Following this major scientific and technological breakthrough, it raised the possibility that humans can be cloned using the same procedure‒ somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). At present, however, human reproductive cloning remains a highly controversial issue. This is particularly due to the associated ethical considerations which include potential genetic damage to the clone, health risks to the mother, psychological harm to the clone and complex altered familial relationships. In this essay, we attempt to argue on why human reproductive cloning should not be banned. Human reproductive cloning, if successful, will allow infertile couples to have a genetically related child.
There is a significant debate developing in the field of biology. Biologists, professors, and many others are questioning the origin of the world and how its habitants came to be. The dispute involves the two competing theories of Intelligent Design and Darwinian Evolution. Science may not offer us absolute certainty about the world, however it can give us explanations for what seems more likely than others. Darwinism is a more likely explanation for species change as it is testable and has supporting evidence whereas Intelligent Design does not.
There has always been a misconception of what it means to clone. The general idea is that cloning is making a precise copy of the cloned subject; however, that is misleading. Cloning organisms does not work completely like the copy machine making copies, but more like breeding animals where two desired breeds are being bred to produce a new offspring where it grows into something that is somewhat similar to the expected outcome. To further understand cloning, the difference between therapeutic and reproductive cloning must be recognized. As Susan Aldridge illustrates in her article “Human Cloning”, therapeutic cloning is the creation of an embryo which will later develop into tissues and cells for the purpose of research.
There are different types of process to clone an animal, which will be explained in this research paper. The topic, cloning, have an ethical open debate. There are educators, religions, and others groups talked about the ethical problems that cloning had. The society constantly asked about the accepted of human cloning. Some economics groups insist about the cost of the process and all the money a country need to clone an animal or human.
Human evolution is a process that shows how humans today originated from primates. This process was most definitely not short, but rather lengthy and took millions of years to get to where we are at now. Human evolution is a very controversial topic when dealing with both religious and scientific minded people. According to Masci, “More broadly, most Americans (59%) say that science and religion are both in conflict” (Masci). When reading this statistics you believe that the Catholic Church is against the process of human evolution, but in all actuality they accept it.
Table 7: Factual, Conceptual & Ethical Issues 4.3 Ethical Issues for utilizing PGD There is an increased prevalence and knowledge about the use of PGD amongst Singaporeans. However, along with it comes a growing ethical concern about the extension of the application of PGD to screen and tweak the genetic information of embryos for enhanced, non-medical traits such as gender, height and intelligence (wholly termed as ‘designer babies’). Hence, it is imperative to discuss on the various ethical issues regarding PGD used for diagnosing genetic diseases and gender selection. Actions Party Ethics PGD for patients with high risk of serious hereditary diseases Bio-engineers and Doctors / Biomedical Engineering
3. Principle 1 Respect Stakeholders beyond shareholders Monsanto has done well by advancing research for better seeds and adding more jobs. As a company we need to make sure that we test and retest all genetics done to our seeds to insure we don’t harm people again. Being concerned with society in general we will be concerned with stakeholder’s vs shareholders. Being concerned about the stakeholders says a lot about a company.
Two of the strongest and most popular beliefs are Evolutionism and Creationism. Many great scientist fall under either category and there are many arguments for either side but neither has all the answers. While both have a basis on how we are here only one belief has a reason why. I believe in creationism because although it might not have answers to everything it gives purpose to life, but just because I need a good grade here are some more scientific answers. I’m going to start with the bees.
Over the past few years the ethical implications of cloning have become a topic of discussion for many academics. This is due to the birth of Dolly the sheep in 1997, the first cloned mammal by Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer. The cloning of the sheep was seen as a major leap in the field of cloning mammals and in particular humans. (FIGO Committee, 2006). This essay will argue in favour of cloning and show that the ethical implications are insignificant when analytically examined.
Firstly, it is the question of people’s professional interest. Actually, many thinkers and scientists are scratching their heads in order to find an exact answer on this dilemma. Perhaps one can imagine gratification they get, when someone finds the solution and it is finally over - it is like solving the Rubik’s Cube. Secondly, chicken or egg dilemma could help in understanding a right direction of development and expanding the general knowledge. If people discover that scientific theory is the right one and egg is the winner, then biological dissidents, not believing in evolutionary theory, might change their minds to confirm their mistakenness.