Layne Hazam English 101 Prof. Anderson Aug 7, 2010 Attack of the Clones I recall sitting around the dinner table with my family as a teenager and engaging in riveting debates about the numerous possibilities cloning had for our world. In recent years, due to sports injuries and other battle wounds, these possibilities have become increasingly personal for me, even as the technology and the debates have rapidly advanced. It seems that since the discovery of fire humanity has attempted to imitate and manipulate phenomena that nature has had billions of years to develop and perfect. Cloning is a perfect example of such attempts. In nature, cloning is the process by which genetically identical organisms are produced by way of asexual reproduction. With some success, scientists have been working on ways to reproduce this phenomenon through biotechnology, in a laboratory setting. In biotechnology, cloning refers to the process used to create copies of DNA, cells, or entire organisms. Each of these forms of cloning will be described in this paper, which will then explore the issues surrounding cloning from biological, technological and public health standpoints. Molecular cloning, or DNA cloning, is the process of making multiple copies of an isolated sequence of DNA fragments (Strachan & Read, 1999). This form of cloning is most often used in biological research, but is also used in more practical applications such as genetic profiling and protein production. In practice, techniques such as this are often used

producing vaccines and researching cures to common ailments. Molecular cloning isolates a desired segment of a DNA and links this fragment to a primary DNA sequence that is capable of replicating itself and the fragment DNA linked to it. Once this new DNA sequence has been formed, it is then inserted into a cell which will make identical genetic copies of the new DNA sequence (Strachan & Read, 1999). Recently researchers at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) have begun to apply this process of molecular cloning to the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) to find treatments for psychiatric disorders. Dr. David Feifel and colleagues at UCSD's Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Medicine program have started cloning the DNA from HIV. They are looking into utilizing the inherent nature of the HIV cell to multiply rapidly to develop non­pharmaceutical treatments for schizophrenia. By isolating and cloning the DNA of HIV, these researchers have been able to transform the infection into a cell which multiplies or clones specified neurons in the brain. In theory, this will aid in correcting some of the known genetic deficiencies found in schizophrenia patients. In its simplest form, cell cloning is the production of an entire population of cells from a single cell. In nature this process occurs frequently in unicellular organisms such as bacteria and some forms of plant life. The ease of this process is what researchers harness in the above­referenced techniques of DNA cloning; the cloning of multi­celled organisms, however, can be a much more difficult process. This form of cloning requires that a colony of desired cells be isolated. A chemical agent is then added to encourage mutations, which cause divisions such as the uncontrollable growth seen in

cancer (Strachan & R, 1999).

In 1952 the first vertebrate, a tadpole, was cloned. This cloning of entire organisms is also known as reproductive cloning. The process by which this is done, nuclear transfusion, seems simple in theory. A nucleus containing the DNA of the animal to be cloned from a donor egg is inserted into an egg without a nucleus. This type of clone is not strictly identical due to possible mutations of the inserted nucleus, and the lack of DNA found outside of the nucleus from the donor cell, which is not available to the new egg produced. One of the most famous reproductive clones was “Dolly the Sheep.” Dolly was cloned in 1996 by the nuclear transfusion process. In Dolly’s case, an adult mammary gland cell was used, and thus she was named after the famously voluptuous country star Dolly Parton. The process has a low yield and in Dolly’s case 237 eggs were used to produce only 29 embryos, which only successfully produced three lambs at birth, and only one lone surviving lamb. Dolly lived to age six and produced six lambs (BBC News, 2003). Though Dolly only lived half the average lifespan of her breed, scientists do not believe this was due to her cloning, as Dolly died from a lung disease common in her breed (Sheils et al.,1999). Some researchers have also speculated that Dolly may have been genetically 12 years old at her death, as she may have inherited the genetic age of the cell which she was cloned from (Sheils et al.,

1999). Dolly became proof that an entire mammal could be created from a single adult cell. Since Dolly, numerous mammals have been successfully cloned. Dolly’s success opened the door to scientific exploration of numerous cloning applications in medicine and nature. Of particular interest for me and the primary motivation for this paper is the potential to regrow and replace specific organs or entire body parts. This application of cloning has the potential to reduce the demand of donated organs, eliminate organ rejection, and reduce the use of immunosuppressive drugs used by organ recipients, which renders them vulnerable to common diseases. I look forward to the day when such technology is common practice and I could have a knee replacement using a cloned knee. Therapeutic cloning may also have applications in treating many genetic disorders and diseases. Many believe that this type of cloning will bring new vaccines or drugs that can repair genetic mutations. Cloning also has environmental and agricultural applications. Cloning may allow the development of unique organisms that can help break down harmful pollutants. Looking at the resent BP Global oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico gives an example of a real world application of how these organisms could potentially play a vital hand in cleaning up harmful pollutants. The cloned organisms could be released into the gulf and begin breaking down the gushing oil. This can reduce the time it takes to clean up the spill as well as prevent the damage done to neighboring beaches and local wild life. These organisms will have a controlled life expectancy and won’t be capable of reproducing to prevent them from spreading and causing any unseen complications to the surrounding region. It is plausible to envision using similar organisms to clean up other

pollutants than crude oil. Around the world they could clean up land fills, nuclear waste and the most valuable of all, drinking water supplies. Many scientists are also enticed by the prospect of breeding cloned livestock and plants that are the most genetically fit of their species. Fields of naturally plump livestock and lush pest­resistant crops may seem an ideal. Such cloning, however, could greatly reduce or even eliminate the extent of genetic variation in a species, known as genetic diversity. Genetic diversity plays an important role in survival and adaptability of a species. This diversity allows a species to adapt to changes in its environment, fight off disease, and successfully reproduce. A reduction of genetic diversity could therefore result in poor sperm quality and increased susceptibility to widespread disease. This was precisely what caused the great potato famine in Ireland in the nineteenth century. Since potato plants are produced directly from another potato plant, they are genetically identical and essentially a clone of the parent plant. During the time of the epidemic, Ireland relied mainly on one type of potato plant with little to no genetic diversity. Each plant contained the same genetic make­up and therefore was susceptible to the same diseases, making it easy for one disease to wipe out an entire population of crops very quickly (Sheils et al., 1999). Cloning also has, on the other hand, the potential to repopulate endangered or extinct species. Because of the blockbuster movie Jurassic Park, when most of us think of cloning extinct species we imagine a safari ride filled with dinosaurs and prehistoric plants and insect life. Scientists have yet to successfully sustain a clone of an extinct species. This has largely been attributed to the poor quality of the DNA available from extinct animals. Several species of endangered animals, however, have been successfully cloned. In fact, our own San Diego Zoo

houses tissue from some of the rarest endangered species (Pence, 2005). When it comes to cloning entire humans, however, a whole new set of issues arises. Most people agree that artificial human reproductive cloning is unethical. One reason is the unresolved safety concerns associated with cloning. The possibility that humans will be cloned in order to harvest organs has also been a primary ethical concern. The human cloning debate seems to centre around two types of cloning: reproductive cloning used to produce babies and therapeutic cloning used to generate cells for treating brain conditions such as Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease. Many people feel that human therapeutic and/or reproductive cloning are unethical practices. Generally, regulatory authorities have been critical of reproductive cloning. Few governments have laws to ban or means to control it however, but they have been less adverse to therapeutic human cloning. Due to the inefficiency of animal cloning (only about 1 or 2 viable offspring for every 100 experiments) and the lack of understanding about reproductive cloning, many scientists and physicians strongly believe that it would be unethical to attempt to clone humans. Not only do most attempts to clone mammals fail, about 30% of clones born alive are affected with "large­offspring syndrome" and other debilitating conditions. Several cloned animals have died prematurely from infections and other complications. The same problems would be expected in human cloning. In addition, scientists do not know how cloning could impact mental development. While factors such as intellect and mood may not be as important for a cow or a mouse, they are crucial for the development of healthy humans. With so many unknowns concerning reproductive cloning, the attempt to clone humans at this time is considered potentially dangerous and ethically irresponsible. Alternatives to direct human cloning have been explored, such as using other animals

and subsequently transplanting the organs into humans, known as xenotransplantation. In 1999 researchers created such a hybrid embryo using cells from a man’s leg and a cow egg. Though the trial was a success, the embryo was not allowed to come to full term.

The first human embryo was cloned by Advanced Cell Technology (ACT), a leading private biotechnology company. The cloned embryo was successful and allowed to develop for 12 days. ACT’s position is that “…an embryo implants into the womb wall after 14 days…the embryo could not be seen as a person before 14 days” (BBC News, 1999). These new technologies will no doubt incite further controversy and debate regarding the ethical issues surrounding cloning. Humanity has been cloning of organisms for thousands of years in the form of horticultural cloning. Only in the last few decades, however, have technological advancements opened the door to many forms of cloning, including the most controversial form, human cloning.

Though heavily debated, cloning is not inherently evil. It brings us closer to developing skin, bone, and other organ replacement therapies which most people approve of, while simultaneously posing safety and ethical concerns regarding other potential applications. Each possibility that cloning presents should be looked at individually and approached with an open mind. Cloning can create a reduction in genetic diversity which may lead to disasters such as the Irish potato famine, but it can also and enhance quality of life and even save lives. Like most scientific discoveries, it has the potential to be deployed for both positive and negative purposes. While its full potential is not yet clear, its benefits are anticipated to be numerous, and with proper ethical restrictions, its potential for harm can be avoided.

References BBC News (2003). Retrieved July 13, 2010 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2764039.stm BBC News (1999). Retrieved July 10, 2010 from http://News.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/ nature/371378.stm Pence, G. E. (2005). Cloning after dolly: Who's still afraid? Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. Shiels, P. G., Kind, A. J., Campbell, K. H., Wilmut, I., Waddington, D., Colman, A., & Schnieke, A.E. (June 1999). Analysis of telomere length in Dolly, a sheep derived by nuclear transfer. Cloning, 1 (2), 119­125. Strachan, T. & Read, A. (1999). Cell­based DNA cloning. In Human molecular genetics, : Bios Scientific Publishers, an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group.