UN: don’t clone people - November 12, 2007
Rogue scientists are going to clone a human unless the UN stops them by putting out guidelines, according to a new report from a UN think tank. Clearly concerned after recent advances in cloning technology, and perhaps also watching too many re-runs of The Island of Dr Moreau, the report’s authors want a global ban on the production of cloned babies, according to many news reports.
“Failure to outlaw reproductive cloning means it is just a matter of time until cloned individuals share the planet,” said report author Brendan Tobin of the Irish Center for Human Rights in Galway, Ireland (AFP, AP). Tobin thinks a previous, non-binding UN declaration in 2005 is not enough to ensure someone doesn’t clone a human (Reuters)
Frankly though I’m a bit confused as to which report some of these news items are looking at. Reuters says the report states: “A legally-binding global ban on work to create a human clone, coupled with freedom for nations to permit strictly controlled therapeutic research, has the greatest political viability of options available.” I can’t find that statement in the report anywhere.
The report I’m looking at is titled, Is Human Reproductive Cloning Inevitable: Future Options for UN Governance, which could probably have done with a question-mark somewhere. This concludes, “...there is a strong case and urgency to prohibit reproductive cloning since a ban on the procedure is emerging as a customary international norm.”
It seems most people are agreed that we shouldn’t clone people. But given the speed at which the UN moves on topics like this, what odds can you get on an international ban appearing before a cloned human?
Comments
It seems that "most people are agreed that we shouldn't clone people". But I've never heard a good reason as to why. What is the metaphysical difference between a clone and a twin?
Or a IVF child? Or a "test tube baby"?
If/when human clones are produced, they are not going to strap on white helmets and serve as soulless soldiers for the Sith Emperor.
Whenever the first clone appears, it will become rapidly apparent that cloning is neither the terror that people fear nor the path to immortality that some desire.
If I were cloned, there would be some new person who would likely have a very different personality from mine, not to mention all the other differences that would be there. He could well be healthier.
To be honest, the topic bores me, except for how it inspired terror in so many people. That bit is really quite intriguing.
Posted by: Rick Desper | November 12, 2007 05:21 PM
Just to comment on the previous comment by Rick Desper:
There are two good (to me) reasons that should be posted as to why cloning could be dangerous at the moment and even in the long run:
1) Technological reason: Current technology has not advanced far enough to make a technical clone identical to a twin. Most clones (of mammals) that I have heard of so far had some health-related problems or shortened life spans. --- Also, one should be careful with terminology: a twin, IVF child, test tube baby, or a clone have very different definitions, and it is not fair to only compare them on the level of their DNA. I (and I think many people) have no problem sharing their DNA with a different person, but they would not support it knowing that technology is currently not safe enough to ensure a healthy clone brother of yours.
2) Societal - long run problem with unrestricted cloning: How can it be avoided that the number of clones of a certain person scales with the financial power of that person (or groups of clones)? Strange networks could develop that many people don't feel ready for.
Posted by: Anon | November 13, 2007 07:03 PM
Presently, cloning human beings is a distant dream. So there should not be much a panic!
As of now, there are many lacunae in achieving success in producing clones as this technique has not completely been standardized. Even reports on production of mammalian clones so far, are few in number. Such clones could not complete their complete life span. There are therfore, two issues which are getting mixed-up:
1. The Science would like to adventure upon this intriguing field, develop the skill to clone and use the technique towards betterment of mankind.
2. Keping ethical aspect of cloning in mind, one would like to question how this scientific feat would be actually used for betterment and what should be prevented.
Ethics should allow scientific devlopment but should keep a check so that the natural existence and evolution of mankind is not challenged.
In essence, one should draw a line in such a way that neither ethics nor science cross their limits and allow progress of mankind.
Posted by: Shailendra Vyas | November 14, 2007 12:53 PM