Clone Circus

Discuss this on our boards!

Clone Circus
by James Hall, Senior Associate Editor

Januay 6, 2003

"Leaning Left"

James Hall The first Eve, according to biblical Genesis, God created from Adam's rib. The latest Eve may have come from Adam's nucleus, placed in the egg by human scientists. Whether we like it or not, the idea of human cloning, if not the act itself, is upon us. So beyond the hype of whose child becomes the first human clone lies the issue of what we would make of this whole cloning business.

The announcement in South Florida by the CEO of Clonaid, a private company operated by the Raelian religious sect, of a newly-cloned baby named Eve has justly generated a storm of skepticism. No proof of cloning was offered by Clonaid: no tissue sample, no technique outlined, no scholarly paper published, and no scientist presented to explain the procedure other than Clonaid CEO Dr. Brigette Boisellier, a chemist who also happens to be a Raelian bishop.

From the perspective of science, this announcement is still a non-event. Even publicity-hungry scientists, and there are lots of them, know better than to appear before the press without a scrap of data for peer review, even if it is only a broad sketch of a complicated process. The Raelians promise something this week, but their press event appeared timed to scoop Italian fertility specialist Dr. Severino Antinori's announcement of the expected birth of a cloned child later this month.

Despite the lack of proof, the Clonaid announcement stirred up cries from religious leaders, bioethicists, and even some scientists to ban cloning, or human nuclear transfer, in the United States as has already been done in several European countries. But it would be a mistake to let this clone circus stymie genuine research into a host of potential medical advances.

What we call cloning conflates two different ends: the use of cloning technology to create human babies genetically identical to one parent, called human cloning; and the use of cloning technology to create stemcell lines for medical research, called therapeutic cloning. While most people, including US legislators, would probably act to ban human cloning, many would rightly refuse to ban therapeutic cloning because of its potential to cure so many different diseases. Unfortunately, religious conservatives in America are eager to ban both forms of cloning and have worked to pass legislation to do just that.

It's doubtful that any cloning ban, even a world-wide one, would stop people like Antinori or Boisellier from continuing their experiments. They've already left their home bases in the US and Europe to work in countries where a blind eye is turned to this kind of research. What a blanket cloning ban will do is stop legitimate scientists from pursuing life-saving treatments for diabetes, spinal-cord injuries, and organ and immune-sysem replacement that might revolutionize 21st Century medicine.

Even human cloning might one day prove to be feasible and relatively safe. Some of the scientists who specialize in cloning higher mammals believe that we're only five to ten years from being able to safely clone a human being. When that day happens, the chief argument against human cloning---the potential for the human suffering of the clones---will no longer apply.

It should be noted that natural human reproductive process is no piece of cake, either. In normal reproduction only one in three conceived embyros survives to be born. And many children are born naturally with genetic defects. It's the difficulty of the natural reproductive process that has fostered much research into cloning, and which drives infertile couples to seek a cloned child in the first place. Perhaps the techniques that lead to safe cloning will also lead to an understanding how to have healthy, happy human babies the natural way.

There was a time when the term "test-tube baby" elicited chills and horrified looks from the general populace. Today most educated people accept in vitro fertilization and fertility clinics as a blessing to infertile couples. In a few years, it's likely that healthy children will be created who are genetically identical to one parent---essentially a twin brother or sister, separated by years and a different birth. Should we fear such children, or embrace them as another example of the miracle of life? ***

James Hall
Orlando, Florida, USA

Photo of the author courtesy of staff files