Harvesting organs, replacing a loved-one who’s died of cancer or some other deadly disease, even duplicating a favorite pet have been themes of science fiction books and movies for decades.
It is science fiction no more.
A veritable dream of genetic marketing, the first “engineered” mammal emerged in 1997 in the form of a sweet-looking lamb named Dolly, through a process known as “nuclear transfer.” Since then, debates over the ethics, morality and even the possibility of human cloning moved quickly from the halls of academia into well-funded research labs, as scientists worldwide proved eager to join the cloning revolution.
“Many believe that if something is technologically possible, it is morally okay,” said Father William Maestri, professor of law and medicine at Pepperdine. Maestri is also visiting priest at Our Lady of Malibu and Bioethicist Advisor to the Archdiocese of New Orleans.
“The blessing of creation is variety, creativity, and diversity,” Maestri continued. “Do we really want a world where we fabricate or Xerox people? Who will be making those choices?”
In a kind of “Brave New World” dj vu, ethicists argue that cloning could lead to selective human breeding for purposes such as servitude or combat. Some fear genetic tampering could produce serious defects in the human gene pool, while others say cloning could become a tool to improve the human race according to a specific agenda.
“It’s important to see that each person is deserving of dignity and respect because each person is made in the image and likeness of God,” said Maestri.
Pastor Susan Klein, of Malibu’s St. Aidan’s Episcopal Church, concurs. “Human cloning is a profound, extremely complicated issue,” she said. “It presents radical challenges to all religious views on the mystery of human life, and a huge challenge as to our understanding of morality.”
Those in defense of cloning are equally passionate. Fertility specialists assert that cloning would allow infertile couples a chance to have their own children. Couples with genetic defects might have an opportunity to create healthy offspring. Many scientists claim continued study of the human genetic code will aid researchers in curing disease.
Still, evidence suggests that the line between genetic research and cloning experiments may have been crossed. According to Globalchange.com, Dr. Philip Damian from the Massachusetts- based Advanced Cell Technology (ACT), confessed under pressure during a live BBC debate that ACT’s “human cloning news was kept under wraps because of ethical objections and legal problems.” Research is reportedly conducted in secrecy.
Despite Clinton’s ban on federal dollars for cloning research, joined with the 30 state legislatures who introduced anti-cloning bills, some say human cloning is a foregone conclusion, an inevitable result of scientific will and the lure of the dollar.
In what some critics called the first step toward “designer children,” Lisa and Jack Nash of Colorado set off a firestorm of controversy when they became the first parents of a baby born from a genetically selected embryo. According to U.S. World News and Report, the couple pre-screened the DNA structure of embryos in order to identify one that would prove a genetic blood match to their daughter, suffering from a fatal anemia disorder. Some suggested the Nashes made a commodity of their newborn when he underwent transplant surgery to have healthy blood cells harvested for the couple’s ailing girl.
“What the Nashes did for their daughter is not too far from harvesting all a [child’s] organs,” said Klein. “I think it’s very dangerous morally and ethically.”
Added Maestri, “Anybody who says let’s wait, let’s reflect on [cloning] is looked upon as an obstacle to progress. We are in a microwaveable culture, there is always money to be paid, notoriety and fame, but what kind of society are we becoming?”
For those less interested in the drama of human engineering and more intrigued with the possibility of cloning a beloved dog, there may be hope.
Texas-based Genetic Savings and Clone (GS&C) CEO Lou Hawthorne says the company is foremost in the field of pet cloning with a staff of “world class” scientists, many from the reputable Texas A&M. With its sophisticated gene bank facility and state-of-the-art technology, Hawthorne projects GS&C is “within 6 to 12 months” of successfully cloning the first canine with its 3.7 million “Missiplicity” project — the goal of which is to clone a Collie mix named “Missy” — the beloved, aging pet of an “anonymous billionaire” who is reportedly financing the project.
Hawthorne said, “Clones produced to date in other species are very similar physically,” but are not “identical” to the donor. The current cost of canine cloning is “six figures,” said Hawthorne, in addition to GS&C’s standard fee to freeze the DNA for an additional $895, plus yearly storage fees of $100. Hawthorne is quick to add that “costs will drop quickly when we succeed [in cloning Missy].”
Veterinarian Dody Tyneway, DVM at Malibu Animal Hospital said, “If you’re not in the medical cloning [field] and do not understand how complicated cloning is, there is no way the average person can afford it or know what it means.”
Dean Graulich, DVM at Pacific Coast Animal Hospital, offered, “I’ve brought the cloning subject up to people — they kind of laughed it off. I think people might start doing it when the technology is really there.”
Many argue that due to the overwhelming number of dogs and cats sacrificed each year at pounds and shelters, perhaps the priority should be in saving the lives of existing animals through increased spaying clinics and more pet adoption programs.
Jenny LeClair, co-owner of the Malibu Canine Connection (a doggie day care facility), also works with pet adoption organizations and continues to witness the large number of stray cats and dogs who need homes.
“I am not for cloning at all,” said LeClair. “There are so many animals out there that are being put down every year — even purebreds. If people interested in cloning were asked to go to the pounds and actually see the dogs that are put down, they might reconsider.”
“If you have that kind of money, LeClaire continued, “Why not contribute some to a pet charity?”
Despite considerable scientific progress, the issue of human cloning and that of other species remains one of the most fiercely debated, emotionally charged issues of the new millennium. Critical, even disturbing questions are being addressed, yet for each new plateau, there appears to be far more questions than answers.