Abigail Western

Gardner
English 10H, Period 4
17 November 2017
Animal Cloning
My name is Abigail Western and today I speak for the animals. Animal cloning is a
controversial yet under discussed topic. Supposedly the future of scientific research, it is
practiced in the United States today. According to Merriam Webster, a clone is defined as “a
group of identical cells that derive from the same ancestral line” (Merriam Webster.) Cloning’s
most common method assembles recombinant DNA molecules and directs their replication
within host organisms. Cloning is used for food production. Cloning is used for biomedical
research. Cloning is used for the recreation of a beloved pet. Cloning is a massive ethical cloud
hanging over our heads.
Supposedly, cloning research for food production is carefully monitored by the
government for the health and safety of the American people. However, according to the article
“Are We Eating Cloned Meat?” by the Scientific American, in January of 2008, the Food and
Drug Administration approved the sale of milk and meat made from cloned animals and their
offspring to consumers (Scientific American.) Adding insult to injury, the FDA ruled that
companies need not label foods made with cloned animal products as such. Consumers: chances
are you are unknowingly eating foods containing cloned animal products. This lack of
transparency could serve as a breeding ground for further damaging coverups if this practice
continues.
Looking to the experimental side of cloning, Dolly the sheep was the first successfully
cloned farm animal. Born in 1996 after 277 attempts out of 13 different birthmothers, Dolly was
euthanized at age six due to arthritis and progressive lung disease, as stated by the scientists at
the Roslin Institute where Dolly lived. Dolly’s death denotes a dilemma, as a sheep’s average
lifespan is eleven to twelve years. This confirmed fears that cloned animals would possess more
health issues and age faster than animals born naturally. Furthermore, four of Dolly’s cloned
“sisters” were euthanized after showing signs of Osteoarthritis as well. The most common defect
cited in animal cloning is the failure for the embryo to develop properly in vitro. According to
Jonathan Hill, from the School of Veterinary Sciences at the University of Queensland, in
various laboratories, the rate of success for cells developing into live fetuses ranges from 0% to
5% (Hill.) If it develops correctly, the embryo may not implant properly into the surrogate’s
uterus. Also, the placenta may not develop correctly, causing the developing animal to lack
nourishment. If an animal is birthed, a disturbing pattern arises of death within 24 hours of birth
from cardiovascular and respiratory problems. These risks show how inhumane it is to both the
surrogates and to the potential cloned animals to continue undergoing these processes. I urge
you: do your research, contact your representatives, make a difference.
I understand those who push for the continuation of cloning because I too hold an interest
in the sciences, yet we must compare the pros and cons to determine whether the moral
implications outweigh the possible benefits. In our era, humans grasp for any possible way to
prolong and improve our lives. While the research stemming from cloned animals has been
shown to provide some of these answers, we must think deeply as to if we are willing to sacrifice
animal lives for our own. While ethical actions breed unity, unethical actions generate strife.
Direct comparisons such as these force us to delve into how the human race views its importance
in the scope of the world. A human naturally views itself as superior to animals, yet animals’
superior itself is nature. Do we surpass that ancient hierarchy? As George Orwell said in his
novel Animal Farm, “The creatures outside looked from pig to man, from man to pig, and from
pig to man again; yet already it was difficult to say which was which.” Although I support the
advancement of the sciences, it is clear that cloning goes against the natural order of life, and
therefore should not be allowed. Some argue that another reason to ban animal cloning is that it
is far too easy to transition from cloning animals to cloning humans. Most would agree that
human cloning should never be practiced because of its major moral implication.
In conclusion, I support a mandatory ban on the use of clones in food production until the
problems of food safety and animal cruelty have been resolved and until consumer rights have
been reclaimed. In addition, it is absolutely necessary for us to take a closer look at the industry
of cloning for research, to address the issue of animal cruelty and determine if it is ethical to
continue cloning in any form. We must work together to lobby the FDA’s regulations on animal
cloning and put a mandatory ban in place. The animals are counting on us.
 Works Cited

“Are We Eating Cloned Meat?” Scientific American, Macmillan Publishers Ltd,

www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-we-eating-cloned-meat/.

“Clone.” Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/clone.

Hill, Jonathan. “Here's why we're still not cloning humans, 20 years after Dolly the sheep.”

Business Insider, Business Insider, 5 July 2016, www.businessinsider.com/can-you-clone-

a-human-2016-7.

Orwell, George. Animal Farm. Secker and Warburg, 1945.

“The Life of Dolly.” Dolly the Sheep, dolly.roslin.ed.ac.uk/facts/the-life-of-dolly/index.html.