What do you think of Human Organ cloning?

What do you think of Human Organ cloning? Topic: Topics for writing argumentative essay
June 24, 2019 / By Anstice
Question: As stated, What do you think of Human Organ Cloning? Should it be allowed or not allowed? What are your views? I need to write an argumentative essay this coming friday on this topic: "Human Organ Cloning is allowed"
Best Answer

Best Answers: What do you think of Human Organ cloning?

Zachariah Zachariah | 6 days ago
With the advancement and expansion of technology science has been able to achieve new wonders. These improvements and discoveries in science have allowed the human race to explore and learn more about the world. One such phenomenon is cloning. Cloning has opened the doors to explore human beings in a way that was once never possible. With cloning the human body, as well as other organisms, will be studied. Cloning and genetic engineering will both come into play to improve scientific knowledge, but is cloning beneficial? Cloning attempts has occurred as early as 1952, and the first successful transfer of embryonic cells occurred in 1970 (1), (5). Ian Wilmut, the scientist famous for the "Dolly" cloning experiment has paved the way for a completely different thought. There were other organisms that were cloned but what made "Dolly" unique was that instead of cells being taken from an embryo "Dolly" was created by using DNA from an adult ewe(3). The process of cloning was discovered to be simpler than what was thought. The first step is to take the cells from the udder of a Finn Dorset ewe and place them in a culture with low concentrations of nutrients causing it to starve and ultimately stop cell division and active genes (3). While this is occurring an unfertilized egg cell is taken from a Blackface ewe with its DNA filled nucleus taken out leaving a nucleus free egg cell that will later produce an embryo (3). Next with the aid of an electric pulse the cells from the udder of a Finn Dorset ewe and the unfertilized egg cell with no nucleus is fused together to begin cell division which will later turn into an embryo which will be placed in the uterus of another Blackface ewe(3). Eventually the Blackface ewe will give birth to a new genetically identical Finn Dorset ewe(3). With the creation of "Dolly" the doors of human cloning has opened the controversy and complications of cloning. The cloning process is not yet perfected nor one hundred percent accurate, in fact, it took Ian Wilmut more than 277 attempts before the successful creation of a "healthy viable lamb" (1). Furthermore, Ian Wilmut explains that mistakes where made in his procedure and there is uncertainty whether a fetus or adult cell was used in his steps of creating "Dolly" (1). Cloning of humans will be a much more difficult task and a huge risk where a number of things can go wrong causing malformation and diseases in the human body (1). It involved a slightly different process where a somatic cell must be taken from the female. These somatic cells will be harder to work with because they are specialized cells where genes are "turned off" and unable to turn back "on" (1). In addition, the "human clone" will be a "time-delayed identical twin" (1). Because of these complications and imperfections the government has taken action with the proposal of the Cloning Prohibition Act of 1997 by President Bill Clinton (1), (4). With this bill there would be no "implantation of cloned cells into the human (1). President Clinton believes that "any discovery that teaches upon human creation is not simply a matter of scientific inquiry but also a matter of morality and spirituality" (1). In addition to the actions of the President the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) agrees that no human cloning shall take place because at the present time it is not justified to produce a human child by the cloning procedure used to create "Dolly" (1), (4). The NBAC stresses that there is potentially a greater risk with human error as well as having numerous failed attempts before creating a perfect clone (1), (4). They are concerned about the psychological damage and the disappearance of individuality if human cloning became a common practice (1). Both the President and the NBAC find it morally wrong and currently inappropriate to put human cloning into practice. There are numerous ways where cloning will further aid in scientific development and help the advancement of scientific knowledge of humans. Human cloning can allow rebirth of deceased humans, cure diseases especially those related to genetics, and discover new data and ideas (2). It can prevent endangered species from disappearing as well as allow healthier human beings(2), (5). It will allow doctors to research and determine the cause of spontaneous abortions as well as research rapid cell growth of cancer cells (1). (2). New organs that genetically match the recipient may be produced as well as allow regeneration of nerve tissues and other damaged tissues, and further study in genetics, human body development, and medicine (1). (2). (5). Agricultural and livestock can also be improved where scientist can alter clone organisms with preferable better traits or ideal characteristics (2). All this will allow the people of science to have an in depth research of the human body. What is the downfall of human cloning? One would be the world lack of genetic diversity (2). The world will be
👍 240 | 👎 6
Did you like the answer? What do you think of Human Organ cloning? Share with your friends

We found more questions related to the topic: Topics for writing argumentative essay

Zachariah Originally Answered: What do u think of HUMAN CLONING and 'playing God'?
The idea of “playing god” in such a case does not seem too feasible to me either. This argument is mainly used by strict religious groups, yet as you say medical treatments are fully backed, not to mention the use of the death penalty in some countries. A heart transplant replaces an organ which is not functioning normally, so what is to stop one from replacing all the organs (ie using cloning)? It is the fact that if this argument is used for cloning, yet not used for the same principle in another field of medicine that invalidates it. I don’t think the argument is feasible. It would be, in my opinion, if there is one person or committee deciding who should be cloned and so on, having the ability to do it however is not playing god. The only field in which the argument stands its ground is genetics, as picking particular “good” traits to improve future generations. But modifying the whole of the human race is not all a good prospect. Designing a baby in my opinion is immoral, and this is exactly what cloning allows, if used as such. Not to mention significantly reducing genetic variation in the human gene pool and thus vastly increases the chance of one mutation spreading and endangering the very future generations “we” attempted to perfect. Using such techniques in medicine, for re-growing particular tissue for example, is mainly stem cell research. Manipulating and cloning stem cells to allow for a “store” is more feasible, so that if one day something happens to you, they can aid full recovery. This in my opinion is not quite cloning a human, as a stem cell is not regarded as a living human. I am against cloning, for many reasons. No procedure to date provides full and problem-free cloning. There are horrific mutations occurring in most of the procedures when cloning animals, imagine your perfect designer baby being a victim of incorrect cloning procedure... As a matter of fact, dolly the sheep took 277 attempts to clone properly. This gives a probability of 0.4% that a clone is successful, and yet it was not fully successful as dolly the sheep died prematurely. Given that procedures improve, should we even be thinking about cloning until there is a 100% successful method, I think not. Even then, can we have children clones knowing that there is a significant risk that they may die young? If one is cloned successfully, how would they feel knowing that they are not unique, that they are a clone? If one is cloned using genes from a young person for example, will these genes not continue to develop? Will they not “grow” to give the young newborn traits and possibly looks of a grown person? It is impossible to tell, and is a major problem faced with cloning. Cloning also costs vast sums of money, and provides too many problems to be worth the money in my opinion, money that could be spent on populations lacking basic healthcare, where they could go a lot further. I back stem cell research but not human cloning; this is all of my opinion of course!

Sherman Sherman
The big ethical problem (for some, but not me) is that the starting material for cloning organs would be human embryonic stem cells. You are probably aware of the controversy surrounding these cells, since to obtain them, you need to destroy a human embryo. However, these cells provide the best theoretical starting point to grow histocompatable tissues to replace damaged organs like the heart. Personally I think it is unethical to not use huESC for research into this type of therapy.
👍 100 | 👎 0

Nowell Nowell
Cloning organs would end the problems we currently have with organ transplants. No more shortages, no waiting lists, no need for immunosuppression therapy or long-term dialysis. Just grow a matching organ and with a simple operation install it, and away you go.
👍 95 | 👎 -6

Landon Landon
you can clone and it has + and some - + saves life reduces chemical risks and side effects leads to genetical modifications - increases population bad for pharmacology gene modifications if done incorrestly may lead to " mutations "
👍 90 | 👎 -12

Landon Originally Answered: Why isnt' cloning - especially human beings legal in the USA?
Because scientists shouldn't be allowed to play God. Besides, even if cloning of human beings was allowed, they would have no soul.

If you have your own answer to the question topics for writing argumentative essay, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.