Is Research on Human Cloning OK?

Since a sheep in Scotland was cloned, the world has been debating a breakthrough that converts science fiction to science fact.

But the reality of cloning is not quite what had been imagined in films such as “The Boys From Brazil” or even “Multiplicity.” Cloning does not create a carbon copy of an individual’s body and mind, scientists say, but merely a newly born genetic duplicate--like a twin--with as much potential for diversity as anyone else.

Now that the capability to clone animals is an established fact, scientists, philosophers and legislators must grapple with where and how to draw the line in cloning developments.

Should cloning research, especially human cloning, be pursued?

Steven Oppenheimer, Cal State Northridge professor of biology:

“There’s no question in my mind that cloning should be pursued, not necessarily human cloning, but the cloning of animals and plants can have tremendous advantages. We’re talking about a technology that can mean a major improvement to the food supplies of the world. For example, what if there is a cow that is a tremendously good milk producer? . . . At this time, I don’t think there should be human cloning. . . . The main reason is the technology is such that you have to go through hundreds of tries to get one clone, and to do that with a human, you would have to discard hundreds of human embryos.”

Dr. Gary Hubert, UCLA School of Medicine assistant professor and director of the Greater Valley Reproductive Medicine Center in Northridge:

“What typically happens in medicine, especially reproductive medicine, [is] the technology usually runs ahead of the bioethical issues, and that’s potentially very dangerous. . . . I can’t think of a good indication for cloning a person. . . . If you have that technology available in animals, it’s always possible for that technology to fall into the wrong hands. If not in this country, some other country, and it could be used for some not-so-worthy purposes. . . . Once someone is able to control the genetics, they may be crazy enough to think they can do something like this.”

Betty Odello, Pierce College associate instructor of philosophy:

“The question is who determines who would be cloned? . . . I think the idea of using humans as a means to someone else’s ends and a possibility of exploitation and a possible reduction of human values is very scary. . . . What would we do with a clone that didn’t fulfill our expectations? What would we do with a clone that was a bit of a misfit or a monster of sorts? . . . How far away from my expectations would they have to be before they would not have a right to live?”

Kenneth Long, biology professor at Cal Lutheran University in Thousand Oaks:

“If we’re interested in the welfare of children . . . perhaps one way out of the ethical dilemma is to limit all surrogate parenting until all children in need of parents are adopted. . . . If we were to consider what is going on now between a surrogate mother and people donating eggs and sperm, if we are allowing that, then cloning is not that much of a stretch. But I have enough of a libertarian streak to worry about government making restrictions on that. From an ethical viewpoint, I have a problem with surrogacy.”