PerspectivesAre you interested in submitting a Perspective Article? Be sure to read The Science Advisory Board's Editorial Guides for Perspective Articles. Click here. Cloning Time: Is it Too Fast? by Ketan Desai, M.D., Ph.D. Seeing double seems to have acquired a new meaning lately, thanks to the controversy over cloning. Along with the new connotation of diplopia, some are also seeing red. Cloning, after all, is a very important issue, one that questions our very sense of identity. Therefore, it is critical that this be looked at carefully. As I see it, there are two aspects to this controversy: animal cloning and human cloning. There seems to be a consensus that animal cloning is acceptable so long as it satisfies the need for human medical and scientific advancement. After all, would we clone animals if it were not advantageous for humans? The present purpose of cloning animals is for animals to serve as modern organ factories -- a combination of George Orwell's Animal Farm (in reverse) and Charles Chaplin's Modern Times. The mental image is clear -- a factory with grunting cloned pigs role on the conveyer belt to be slaughtered, and their organs harvested to be sent to hospitals for transplantation. To many, this is the price that animals pay for not being at the top of the evolutionary scale. The rationale is that if we can kill them to eat them, surely we can clone them and harvest them. Except for the animal right activists, not many seem to be bothered by this situation. The issue of human cloning seems to be a different matter altogether. It is an issue that pits scientists and medics against religious leaders and politicians (with plenty of crossover between the groups). The subliminal question appears to be -- if God created an individual (however remotely) can there be more than one of that individual at the same time? Would that second individual have a soul? If not, do we want soul-less beings amongst us? If so, where did that soul come from? Certainly it would not come from the traditional route assumed in most, if not all, religions of the world. If two identical beings did exist at the same time, it implies that the first one is not unique, with attendant implications on life and creation as a whole. No wonder the strongest opposition to human cloning comes from the creationists amongst us. As can be expected, there are many counter arguments. Some say that human cloning is justified for scientific progress. Others would say that cloning is justified for the medical benefits it could provide -- stem cells, haplo-identical organs, etc. Finally, there are some that just cannot get enough of themselves and would like to be cloned in order for the world to derive the benefit of more than one of them. After all, if one can buy a stairway to heaven, cloning is certainly a step in the right direction. Like many complex issues (such as abortion), there are many points to consider. These considerations need time. However, when science moves faster than our hearts and minds do, the luxury of time is absent. We need to recreate an environment where we have the time to cogitate and ponder over these issues. It is unlikely that there ever will be a consensus on human cloning, but whatever the decision made, at least all sides would have had their say and the issue thoroughly explored. ### Ketan Desai, M.D., Ph.D. SAB Member Since January 1998 ### << Previous Next >> [ View All Perspectives ] |
|
