Ian Wilmut Pushes the Case for Cloning Humans

Without so much as uttering the phrase, Wilmut quietly articulates the case not only for the potential efficacy of "therapeutic cloning" but also for ceasing to use that word and "re-claiming" the scientific use of the verb "clone," i.e. meaning the activities that have been more recently associated with therapeutic cloning as a moniker.

comments

Well, Wilmut has also supported reproductive cloning once it is safe, suggesting, along with Glenn McGee, that requests of potential cloners be treated like adoption requests are now handled. He has walked a long way in the wrong direction since he eschewed any interest in human cloning in his book about the creation of the third cloned mammal, Dolly.

I've always found the reasons against reproductive cloning, once the safety issues are put to one side, to be pretty vague.
Can anyone give me some strong reasons that don't fall back on an unanalysed reference to dignity? (Note: I think arguments in favor of reproductive cloning in terms of autonomy are pretty flimsy too.)

"Bring me human eggs, the necessary social consensus and legal permission and I can get you your replica within a year," says cloning expert Park Se-pill of Korea's Maria Biotech. "In contrast to widespread public belief, cloning a human is much easier than cloning a cow or pig."
From today's Red Nova News
"Someone, Somewhere Is Trying to Clone a Human Now."
http://www.rednova.com/news/science/217425/someone_somewhere_is_trying_to_clone_a_human_now/

Actually, issues of human dignity are important. And they are not unanalyzed. But they are certainly not the whole story. If you haven't read "Human Cloning and Human Dignity," from the President's Council, it provides a superb analysis of why reproductive cloning would be wrong. And, it was unanimous, meaning that not only Leon Kass, Robert George, and Bill Hurlbut signed on, but so did supporters of therapeutic cloning such as William May and the martyred Elizabeth Blackburn.

contribute a comment

Comments have been closed for this post.

what is this?

A 'Nature Top 50' science blog by the editors, staff and friends of The American Journal of Bioethics. Science writes: "To follow the latest twists in ... science stories with social impact, dive into this Web log"

The original story behind this blog

What people are saying about blog.bioethics.net

recently on blog.bioethics.net

Is Hope a Culprit in Cancer Clinical Trials?

A recent study conducted by Emory University School of Medicine found that therapeutic misconception is alive and well in Phase I cancer research. According to... (more)

Gingrich on IVF: Bad for Families, Bad for Bioethics

Scientists, reproductive specialists and andrologists had better prepare. If Newt Gingrich has his way (and wins the Presidency), he will have a whole new world... (more)

Canadians have Bieber Fever...For Organ Donation

Yes, it's true. Bieber Fever has spread far and wide. But it isn't just tweens who are following the pop star, Justin Bieber's, every move.... (more)

Caplan: Say No to Sterilization, Forced Abortion

Art Caplan discusses a troubling case regarding a 32-year-old pregnant woman known as "Mary Moe" who is pregnant for the third time and who suffers... (more)

Rallying Around Amelia: A Debate on Disability

The blogosphere and the airwaves are filled with indignation regarding what has happened to Amelia Rivera, a three year old who has a rare genetic... (more)

this blog's feed

  • Subscribe
    • XML
    • Google Reader or Homepage
    • Add to My Yahoo!
    • Subscribe with Bloglines
    • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
    • Add to My AOL
    • Convert RSS to PDF
    • Add to Technorati Favorites!
    • Add to your phone
    • Get RSS Buttons

info

archives

tags