Sunday, December 4, 2011

human cloning.

Effective July 1, 2011, Minnesota taxpayers have been funding human clothing. SCNT (somatic cell nuclear transfer) produces a new human organism at the earliest stages of development who is genetically virtually identical to an already-existing human organism. This is an extremely controversial topic that is even effecting the University. Found from MCCL, "The University of Minnesota, among some others, vigorously opposed the prohibition on human cloning funding, despite admitting that its scientists are not currently pursuing the research. The University explained that it might want to pursue SCNT in the future in order to create cloned human embryos to then kill for research (so-called “therapeutic cloning”).
I personally feel that human cloning should not be practiced. I also believe that Minnesota's tax dollars should not be put towards research. Not everyone supports this act, which seems to be unfair to automatically put our money goes towards this research without our consent. Along with this bill, "therapeutic cloning" was promised. The aim of carrying out this procedure is to obtain stem cells that are genetically matched to the donor organism. I think this is very unethical. Yes, this would be a huge step in the medicine world, but parents of sick children would basically decide to make a clone of their child solely to save their first child's life. That is a huge responsibility for a child. This also places a heavy strain on woman. Eggs for this procedure must come from a woman and there are risks that are involved with retrieving eggs. In order for someone to benefit from SCNT, many healthy eggs would be needed. Woman would have to take hormones that could potentially lead to long term health effects. Then, this would lead to woman literally selling their eggs for thousands of dollars. All of this seems like a sticky process, right now. There needs to be more research on SCNT without using taxpayers dollars. There may be little funding, but if this is what the majority of Minnesotan's wanted, they would donate to the research.

1 comment:

  1. Can't take MCCL (or the Stem Cell Institute) simply at their word (though the Stem Cell Institute is a good deal more ethical in reporting issues); they are making rhetorical cases, and hiding assumptions.

    THe science here is a good deal more complicated than MCCL allows.

    ReplyDelete