Cloning has become a topic of discussion. While there are many benefits to cloning, I think cloning’s harm outweighs its benefit in current society.
Cloning is the process of producing individual organisms with identical or virtually identical DNA.
The first reason is that cloning is not entirely safe and the result is not guaranteed: most of the clones produced have had reduced longevity and developed health problems. For example, Dolly the cloned sheep only lived to six years old which is the bottom end of a sheep's average life expectancy. At the age of five, she developed arthritis. Moreover, Dolly showed a high risk of pregnancy losses and abnormal birth. Even now, the researcher is still trying to clone another lamb in their lab; however, the lamb still developed lung problems that caused it to hyperventilate and regularly passed out (Weintraub, 2016). Moreover, When people have a trait that the scientists cloned in means of DNA, they have about a 21 percent greater risk of dying before the age of 76 than people who don't. This means that cloning which artificially converts genes has evident problems, which is reducing life expectancy. Adding on, in mammals, in general, the animals produced by cloning suffer from serious health handicaps, among others, gross obesity, early death, distorted limbs, and dysfunctional immune systems and organs, including liver and kidneys, and other mishaps. This means that cloning causes lots of adverse health problems, and people still aren’t able to solve those problems. These unexpected negative health effects could appear anytime in any way. Thus, it is unsafe to develop cloning and should find other ways to replace what cloning solves.
The second reason is that the cloning process is socially disadvantageous and unethical. As we all know, cloning requires many attempts before success. More than 277 attempts were conducted before a viable clone was first produced. Still, today, when we look at the success rate of overall cloning, a successful embryo gets created about 1% of the time in the best of circumstances. This only suggests that if humans were to be cloned, scientists need to conduct numerous “failed” attempts. This means time and economic loss are evident when creating cloning.
Moreover, cloning should be ethically banned because cloning can trigger the designer baby. Adam Nash was first conceived for his stem cells from the umbilical cord, which was later used for the life-saving treatment of his sister suffering from Fanconi’s Anemia. Since then, many countries have emulated technology to save families. India had its first savior baby in 2018 (Kavya Solanki was created to save brother Abhijit from a rare blood disorder). They were basically created in the form of fetuses using cloning technologies, and they were transplanted into the mother’s womb. This means that a baby will be created based on the parent or society’s needs. A baby, who is supposed to be born with love and care, is now being born to be exploited for a certain purpose. According to the NY times, this can cause further child abuse, more than the current 4%.
The third reason is that cloning increases economic inequality. The author of Economic Policy claims that only the rich, who make up about 6% of the whole population, will be able to afford cloning based on the mathematical formula that can find the current demand and supply of cloning. This means the rich will use their money to increase their plant, animals, or even humans that have good genes. As we are transferring the same genes from rich people when they clone their genes, this unnatural selection will inevitably increase the proportion of high ability in society and further widen the gap between the rich and the poor.
Therefore, cloning's negative impact outweighs its positive impact.
Writer: Soyun Lee
Commenti