Welcome

Human clonning: Status and Ethics Hariom Yadav1, Shalini Jain1 and Mukesh Yadav2 1Animal Biochemistry Division, National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal-132001, Haryana, INDIA 2SOS in Chemistry, Jiwaji University, Gwalior-474011, M.P., INDIA Corresponding author: Email: yadavhariom@gmail.com Presented at Paradoxes Sunday School Class, Sierra Madre Congregational Church, June 27, 2004.

Early Successes – Human Cloning 2001 – First cloned human embryos (only to six cell stage) created by Advanced Cell Technology (USA) 2004* – Claim of first human cloned blastocyst created and a cell line established (Korea) – later proved to be fraudulent The first human cloned embryos were not produced until 2001, when a private company, Advanced Cell Technology, produced 6-cell embryos. However, the first cloned human blastocyst was not produced until 2004 by a group in Korea. However, subsequently, it was found that much of the information in the publication was fabricated and the paper was officially withdrawn in January, 2006. Also, contrary to the claims in the paper, not hundreds of oocytes, but over 2000 were used, although no cell lines could be established.1 A subsequent publication by Hwang et al. in 2005 was also found to have been fabricated by intentionally submitting duplicate patient samples in place of patient samples and cloned cells. Both papers were withdrawn by the journal Science. More info is available from the Science website. Dennis Normile, Gretchen Vogel and Jennifer Couzin. 2006. South Korean Team's Remaining Human Stem Cell Claim Demolished. ScienceNOW Daily News. *Hwang, W.S., et al. 2004. Evidence of a Pluripotent Human Embryonic Stem Cell Line Derived from a Cloned Blastocyst. Science 303: 1669-1674.

Principle of Human cloning

Types of cloning Recombinant DNA technology Reproductive cloning DNA/ molecular/ gene cloning Reproductive cloning Adult DNA cloning Therapeutic cloning Embryo/ Biomedical cloning

Recombinant DNA Technology for Human

Reproductive cloning uses the cloning procedure to produce a clonal embryo which is implanted in a woman's womb with intent to create a fully formed living child--a clone. Therapeutic cloning uses the cloning procedure to produce a clonal embryo, but instead of being implanted in a womb and brought to term it is used to generate stem cells.

Applications

What are the risks of cloning? Reproductive cloning is expensive and highly inefficient Cloned animals tend to have more compromised immune function and higher rates of infection, tumor growth, and other disorders Genomes of cloned mice are compromised, 4% of genes function abnormally The abnormalities do not arise from mutations in the genes but from changes in the normal activation or expression of certain genes. A process called "imprinting" chemically marks the DNA from the mother and father so that only one copy of a gene (either the maternal or paternal gene) is turned on. Defects in the genetic imprint of DNA from a single donor cell may lead to some of the developmental abnormalities of cloned embryos.

Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis and Selection (PDS)

Why Cloning Humans is Ethically Unacceptable Controlling Someone Else's Genetic Makeup Child can reject any aspect of its upbringing, but it could never reject the genes that were chosen for it Such control by one human over another is incompatible with the ethical notion of human freedom, in the sense of that each individual's genetic identity should be inherently unpredictable and unplanned. The next nine slides examine the current status of embryonic and cloning laws. Shortly after the Supreme Court decision mandating abortion in the United States, a moratorium was placed on government funding of human embryo research. The NIH voted in favor of government funding, but the moratorium was extended by DHHS Secretary Sullivan.

Instrumentality Cloning raises a number of concerns arising from its consequences, of which instrumentality and risk are of especial importance.

Infertility - an Exception to Instrumentality An exception to this objection would be the idea of producing a child from an infertile couple by cloning one of them. But this raises other problems. Instead of being the unique genetic product of both parents, the child is a copy of one of them. It would not be the biological child of both parents in the normal sense.

Psychological Effects - Identity and Relationship Would the clone feel that he or she was just a copy of someone else who's already existed and not really themselves? Am I really someone else but put into a different womb? What will be my relationship to the one I was cloned from? No one can predict with any degree of assurance what the response would be.

Physical Risk To repeat the same thing on humans would be giving both the mother and the potential foetus an unacceptably high risk of damage. How many abnormal babies would have to be produced to get one right? Roslin researchers have said that there is no experiment that could be done to prove the safety of human clonig without casuing serious risk to humans in the process.

Social Risk Human cloning would bring grave risks of abuses to human dignity and exploitation by unscrupulous people.

The current law on human cloning United Nations On December 12, 2001 the United Nations General Assembly began elaborating an international convention against the reproductive cloning of human beings. Lawrence Goldstein, professor of cellular and molecular medicine at the University of California at San Diego, claims that the United States, unable to pass a national law, forced Costa Rica to start this debate in the UN over the international cloning ban. In February 2005 a vaguely worded and non-binding United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning was finally adopted.

Australia Australia had prohibited human cloning, though as of December 2006, a bill legalising therapeutic cloning and the creation of human embryos for stem cell research passed the House of Representatives. Within certain regulatory limits, therapeutic cloning is now legal in Australia.

European Union The European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine prohibits human cloning in one of its additional protocols, but this protocol has been ratified only by Greece, Spain and Portugal. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union explicitly prohibits reproductive human cloning, though the Charter currently carries no legal standing. The proposed European Constitution would, if ratified, make the charter legally binding for the institutions of the European Union.

United States President George W. Bush is opposed to human cloning in any form. Some American states ban both forms of cloning, while some others outlaw only reproductive cloning. Current regulations prohibit federal funding for research into human cloning, which effectively prevents such research from occurring in public institutions and private institution such as universities which receive federal funding.

1993 – President Clinton lifted the ban 1990 – Congress voted to override the moratorium, vetoed by President Bush 1993 – President Clinton lifted the ban In 1990, Congress voted to override the moratorium on government funding of embryonic stem cell research, which was vetoed by President Bush. President Clinton lifted the ban, but changed hi mind the following year after public outcry. Congress banned federal funding in 1995. 1994 – the Human Embryo Research Panel favored research, but Clinton overrode the panel 1995 – Congress banned federal funding

United Kingdom The British government introduced legislation in order to allow licensed therapeutic but not reproductive cloning in a debate in January 2001 after an amendment to the Human Embryology Act. March 2002 and currently therapeutic cloning is allowed under license of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. The first known licence was granted on August 11, 2004 to researchers at the University of Newcastle to allow them to investigate treatments for diabetes, Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease.

Right to Life The Declaration of Independence of the United States guarantees “certain unalienable Rights, that among those are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” The declaration of Independence of the United States of America claims, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among those are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” The right to life is one of the most important principles of law within a free republic.

Christian Arguments and Response We may not do evil so that good will result (Romans 3:8) Humans are created in the image of God before birth The human soul begins before birth Christian theology specifically addresses the issues surrounding embryonic stem cell research. Most notable is the Christian concept that we may not do evil so that good will result.1 So, even though people may be cured through embryonic cell therapies, the destruction of human life (i.e., evil) prevents is use. The Bible says that human beings are created in the image of God, which is why murder is a moral violation.2 In subsequent slides, we will see that the human soul is imputed to the body prior to birth, making the use of human embryos morally unacceptable. References Why not say--as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say--" Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved. (Romans 3:8) "Whoever sheds man's blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man. (Genesis 9:6)

When Does Ensoulment Occur? John the Baptist: "For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and he will drink no wine or liquor; and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, while yet in his mother's womb." (Luke 1:15) Paul: But when He who had set me apart, even from my mother's womb, and called me through His grace… (Galatians 1:15) Jeremiah: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5) According to the Bible ensoulment (the entry of the soul into the body) occurs before birth. A verse from Jeremiah suggests that ensoulment occurs before implantation (i.e., before the fetus is formed in the womb). Although not specifically stated, it would seem most likely that the soul begins at the moment of conception. Therefore, Christian theology would consider the deliberate destruction of human embryos as murder.

Murder Defined by the Bible People are not to be murdered because they are created in the image of God. (Genesis 9:6) Murder must be intentional, with premeditation (Joshua 20:3) Killing of embryos is intentional, and premeditated The Bible prohibits the killing of human beings because they are created in the image of God.1 In order to be considered murder, the killing must be both premeditated and intentional. Since embryonic stem cell research results in the premeditated, intentional killing of a human being, Christian theology would consider it to be murder. References "Whoever sheds man's blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man. (Genesis 9:6) that the manslayer who kills any person unintentionally, without premeditation, may flee there, and they shall become your refuge from the avenger of blood. (Joshua 20:3)

Biblical Arguments: Summary The Bible indicates that God recognizes human beings as persons prior to development in the womb Bible defines murder as being intentional and premeditated ESC research destroys embryos that are considered as ensouled human beings Embryonic stem cell research fits the biblical definition of murder, since it is the intentional killing of an ensouled human being.

Morality of Human Reproductive Cloning “Be fruitful and multiply” – assumed to be natural, but IVF and cloning not mentioned in the Bible Problems with cloned animals – most suffer premature aging and other genetic problems. Might be avoidable with better techniques? Biblical basis to condemn human reproductive cloning? What should be our moral reaction to reproductive cloning? Most people are against it, including scientists. However, the primary scientific reason for opposition to reproductive cloning is that cloned animals tend to suffer premature aging and other genetic problems. My guess is that this problem will be solved by better techniques. What should our response be then? God's first command to the human race was to "be fruitful and multiply." Most Christians assume that the reference is to natural methods of reproduction. However, many Christians have used in vitro fertilization (IVF) to produce children. These techniques are not without ethical concerns (such as what happens to leftover embryos). Cloning is another grey area that Christians will have to debate regarding its morality. However, the Bible is largely silent on the issue. Reference And God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth." (Genesis 1:28) And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. (Genesis 9:1)

Is adult human DNA cloning moral? Some talents seem to be genetically influenced. Musical ability seems to run in families. Cloning using the DNA from the cell of an adult with the desired traits or talents might produce an infant with similar potential. Yes ?

A heterosexual couple in which the husband was completely sterile could use adult DNA cloning to produce a child. An ovum from the woman would be coupled with a cell from the man's body. Both would contribute to the child: the woman would provide the "factory" for creating cells; the man would provide the "genetic information." They might find this more satisfactory than using the sperm of another man. Yes ?

Two lesbians could elect to have a child by adult DNA cloning rather than by artificial insemination by a man's sperm. Each would then contribute part of her body to the fertilized ovum: one woman would donate the ovum, which contains some genetic material in its mitochondria; the other woman the nuclear genetic material. Both would have parts of their bodies involved in the conception. They might find this more satisfactory than in-vitro fertilization using a man's sperm Yes ?

There is no guarantee that the first cloned humans will be normal There is no guarantee that the first cloned humans will be normal. The fetus might suffer from some disorder that is not detectable by ultrasound. They may be born disabled. Disorders may materialize later in life. Such problems have been seen in other cloned mammals. There is no reason to assume that they will not happen in humans. No ?

Cells seem to have a defined life span built into them Cells seem to have a defined life span built into them. "Dolly" was created from a cell that was about six years old; this is middle age for a ewe. There were some indications that Dolly's cells were also middle-aged. She was believed to be, in essence, about six years old when she was born. She was expected to live only for five years, which is shorter than the normal life span of 11 years. If this is also true of humans, then cloned people would have a reduced life expectancy. The cloning technique could take many years off their life. [These fears proved to be unfounded. "Dolly" has grown into a comfortable middle age with signs of normal aging for her age.] No ?

Dolly was conceived using a ewe's egg and a cell from another ewe's body. It is noteworthy that no semen from a ram was involved. If the technique were perfected in humans, and came into general usage, then there would be no genetic need for men. All of the human males could be allowed to die off. [The author of this essay is a male and does not think kindly of such a future. However, some readers might not object to this eventuality.] No ?

Large scale cloning could deplete genetic diversity Large scale cloning could deplete genetic diversity. It is diversity that drives evolution and adaptation. It prevents an entire species from disappearing because of susceptibility to a disease. [It is doubtful that cloning would ever be used at a level to make this a significant threat.] No ?

Some people have expressed concern about the effects that cloning would have on relationships. For example, a child born from an adult DNA cloning from his father would be, in effect, a delayed twin of one of his parents. That has never happened before and may lead to emotional difficulties. No ?

There are religious objections to cloning. Most pro-life supporters believe that a fertilized ovum is a full human person. When its nucleus is removed during cloning, that person is, in effect, murdered. A secondary concern is the whole business of collecting surplus embryos and simply storing them in a deep-freeze as a commodity. No ?

Some claim that cloned humans may be born without souls Some claim that cloned humans may be born without souls. They speculate that the soul enters the body when a sperm fertilizes an ovum. Since there is no sperm involved in cloning, perhaps the fetus would develop without a soul. There is no way to know whether a soul is present; it has no weight, it cannot be seen, touched, smelled, heard, or detected in any other way. In fact, many people believe that souls do not exist. Speculation on this topic can never be resolved. No ?

Fun of Human Cloning

Thanks