Regulation and Animal cloning

By: Jacob Robinson

Florida State University

Ms. McKenna

ENC2135 S0007

July 30, 2021

 I. Introduction

In 1996 Ian Wilmut and colleagues created the first mammalian clone, a Finn Dorset

sheep named dolly. News of dolly and the scientific breakthrough leading to her creation spread

across the world. As the news spread the research team responsible for dolly’s creation received

serious backlash from the public. Controversy arose as to whether such practices involving

cloning should be permitted or banned. Many believed that the practice of cloning was unethical

and a misuse of technology, in addition the practice went against many people’s religions or

moral codes. on the other hand, the scientists behind the creation of dolly argued the new

technology had an almost limitless potential that could be used to revolutionize medicine. The

ethical dilemma of animal cloning remains unanswered to this day. Animal cloning has various

uses, but could be especially useful to the medical industry, providing organs and stem cells, and

tissues that are currently in low supply. While animal cloning can be beneficial many are against

the practice because of conflicts with their principles and the chance of possible abuses of the

technology. In this paper I will outline the most ethical approach to regulating the practice of

animal cloning in medical settings.

II. Benefits

In order to create an ethical regulation policy, the benefits and consequences of animal

cloning must be weighed and compared. The main benefits to medicine come from a process

called therapeutic cloning. Therapeutic cloning involves genetically modifying organisms to

produce a desired material, the genetically modified organism is then cloned in order to mass

produce the desired material. “Therapeutic cloning describes the potential use of nuclear transfer

to provide cells, tissues and organs for patients” (1, Colman). Nuclear transfer is the process of

transferring the nucleus of a somatic cell into an egg and is used in most forms of animal
cloning. The process results in the creation of a cell with the exact same DNA sequence of the

original cell, or a clone. Therapeutic cloning is a huge breakthrough in the medical field as it

introduces a new and safer way to conduct transplantations. “Two of the most serious obstacles

to successful transplant therapies, insufficient numbers of transplantable cells/tissue/ organs and

immune reactions/rejections after transplants, are both overcome” (8, Xu). Therapeutic cloning

can be used to provide a source of important materials that are currently in low supply.

Organs can currently only be obtained through a volunteer organ donation or the death of

an organ donor, making organs a scarce material. Today there are around 100,000 people on

waitlist for organ transplantation in the U.S alone. This number continues to grow as only around

20,000 transplants occur a year (6, OPTN). Because human organs are in such low supply many

do not receive organ transplants in time, other have to suffer with faulty organs while they wait.

In addition, animal cloning allows for the production of healthy and disease-free organs.

“Infectious disease transmission through organ and tissue transplantation has been associated

with severe complications in recipients” (5, Greenwald). during human-to-human organs

transplants there is a chance for infectious diseases to be passed from donor to recipient during

transplantation. The infections can cause serious issues including organ failure and in some cases

death. Animal cloning would allow for the organ to be raised and harvested in a sterile

environment decreasing the number of complications due to infected organ transplants. In

addition, organs created through animal cloning would overcome the issue of immune reactions,

because the organs would be cloned to match the patient’s current organ.

Therapeutic cloning can also be used to produce stem cells and tissues. Stem cells can be

used to help treat diseases like leukemia, sickle cell anemia, and multiple congenital disorders.

Tissues produced by cloning can be used to replace torn muscles or be used as skin grafts. A
study conducted Alan Colman shows that by using embryonic stem cells produced through

therapeutic cloning, multiple cell types including muscle and skin cells could be generated and

used to heal injuries (1, Colman). In total therapeutic cloning could save the lives of hundreds of

thousands of people and help in treating millions or more.

III. Consequences and Ethical Concerns

While therapeutic cloning can provide many benefits to medicine, there are many ethical

concerns surround the practice of cloning technology. The main ethical concerns of animal

cloning come from religion, and possible misuses of the technology. Animal cloning involves the

intentional modification and creation of life, a process that challenges any religion that includes

principles of creationism. Such religions include Christianity, Taoism, Islam, or Hinduism. The

population of people that follow these religions adds up to around 70% of the world (4, Funk). In

a study done by the PEW research center 66% of people view animal cloning as a misuse of

technology, and religiously affiliated people were strongly against the technology averaging the

highest disproval percentage of all subgroups surveyed. (4, Funk) another ethical concern of

animal cloning is the possible misuses of the technology. Determining the uses of animal cloning

in the future is impossible. According to J.H Fielder on the topic of future abuses of cloning

“there are no clear answers because the technology is new and powerful. But there are some

considerations that help” (2, Fielder). Taking these potential misuses of the technology into

account when regulating animal cloning will ensure the policy is an ethical solution now and in

the future.

The main abuse of animal cloning that needs to be considered, does not involve animals.

The process used to clone animals can also be used to modify and clone humans. This could

lead to the marketing of genetic modification and cloning technology, and the creation of
‘designer babies’ or ‘genetic cosmetics’. Additionally, many people are against animal cloning

because of the unethical treatment of the animals. Cloned animals would be raised until the

organs were ready for harvest once the organ has been harvested the animal would either die or

be slaughtered. There are a few exceptions to this, where an organism can produce the desired

material until they die naturally, but most in most cases the invasive genetic modification done to

the organisms leads to a significantly shortened life span.

IV. Current Regulations

Even though most people are against the process of animal cloning, there have been very

few regulations or laws put in place to prohibit the practice. Today regulation on animal cloning

is overshadowed by human cloning, and the regulations that have been put into place are

inconsistent. “Over 30 countries, including, France, Germany, and the Russian federation, have

banned human cloning altogether. Fifteen countries, such as Japan, the United Kingdom, and

Israel, have banned human reproductive cloning, but permit therapeutic cloning” (7, Wheat).

Because human cloning is the main concern of countries, animal cloning is largely ignored, or

grouped in with human cloning. when looking at the ethicality of regulating animal cloning the

countries current regulations on the practice must be taken into account. Placing regulations on

currently unregulated countries would cause many to lose jobs, and the complete shutdown of

the animal cloning industry. Repealing regulations could cause outrage in countries with

regulations if the matter is not handled carefully. Thus far the world governments have yet to

take a strong stand for or against animal cloning, and the opinion on human cloning is in a

similar position. In March 2005, the United Nations proposed a declaration that would prohibit

all forms of human cloning, which included animal and therapeutic cloning, 69 nations didn’t

vote on the matter, and the declaration was passed with only 84 votes which is less than the
majority (7, Wheat). Many countries noted that they were disappointed that there was no

difference between reproductive and therapeutic cloning in the declaration (7, Wheat). This vote

shows a definite split between those for and against animal cloning, one that reaches even to the

world governments.

V. Analysis and Solution

Solving the ethical dilemma surrounding animal cloning is a delicate matter, with ethical

consequences and benefits to both sides. In order to create the most ethical solution to regulating

the practice of animal cloning in medicine both sides must be evaluated, and a workable middle

ground must be met. A total ban on animal cloning would satisfy the majority of the world

population, preserve religious principles, and prevent the misuse of animal cloning technology.

Allowing a total ban would also be willingly ignoring the people whose lives could be saved or

at least bettered by animal cloning technology. Allowing the practice of animal cloning enables

the technology to be used to help the millions of people in need and allows the research on

animal cloning to continue. This comes at the expense of displeasing the majority of the global

population. Allowing animal cloning would also conflict with many religious principles and

would allow the unethical treatment of animals in the animal cloning process.

The most ethical approach to regulation is to allow the practice of animal cloning only in

medical settings as an optional procedure for patients, and to limit the technology to only be used

on animals. This is the most ethical approach to regulation because it avoids any instance of

human cloning or modification, while allowing the technology to be used to benefit those in

need. This solution creates a middle ground that may not solve every concern surrounding the

practice but makes a compromise that best balances the benefits and consequences. The religious

concerns on the practice stem from creationism taught in many religions, labeling god as the only
being capable of creating life. Animal cloning has already been researched and successfully done

multiple times in such cases as dolly the sheep. The existence of such animals has already

disproved the theory of creationism to an extent. Minimizing the technology to only medical

settings minimize any further damage done to religion while still benefiting the medical industry.

As for the issue of the unethical treatment of the animals, in order for the technology to

be all out banned, it would need to be more unethical to animals then the current systems in

place. The production of meat, or animal produced products, in the agricultural industry follows

an almost identical process to what would be seen in animal cloning. In agriculture animals are

raised to produce a product and are slaughtered when the product Is ready for harvest, or the

animal can no longer produce the product. Because therapeutic cloning follows a similar

concept, an outright ban of the practice cannot be justified.

Limiting the practice of animal cloning to only medical settings means that minimal

damage will be done to the animal cloning industry, while also making sure the technology is not

misused in the future. A ban on animal cloning would mean that all the researchers and

companies focused on animal cloning would be unable to work in the field anymore, allowing

medical research to continue avoids this scenario to an extent. Limiting the practice of animal

cloning also ensures that the technology will not be commercialized or misused in the future by

limiting the ways it can be used and marketed.

Finally, this solution appeases to those against the practice of animal cloning by allowing

them to choose whether or not they want to be treated with materials created from animal

cloning. I believe this is the best approach to pleasing the population because being in a situation

where a person can directly benefit from animal cloning may impact their opinion on the issue.

Currently the majority of people are not on a transplantation waitlist or suffering from a disease
that can be cured by stem cells, therefore the majority of people being against a technology that

brings them no direct benefit makes sense. If a person that was previously against animal cloning

ended up needing an organ transplantation it would be unethical to deny them an organ because

of their previous views. Similarly using people that cannot benefit from the technology to decide

the fate of those who can benefit from the technology is also unethical. Putting the decision in

the hands of the person the procedure would directly effect is the most ethical solution to this

issue.

VI. Conclusion

After looking at the effects caused by animal cloning in the present day it is clear that

there is no completely ethical solution. There are ethical benefits and consequences to both

banning and allowing animal cloning. regulating animal cloning to only being permitted in

medical settings and being optional for patients creates a compromise that allows animal cloning

to benefit those in need while limiting the consequences of the practice. This ensures that animal

cloning can still be used and researched for beneficial purposes, and can benefit more people as

time goes on. Allowing animal cloning to be practiced in medical settings is the ethical decision

for not only now but the future as well.

Works Cited

1. Colman A., Kind A. (2000). Therapeutic cloning: Concepts and practicalities. Trends in

Biotechnology, 18, (5), 192-196 PPL therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-

7799(00)01434-7

2. Fielder J. (2002). Cloning. [Issues in ethics]. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology

Magazine, 21, (4), 120-122, 10.1109/MEMB.2002.1032649

3. Fiester A. (2005). Ethical Issues in Animal Cloning. Perspectives in Biology in Medicine,

48(3), 328-343. doi:10.1353/pbm.2005.0072.

4. Funk C. Tyson A. Kennedy B. Johnson C. (2020, December 10) Biotechnology Research

Viewed with Caution globally, but Most Support Gene Editing for babies to treat disease.

Pew Research Center Biotechnology Research Viewed With Caution Globally, but Most

Support Gene Editing for Babies To Treat Disease | Pew Research Center

5. Greenwald M. Kuehnert M. Fishman J. (2012, August) Infectious Disease Transmission

during Organ and Tissue Transplantation. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 18(8)

http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1808.120277

6. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. (2021, July 3) Data U.S Department of

Health and Human Services Data - OPTN (hrsa.gov)

7. Wheat K. Matthews K. World human Cloning Policies. Rice university Coalition for the

Advancement of Medical Research (rice.edu)

8. Xu J., Yang X. (2004). Science, technology, and potential applications of therapeutic

cloning. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine. 23(2), 43-46.

10.1109/MEMB.2004.1310973