One of the biggest stories that has to do with cloning would be the full replication of a sheep, resulting in an animal named Dolly. This cloned sheep became a huge subject in scientific conversation when she was born in 1997. Studies in cloning and stem cell research progressed as Dolly was physically analyzed. Dolly's physical status was constantly checked by the Roslin Institute, and her organs seemed to be functioning quite well. However, in 2003, Dolly had to be put to sleep because she was suffering from a gradual yet severe lung disease. Nobody knows how this disease developed, but people have their own theories. For example, some say Dolly obtained the disease from an environmental factor while others claim she died from unnaturally created.
Dolly's relatively early death in February 2003 created the debate about the ethics of cloning research and the long-term health of clones. These ethics include the proper treatment of animals during cloning. If scientist clone animals, and these animals die early, people tend to think of cloning as cruelty.
Obviously, cloning humans is another story. Primarily, human testing isn't ready because animals and other living organisms are dying relatively early. Also, the degree of scientific study with humans becomes more intense because people have stronger opinions about humans, which is understandable.
I end this post with a request to my audience: Feel free to leave a comment about your opinion on cloning and Dolly. I'd like to know how you people feel about this very controversial issue.
To view photos and gain more information about Dolly, check out this website: http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/antenna/dolly/index.asp
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
With Dolly's untimely death just six years after being created, what were the ethic questions involved. Were they questioning the fact that they are creating these animals through unconventional means or is it because cloning seemed to reduce the life span of this sheep, which is around 8-11 years.
Anybody that doesn't like stem cell research or cloning is dumb. There is no reason not to further our knowledge about the human genome just because of what people read in the Bible. Cloning organs would be a huge benefit to people and without research this isn't possible.
When Galileo suggested that the earth revolved around the sun he was killed. Now he is honored as one of the great scientists of history. Now a similar situation is occurring with cloning, where a "few" scientists are arguing that it is unethical. In fact this is not a scientific debate, because experimentation is the very foundation modern science. Instead cloning is among the many controversial issues used by politicians in order to further their own agenda by appealing to a fundamentalist section of America for votes. The benefits that could be received from cloning far out way the consequences.
This response is to alcohol 101:
That is a great question!
Answer: Actually, it's both. Ethical issues tend to include the proper treatment of animals during cloning. If scientist clone animals, and these animals die early, people tend to think of cloning as cruelty. Also, people argue that Dolly's death was the result of being "unnaturally" created, which serves as an argument for not only early death itself, but for the simple fact that animals and people should only be created naturally.
This response is for jdawghelton:
Well, although you failed to mention anything about Dolly, I'm certainly impressed from what you say about stem cell research and cloning. Experimentation is the foundation of modern science, and I believe that people should start to realize that experimentation with stem cells will bring about many benefits, such as cures to various diseases.
I also liked the fact that you bring up a political aspect regarding cloning and stem cell research. Politicians seem to touch bases on how they view stem cell research based on both cultural and advancement purposes. I say "advancement" because their opinion affects votes, which is very critical right now because our next presidential election is only in one year. Hopefully, in a future post, I'll mention your opinion about the political aspect of stem cell research.
Thank you for your comment.
This response is to the person who made the second comment (comment is posted after alcohol 101):
As the blog creator, I have the power to delete your comment because I don't necessarily like the fact that you claim people who oppose stem cell research are "dumb". That is biased, and quite frankly, it's immature. In addition, your user-name is despicable, which can offend others. However, you did express your opinion about stem cell research, so I'm going to the nice guy and give you a second chance.
Although you failed to mention anything about Dolly and you seem a little bit more radical on the religious aspect, I must say that I agree with your opinion to a certain extent. I am Christian, so I believe what the Bible says. After doing scientific and religious research, in this case, scientific experimentation should be accepted. This is because stem cell research will save lives. Also, I don't believe that stem cell research is "playing God".
I also like the fact that you bring up that cloning organs will be beneficial. As far as animals and humans go, this topic of cloning will always remain a debate. But if we only replicate organs, what's wrong with that?
Remember, next time you decide to make a comment, think about others.
I'm really not sure what to think. Either thing is possible, I guess the only way to really know would be to clone more and find out if the clones also have shorter life spans. Do you know anything about this?
Post a Comment