Related articles and links |  1 of 3

Panayiotis Zavos, a global leader in assisted reproduction, told Congress last year that he, Italian physician Severino Antinori, and others would work with infertile couples to produce the world's first human clone by 2003. "Human cloning is around the corner," Zavos said. "The genie is out of the bottle." Zavos suggests that the world will hail the scientist who produces the initial human clone as a Neil Armstrong of the 21st century.

Renegade scientists and a handful of infertile couples are not the only cheerleaders for human cloning. Some biotech activists urge that cloning be included within a broader definition of human rights. Forty Nobel laureates anxiously proclaimed in April that a cloning ban would have a "chilling effect on all scientific research in the United States." Outspoken advocates for disease research and assorted Senators promote human cloning, but only if human embryonic clones are destroyed for their useful stem cells. Birth is never an option.

Reproductive cloning of a human being could happen sooner than we imagine, but Congress should never allow any form of cloning on American soil. As President Bush has said, "Advances in biomedical technology must never come at the expense of human conscience. Life is a creation, not a commodity."

Since the 1997 cloning of the sheep Dolly, Americans have become more opposed to cloning, especially for reproduction. Public opposition to cloning declines when this technology is hyped as a miracle therapy to cure myriad diseases.

In "therapeutic cloning," stem cells from an embryonic clone are transformed into specialized cells, which are introduced into a diseased organ to bring about the growth of new, healthy tissue.

Nonetheless, there are huge practical barriers to therapeutic use of stem cells from embryonic clones. Researchers have not solved the problem of tissue rejection. Also, new research reveals that transplanted embryonic cells may develop into harmful tumors. For clone therapy to be widely available, physicians will need millions upon millions of donated human eggs. According to one estimate, 800 million human eggs would be required to treat the 16 million Americans with diabetes using cloned embryonic stem cells. Some biotech experts admit a growing demand for donated human eggs would quickly outstrip the short supply. Tissue rejection, tumors, and the egg shortfall are warning signs that therapeutic cloning "fails the utility test," in the words of author Wesley Smith.

Advocates argue that therapeutic cloning is the fast track to medical breakthroughs sought by millions. But Senator Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), a cloning opponent and a surgeon, says research breakthroughs using stem cells do not require the fresh destruction of embryos, cloned or otherwise. Scientists are succeeding in using adult stem cells against disease. And, under last year's compromise by an agonized President Bush, the federal government is starting research on more than 60 lines of embryonic stem cells.

The therapeutic-cloning lobby argues that a human embryo is a nonbeing. Two of the largest Orthodox Jewish groups have taken this perspective. "[A] fertilized embryo in a petri dish does not have the status of human life," Edward Reichman, a rabbi and physician, told The Washington Post. If that kind of embryo is useful in saving lives, "[it] is something we would welcome with open arms."

Cloning advocates seem to have the moral high ground because curing the sick and helping the handicapped are deeply ingrained in all of us. But the promise of modern medicine must not breach our biblical commitment that each human life, even an embryonic clone, has essential value. An embryo is not like an acorn from an oak tree. Human embryos meet all the essential definitions of living beings.

next page... |  1 of 3

share this page

May 21 2002, Vol. 46, No. 6