The Neiswanger Institute for Bioethics at Loyola University

Dolly on the Dinner Table? Don't Worry About It

Art Caplan writes in his MSNBC column:
Dolly, the world's first cloned mammal, must be turning in her grave.

The Food and Drug Administration has declared that meat and milk from cloned animals is safe to eat, paving the way for cloned products to show up in grocery stores across the land, likely without any special labels or warnings. This makes sense because there is absolutely no evidence to show that there is anything unsafe about milk or meat from cloned cows, goats or pigs. (Actually, the FDA is holding off on deciding whether cloned sheep are a safe source of chops, saying not enough information is available yet.) But many of us hear the words "meat from cloned animals" and get queasy. Dolly, fairly or not, is to blame.

Dolly was a sweet-faced little sheep who bothered no one during her life. Her only impact on humanity was to give employment to countless novelists, journalists, TV producers, cult leaders, Hollywood screenwriters, politicians, comedians and, yes, bioethicists, who otherwise might have spent years wondering what they could do that would scare the daylights out of the American public while making either making them plenty of money or getting them elected in the case of the politicians. Remember Osama bin Laden and avian flu weren't in the news when Dolly's existence was announced to a completely freaked-out public in 1997.

Dolly, whose remains are on display at the Royal Museum of Scotland, spent her six years on earth as the object of scorn, fear, derision and slander. The media had a field day upon her birth telling us that Dolly was the key to resurrecting the dead, creating vicious clone armies and a world in which everyone would be trailed by a hapless clone whose internal organs would be available on demand to prolong lives threatened by disease or old age. Who could like a cloned animal when the technology that created her might lead to innumerable copies of Kevin Federline, Bob Saget or Nicole Richie?

But worse was to follow. Soon wacky cults like the Raelians and nutty scientists and semi-scientists like the incredibly fortuitously named Dr. Richard Seed and the ominously monikered Professor Panos Zavos were hollering about cloning rich people, cult leaders, and generally unsavory types to the rapt and stupefied attention of a media unable to discern the fact that dressing in a Star Trek uniform and displaying a very bad hair dye job did not prove your bona fides as the cloner most to be feared.

All of this nonsense set the stage for the next big scare about cloning, which was fueled by the debate over federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. Opponents of that funding found they got the greatest traction for their desire not to see federal funds spent by invoking the word "clone" over and over again. Funding embryonic stem cell research likely meant a pod person would move in next door, some high-profile Republican legislators as well as President Bush would lead you to believe.

All of this nonsense took a toll. It made Americans forget that cloning is nothing more than artificially creating twins. It made us forget that every drop of wine we drink comes from cloned grapes. It made us ignore the fact that if you want to worry about what you are eating you would be better off fretting over whether the FDA has enough inspectors on the job at meat plants looking for salmonella and E. coli than whether your dinner started off as a clone. Dolly got a bad rap. And it has stuck. But the FDA is right to follow the evidence and let products from clones enter the marketplace.

If people want these products labeled so they can choose not to buy them, that's their right. But, before you decide, remember the only thing you really have to fear from cloned animals is what human beings have done to ruin their reputations!

-Art Caplan

Labels: , , , ,

comments

Who could like a cloned animal when the technology that created her might lead to innumerable copies of Kevin Federline, Bob Saget or Nicole Richie?
I suddenly see the light - sign me up for anti-cloning everything! We've got to save ourselves from more K-Fed!
Ahem.
It's been very interesting being around my smart, but not terribly informed, family while this cloning stuff has been discussed in the media. They're having the same reaction as it looks like most people are - which is "hell no!" I've had the "but it's just a delayed twin" conversation more times than I can probably count, with relatively predictable (ie skepticism) results. Everyone involved in the media has done a remarkably good job at joining in the chorus of bad about cloning - I suppose because it's easier to promote the idea of a bunch of boys from Brazil than not.
It seems like it's only been the last couple of years I've heard sane voices making arguments that might not be for cloning, but aren't arguing strongly against it as one of the most evil things to grace our planet. And so to turn it back to you (or anyone else who chooses to comment), why do you think it is that those in our field (if I might include myself in it) have been so slow to stop speaking out against cloning? Some sort of Heideggerean anti-technology, beware the negative potential thing? Cautiousness in general? Lack of foresight? Lack of experience? Or did it follow what you think the appropriate course should have been?

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

Will a Recession Mean that Botox Users Have to Use the 'Wisdom of Repugnance'? Maybe Not.

There's great news for those of you who would prefer to hide any expression whatsoever on your face, particularly those of you who think that... (more)

Husband Wants Kidney Back

Many divorces turn acrimonious, but a New York divorce has turned potentially life-threatening. But a new litmus test has emerged for real acrimony: has... (more)

Dr. Gupta Goes to Washington?

Reported by Howard Kurtz at the Washington Post yesterday, Obama administration officials have announced that Dr. Sanjay Gupta of CNN and CBS news fame... (more)

Kidney on the Rocks or Perfused? I'll Take Mine Perfused.

As reported in TIME, researchers from the University of Groningen have found a new method to keep organs from cadaveric donors better preserved for transplant.... (more)

Could Spider Silk Save Your Life?

Posted today at Nanotech-Now.com, Summer Johnson has written a column on the ethical issues with the new polymer nanocomposites that material scientists have created and... (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