Sanctity of Human Life - Cloning
- Jan 9, 2006 - comment
The obstacle to cloning adult mammals has been the way that cells developed into different types: skin, nerve, tissue, bone, etc. A team of Scottish scientists, led by Ian Wilmut, sought to change the way key cells worked after being brought into existence. They accomplished this by using udder cells from a six-year-old, pregnant sheep. The cells were developed in lab dishes. They were then immersed in strength-building nutrients. After a period of development, the nutrients were cut back to one-twentieth of what the cells normally needed to grow on. After a period of five days, the cells went into rest mode, ready to be acted on by signals from the female reproductive ovum cells. These signals supposedly would tell the cells what to become; i.e., a lamb embryo. Unfortunately, it didn’t always work that way. Out of 277 adult cells used in the experiment, only 18 produced pregnancies. Out of those, only 1 lived—Dolly. Imagine the same kind of results in human experimentation. One out of two would be tragic. One out of 277 would be disastrous.
Lane P. Lester and James C. Hefley, Human Cloning (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Fleming H. Revell, 1998), 10-11.
According to a Gallup poll taken in May 2005, an overwhelming majority of Americans are opposed to reproductive cloning. An amazing 87 percent believe cloning humans is morally unacceptable while only nine percent believe it is acceptable. The figures haven’t changed much in the last four polls as the chart below reveals, but the figures are trending downward somewhat.
| 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Not Acceptable | 90% | 90% | 88% | 87% |
| Acceptable | 7% | 8% | 9% | 9% |
Joseph Carroll, “Society’s Moral Boundaries Expand Somewhat This Year,” http://www.gallup.com , May 16, 2005 [Subscription required for access]