky Chubby might get drunk and call you a soulless baby killer (And apologize the next day) but that's about it.

    If it helps though, I never had a problem with non-reproductive cloning techniques to further the cause of medicine and don't really see any major downside to it.
    Writing: It's more fun than a barrel of Ebola ridden monkeys!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by End Master View Post
      If Apoth, Xnull, or Ryan were around they'd probably discuss this stuff in great detail. If you're really lucky Chubby might get drunk and call you a soulless baby killer (And apologize the next day) but that's about it.

      If it helps though, I never had a problem with non-reproductive cloning techniques to further the cause of medicine and don't really see any major downside to it.
      All of that sounds fun!
      How we paid such close attention
      To each sweet and stuttered breath,

      Comment


      • #4
        Actually, End, my views on abortion have evolved in the last five years. A lot of my world views in general have evolved. I'm much more...progressive(?).

        But he's right. If I was drunk I would have some sort of extreme view I wanted to get across and then the next morning I would apologize. As it stands I haven't even read the essay yet (in a hurry, sorry). But I'll try to get drunk and read it this weekend.

        At the very least I WILL get drunk.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ChubbyTeletubby View Post
          Actually, End, my views on abortion have evolved in the last five years. A lot of my world views in general have evolved. I'm much more...progressive(?).

          But he's right. If I was drunk I would have some sort of extreme view I wanted to get across and then the next morning I would apologize. As it stands I haven't even read the essay yet (in a hurry, sorry). But I'll try to get drunk and read it this weekend.

          At the very least I WILL get drunk.
          On the topic of drunk thinking, I did a whole shit-tonne of physics last night while drunk to study for my upcoming final. And looking it over, today, it's actually pretty damn good.
          How we paid such close attention
          To each sweet and stuttered breath,

          Comment


          • #6
            Funny...

            Funny, that's kinda what I did too...hmmm. Are you stalking me?

            Comment

            Working...
            Do Not Sell My Personal Information