FREE ESSAY ON GENETIC ENGINEERING

GENETIC ENGINEERING

On February 24, 1997 news broke globally that Ian Wilmut of the Roslin Institute in
Scotland had successfully cloned the genetic material of an adult sheep and had created
the infant Dolly. The discovery instantly caught the world's attention because Dolly had
only one parent; Dolly had been formed by transferring the genetic material of an adult
female into one of its own embryos. This process, known as "somatic cell nuclear
transfer", refers to removal of genetic material from an adult cell and then implantation
of that material into an embryo that has had it's original genetic material removed. The
only way to clone an existing animal uses the process of somatic cell nuclear transfer.
The science used to create Dolly applies to any mammal, and "the arrival of Dolly made it
clear that human beings would soon have to face the possibility of human cloning"
(Nusbaum and Sunstein 11). Motivated by profit and fame, scientists around the nation
have been researching how to apply somatic cell nuclear transfer technology to humans. In
response to this research Congress has been trying to draft legislation that will make
the genetic cloning of a human illegal. Unfortunately, because of imprecise wording based
on a shallow Congressional understanding of genetics, a ban on human cloning would
inadvertently ban essential medical research that utilizes essential genetic cloning
technologies. The term "human cloning" refers to a great number of technologies of which
only somatic cell nuclear transfer can produce a living human being. Rather than an
improperly worded ban on human cloning entirely, only genetic cloning by somatic cell
nuclear transfer should be banned while funding for other beneficial genetic cloning
techniques should be increased.
The reason why Dolly had been so special has to do with the original cells that she had
been cloned from. The mammary cells that had their genetic material removed are referred
to as somatic cells. Somatic cells serve a specific function only, like a liver cell or a
brain cell. Totipotent cells, on the other hand, have not yet become specific cells.
Totipotent cells, like the cells in a fertilized embryo, give rise to somatic cells as
the totipotent cells continuously divide, thereby creating the different somatic cells
that formulate a fetal human being. During Dolly's creation, Ian Wilmut and his team
first removed the genetic material from a somatic cell and from a totipotent embryonic
cell, and then implanted the genetic material from the somatic cell into the empty
totipotent cell. "The result is a totipotent embryo with the genetic information of the
adult from which the somatic cell nucleus was taken. This is known as cloning by somatic
cell nuclear transfer" (Larry Craig online). In its human application, somatic cells
would be removed from a living human, injected into an empty embryo, and then implanted
into a woman's uterus for gestation. During the gestation period, the genetic material
from the somatic cell would spawn totipotent cells in the embryo and would begin creating
the totipotent cells necessary for development. The scientific magic of the process
consists of the development of totipotent cells from the genetic material of the somatic
cells. Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), located in the nucleus of all somatic cells, contains
all of the necessary information to produce an entire human being. By isolating the DNA
of a somatic cell during a somatic cell nuclear transfer; the DNA of an existing human
directs the development of a fetal human being from the totipotent embryonic cells.
Genetic cloning by somatic cell nuclear transfer creates a clone of an existing human
being through the transfer of genetic material and then implantation into a surrogate
uterus.
Somatic cell nuclear transfer cloning of a human will occur and become common in the
future. Lee Silver, a biologist at Princeton University, believes that enough historical
precedent exists to suggest such a trend. Citing American usage of reproductive
technologies and for-profit clinics as examples, Silver suggests that the market
incentive to develop and patent cloning technologies will result in the common cloning of
humans in the future (Boyce online). Susan Root, the director of human genetics for the
National Center for Genome Resources, also believes that "it's going to happen" and that
"[society] will have to deal with it" (Merzer online). Robert Wachbroit, a member of the
Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy makes an observation supporting both Silver and
Root's arguments. He believes that the technologies for both transplantation and genetic
engineering are progressing and that they will become acceptable. (Online) Acting now
might offer politicians the choice to prevent the cloning of a human by somatic cell
nuclear transfer. In the future such an action would have greater complications because
human cloning by somatic cell nuclear transfer will have established itself and will have
been done numerous times. Now might be the time to nip human cloning by this method in
the bud.
Few, if any, reasons exist that can be used to argue for the cloning of a human by
somatic cell nuclear transfer. Constance Morella, chairwoman of the Congressional
Subcommittee on Technology, correctly observes the existence of national and worldwide
consensus that the cloning of an existing human should never occur. She cites several
developed countries, such as the United Kingdom and Japan, which totally oppose cloning
by somatic cell nuclear transfer. Supporting such an observation, the National Bioethics
Advisory Commission has concluded "that at this time, it is morally unacceptable for
anyone in the public or private sector to attempt to create a child using somatic cell
nuclear transfer cloning" (Senator Gordon 3). Dan Brock, director of the Center for
Biomedical Ethics at Brown University, argues that human cloning by somatic cell nuclear
transfer "would result in a persons' worth or value seeming diminished because we would
come to see persons as able to be manufacture or "handmade." This demystification of the
creation of human life would reduce our appreciation and awe of human life and of its
natural creation" (159). Additionally, a child's sense of individuality and uniqueness
would be substantially diminished as a result of expectations set by the life of the
adult from whom he was cloned.