Encyclopedic YouTube
1 / 5
✪ Why you can't clone people
✪ Human cloning (narrated by Pavel Tishchenko and Valery Ilyinsky)
✪ Cloning (narrated by Konstantin Severinov)
✪ An Islamic perspective on cloning
✪ Cloning people | Secret military bases and laboratories | Alien technologies | clones
Subtitles
Technology
The most successful of the methods for cloning higher animals turned out to be the “nucleus transfer” method. It was he who was used to clone the sheep Dolly in Scotland, who lived for six and a half years and left behind 6 lambs, so that we could talk about the success of the experiment. According to scientists [ ] , this technique is the best we have today to start directly developing a method for human cloning. But Dolly died of cancer, and the lambs were not all healthy.
However, after some time, a refutation of this experiment was published in the Independent with reference to Nature Genetics, which were among the first to report the successful cloning of a sheep. In fact, Dolly the sheep had the genome of two mothers, which contradicts the definition of cloning, she also had a highly developed Hayflick Limit, which is associated with her relatively short life.
The method of parthenogenesis looks more limited and problematic, in which the division and growth of an unfertilized egg is induced, even if it is implemented, it will only allow us to talk about success in cloning female individuals.
Therapeutic human cloning
Therapeutic human cloning - assumes that the development of the embryo stops within 14 [ ] days, and the embryo itself is used as a product for obtaining stem cells. legislators in many countries [ ] fear that the legalization of therapeutic cloning will lead to its transition to reproductive. However, in some countries (USA, UK) therapeutic cloning is allowed.
Prospects for cloning consciousness
Cloning in the future will not be able to provide value, due to the fact that humanity still does not understand what consciousness is, and why it is not possible to extract an identifiable point of consciousness, since the scientific method is not accurate enough when building a chain of connections that presuppose the "derivative" itself, by means of synthesis of consciousness.
Simply put, the necessary tools have not yet been developed.
Obstacles to cloning
Technological difficulties and limitations
The most fundamental limitation is the impossibility of repeating consciousness, which means that we cannot talk about the complete identity of individuals, as shown in some films, but only about conditional identity, the measure and border of which is still subject to research, but for support, identity is taken as a basis identical twins. The inability to achieve 100% purity of experience causes some non-identity of clones, for this reason the practical value of cloning is reduced.
Social and ethical aspect
Fears are caused by such moments as a high percentage of failures in cloning and the associated possibility of the appearance of inferior people. As well as questions of paternity, motherhood, inheritance, marriage and many others.
Ethical-religious aspect
From the point of view of the main world religions (Christianity, Islam, Buddhism), human cloning is either a problematic act or an act that goes beyond the dogma and requires theologians to clearly justify one or another position of religious hierarchs.
The key point that causes the most rejection is the purpose of cloning - the artificial creation of life in an unnatural way, which is an attempt to remake the mechanisms, in terms of religion, created by God.
Also, an important negative point is the creation of a person only for immediate killing during therapeutic cloning, and the almost inevitable creation of several identical clones at once with modern methods (as in IVF), which are almost always killed.
As for cloning, as a scientific experiment, it makes sense if it benefits a specific person, but if it is used all the time, it is not good.
At the same time, some non-religious movements (raelites) actively support developments in human cloning. [ ]
Attitude in society
A number of civil society organizations (WTA) advocate for lifting restrictions on therapeutic cloning. [ ]
Biosecurity
The issues of biological safety of human cloning are discussed, in particular, the long-term unpredictability of genetic changes.
Human cloning legislation
1996-2001
The only international act establishing the prohibition of human cloning is the Additional Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Human Dignity in connection with the application of biology and medicine, concerning the prohibition of the cloning of human beings, which was signed on January 12, 1998 by 24 countries out of 43 member countries of the Council Europe (the Convention itself was adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on April 4, 1997). On March 1, 2001, after ratification by 5 countries, this Protocol entered into force.
2005
On February 19, 2005, the United Nations called on UN member states to enact legislation banning all forms of cloning, as they are "contrary to the dignity of man" and oppose the "protection of human life." The UN Declaration on Human Cloning, adopted by General Assembly resolution 59/280 of March 8, 2005, calls on Member States to prohibit all forms of human cloning to the extent that they are incompatible with human dignity and the protection of human life.
During the discussion at the UN level, several versions of the declaration were considered: Belgium, Britain, Japan, South Korea, Russia and a number of other countries suggested leaving the issue of therapeutic cloning to the discretion of the states themselves; Costa Rica, the USA, Spain and a number of others have called for a complete ban on all forms of cloning.
Criminal liability
Currently, the process of criminalization of human cloning is actively unfolding in the world. In particular, such compositions are included in the new criminal codes of Spain 1995, El Salvador 1997, Colombia 2000, Estonia 2001, Mexico (federal district) 2002, Moldova 2002, Romania 2004. In Slovenia, the corresponding the amendment to the Criminal Code was made in 2002, in Slovakia - in 2003.
In France, the Penal Code was amended to include liability for cloning under the Bioethics Law of 6 August 2004.
In some countries (Brazil, Germany, Great Britain, Japan) criminal liability for cloning is established by special laws. For example, the German Federal Law on the Protection of Embryos of 1990 makes it a crime to create an embryo that is genetically identical to another embryo derived from a living or dead person.
In the UK, the relevant criminal provisions are contained in the Human Reproductive Cloning Act 2001 (Human Reproductive Cloning Act 2001), which provides for a sanction of 10 years in prison. However, therapeutic human cloning is allowed.
In the United States, the ban on cloning was first introduced back in 1980. In 2003, the US House of Representatives passed a law (Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003), according to which cloning, aimed at both reproduction and medical research and treatment, is considered as a crime with a possible 10-year prison sentence and a $1 million fine. In January 2009, the ban on therapeutic cloning was lifted.
In Japan, on November 29, 2000, the Parliament passed the "Law Regulating the Application of Human Cloning Technology and Other Related Technologies" containing criminal sanctions.
Human cloning in Russia
Although Russia does not participate in the above Convention and Protocol, it has not remained aloof from global trends, responding to the challenge of the times by adopting the Federal Law “On a temporary ban on human cloning” dated May 20, 2002 No. 54-FZ.
As stated in its preamble, the law introduced a ban on human cloning based on the principles of respect for the individual, recognition of the value of the individual, the need to protect human rights and freedoms, and taking into account the insufficiently studied biological and social consequences of human cloning. Taking into account the prospect of using existing and developing technologies for cloning organisms, it is possible to extend the ban on human cloning or cancel it as scientific knowledge in this area is accumulated, moral, social and ethical standards are determined when using human cloning technologies.
Human cloning in the Law is understood as “the creation of a person genetically identical to another living or deceased person by transferring the nucleus of a human somatic cell into a female reproductive cell devoid of a nucleus”, that is, we are talking only about reproductive, and not therapeutic cloning.
According to Art. 4 of the Law, persons guilty of violating it are liable in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation.
According to Art. 1 of the Law, a temporary ban was introduced for five years, which expired in June 2007, and in the next two years, the issue of human cloning was not regulated by Russian law in any way. However, at the end of March 2010, the ban on human cloning in Russia was extended by adopting Art. 1 of the Law of the amendment, extending the ban on human cloning for an indefinite period - until the entry into force of the law establishing the procedure for the use of biotechnology in this area.
The reason for the ban is stated in the explanatory note to the bill: “Human cloning faces many legal, ethical and religious problems that do not yet have an obvious solution.”
The new version of the article stipulates that the ban does not apply to the cloning of organisms for other purposes.
Some politicians expressed regret at the extension of the ban on human cloning. In particular, State Duma deputy Vladimir Zhirinovsky said:
We will certainly strive to lift the ban on human cloning - this is necessary for the economy, for demography, for the family, for traditions, this is only a benefit, there is no harm.
Clone Identity
Contrary to popular misconception, a clone is usually not a complete copy of the original, since only the genotype is copied during cloning, and the phenotype is not copied.
Moreover, even when developing under the same conditions, cloned organisms will not be completely identical, as there are random deviations in development. This is proved by the example of natural human clones - monozygotic twins, which usually develop in very similar conditions. Parents and friends can tell them apart by the location of the moles, slight differences in facial features, voice, and other signs. They do not have identical branching of blood vessels, and their papillary lines are also far from completely identical. Although the concordance of many traits (including those related to intelligence and character traits) in monozygotic twins is usually much higher than in dizygotic twins, it is far from always one hundred percent.
Human cloning in popular culture
In science fiction, many authors have written about cloning. Nancy Friedman's novel "Joshua, No Man's Son" is dedicated to the cloning of the murdered American president (with a hint that this is John Fitzgerald Kennedy). In Anatoly Kudryavitsky's story "Parade of Mirrors and Reflections" - Yuri Andropov. Stefan Brace's novel "The Angel Maker" brought the author a stunning success. The book tells about Victor Hopp - a lonely boy from a monastery orphanage, a promising young scientist obsessed with genetics, destroying all obstacles to his goal. House of the Scorpion, a children's detective story written by Nancy Farmer, follows the life of a clone boy created by a Mexican drug lord. Films from the Star Wars series, Battlestar Galactica, The Prestige, The Sixth Day, The Fifth Element, The Sixth Element, Resident Evil in 3D: Afterlife, Don't Let Me Go (movie) are devoted to the same topic ”, “Island”, “Another”, “Moon 2112”, “Womb”, “Alien: Resurrection”, Brazilian TV series “
A clone is an identical twin of another person, delayed in time. In fact, we are not even talking about cloning, but about obtaining a copy of an individual, since the term “cloning” implies obtaining a certain set of individuals. But the word has already taken root, so it is still used. Science fiction novels and movies have given people the impression that human clones will turn out to be mindless zombies, monsters like Frankenstein, or doubles.
In fact, there is an opinion that human clones will be ordinary human beings. They will be carried by an ordinary woman for 9 months, they will be born and will be brought up in the family, like any other child. It will take them 18 years to come of age, just like everyone else. Therefore, the twin clone will be several decades younger than its original, so there is no danger of people confusing the twin clone with the original. Just like identical twins, the clone and the DNA donor will have different fingerprints. The clone will not inherit any of the original individual's memories. Thanks to all these differences, a clone is not a photocopy or double of a person, but simply a younger identical twin. Human clones will have the same legal rights and obligations as any other human. The clones will be human beings in the fullest sense. The main points due to which human cloning raises many objections are the following:
The formation of a person as a person is based not only on biological heredity, it is also determined by the family, social and cultural environment. When cloning an individual, it is impossible to recreate all those conditions of upbringing and education that formed the personality of his prototype (nucleus donor).
In asexual reproduction, the initially rigid programming of the genotype predetermines a smaller variety of interactions of a developing organism with changing environmental conditions (compared to sexual reproduction, when two genomes participate in the formation of an individual, interacting in a complex and unpredictable way with each other and with the environment). This objection is based on the so-called. extreme extrapolation. There are more than 5 billion people on the planet. Obviously, at first, human cloning will be carried out on a very modest scale due to the expected cost of the procedure. Besides, most women still don't want to be mothers of twin clones. It will take many decades before the total number of human clones reaches at least 1 million people worldwide. Percentage-wise, this would represent a microscopic fraction of the total population and would have no impact on the genetic diversity of humans. But in the future, restrictions will become necessary. But where to draw the line? This question may be unresolvable.
Almost all religious teachings insist that the birth of a person is in the “hands” of higher powers, that conception and birth should occur only naturally.
· it is believed that human cloning can lead to the creation of freaks and monsters. Human cloning is often compared to human genetic engineering. In cloning, DNA is copied, resulting in another person, an exact twin of an existing individual and therefore not a monster or freak. Genetic engineering, on the other hand, involves the modification of human DNA, as a result of which a person may appear, unlike any other that previously existed. This could conceivably lead to the creation of very unusual people, even monsters. Human genetic engineering, while having great positive potential, is indeed a very risky undertaking and should only be carried out with the greatest care and supervision. Cloning is safe and trite compared to genetic engineering. This is often used as an argument in defense of cloning: "If you are afraid of human cloning, then human genetic engineering should simply terrify you."
The technology is not perfect, it can lead to the death of the fetus. No sphere of human activity is free from accidental death. Human cloning is no exception. Some of the sheep cloned at Raslin were stillborn. At the moment, mammalian cloning technology is in the experimental stage and the success rate is still low. Judging by additional experiments on higher mammals, it can be foreseen that the cloning procedure will be improved to the point where the risk of miscarriage or death of the child will be the same as for other births.
At the same time, there are at least two good reasons for cloning:
· provide an opportunity for families to conceive twin children of outstanding personalities;
Allow childless couples to have children.
Cloning of prominent people is a very controversial phenomenon. At present, it is impossible to say with certainty what percentage of twins of outstanding people will make equal contributions to science, and whether they will give at all. At the same time, it may reduce the infusion of outside talent into the scientific realm. However, if cloning is banned, we will never know. Decisiveness and energy are undoubtedly important characteristics of many prominent people. There are suggestions that they are strongly influenced by genetics. If it turns out that clones of prominent people do not live up to the reputation of their predecessors, then the incentive to clone people will weaken. Then we will see that people, being informed, will want to clone less often.
Among other things, human cloning is a new and unexplored legal field, which will definitely require some legislative regulation to prevent abuse.
An interesting but little-known fact of the cloning procedure is that it is done with frozen rather than fresh cells. This means that the DNA donor, whether animal or human, does not need to be alive when cloning is performed. If a human tissue sample is frozen properly, a human could be cloned long after death. In the case of people who have already died and whose tissue has not been frozen, cloning becomes more difficult, and today's technology does not allow this. However, it would be very bold for any biologist to say that this is impossible. If science can develop a method for obtaining a clone from the DNA of an already deceased creature, new possibilities will open before it.
All human tissues contain DNA and can potentially be a source for cloning. The list of tissues includes human hair, bones and teeth. However, DNA begins to slowly degrade a few weeks after death, destroying segments of the genetic code. For example, after 60 million years, only short fragments of dinosaur DNA have survived, so the chances of replicating Jurassic Park are slim. However, there is a good chance of recovering the DNA sequence from human tissue samples, since much less time has passed. Think of the genetic code as a book from which paragraphs or pages are randomly deleted over time. If we only have one copy of a book, the full text cannot be restored. Luckily we have more than one copy. There may be many thousands of cells in a bone or tissue sample, each with its own copy of the DNA code. It is like having thousands of copies of the same book. If a page is removed from one book, that page may be intact in another, so by combining information from many cells, the original genetic code can be exactly restored. Another encouraging factor is that only a small percentage of the three billion symbols of the human genetic code is responsible for individual differences. For example, the genetic codes of chimpanzees and humans are actually 99% the same. This means that less than 1% of the code will have to be restored, i.e. only the part that determines the individual differences between people. All of this is beyond today's technology, but fundamentally feasible.
Clearly, human cloning has enormous potential benefits and several possible negative consequences. As with many scientific achievements of the past, such as airplanes and computers, the only threat is that of our own narrow mental self-satisfaction. Human clones can make a great contribution to scientific progress and cultural development. In certain cases, where possible abuses are foreseen, they can be prevented with the help of narrowly focused specialized legislation. With a modicum of common sense and reasonable regulation, human cloning is not something to be feared. We should look forward to it with excitement and support scientific research that will speed up cloning. Exceptional people are among the world's greatest treasures. Human cloning will allow us to preserve, and eventually even restore, these treasures.
According to leading Russian geneticists, with the current level of development of biomedical technologies, it is possible to produce a person from a single cell. Another question is whether such a method of reproduction is acceptable from a moral and religious point of view - after all, a cloned person will not have parents. Can an artificial being be free?
Alexander Sobolev, Head of the Laboratory of Molecular Genetics of Intracellular Transport of the Institute of Gene Biology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor of the Department of Biophysics of the Faculty of Biology of Moscow State University, Doctor of Biological Sciences, answered positively to the question of whether human reproduction is possible asexually at the present stage of the development of science, during the XIII conference "Science . Philosophy. Religion”, held at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research Dubna and organized with the support of the St. Andrew the First-Called Apostle Foundation.
According to the scientist, "the issue of human cloning is more ethical than biological" and this issue "is unlikely to become a subject of discussion in the coming years."
In turn, Hieromonk Dimitry (Pershin), a senior lecturer at the State Medical University of Roszdrav, told reporters about the attitude of the Orthodox Church towards human cloning:
Print version Font Send to a friend- The analysis of such problems and the development of solutions takes place with the participation of the Church-Public Council on Biomedical Ethics, which includes doctors, priests, scientists, theologians, philosophers, and lawyers. In 2000, the Jubilee Council of Bishops adopted the Fundamentals of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church, a separate section of which is devoted to biomedical ethics, including human cloning. The Church consistently advocates for a person at all stages of his development, including the embryonic one, and therefore cannot support the idea of therapeutic cloning, which involves the creation of a human embryo for the purpose of its subsequent destruction. It is unacceptable to turn human life into raw materials.
It is very important for me that Russia's position on this issue coincides with the position reflected in the fundamental international documents that guide the world community. For example, the "Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights", adopted by UNESCO on November 11, 1997, states: "The practice of cloning for the purpose of reproduction of the human individual is not allowed," since it "contradicts human dignity." And in the "Declaration on Human Cloning" of March 8, 2005, the UN directly appeals to Member States to "prohibit all forms of human cloning to the extent that they are incompatible with human dignity and the protection of human life." These documents are based on the norms formulated in the Nuremberg Code, adopted in 1947 following the results of investigations of the crimes of fascist doctors, as well as in the Declaration of Helsinki, adopted in 1964 by the World Medical Assembly.
I believe that moral standards do not become obsolete with the development of biomedical technologies. I am convinced that the ancient precept of Hippocrates “do no harm”, which the father of European medicine extended to human embryos, is still relevant. In the language of the Bible, this commandment is known to all: "Thou shalt not kill." I hope that moral responsibility will prevail and an absolute ban on cloning person will be extended. We all need this to keep us human.
In the case of human cloning, there is no doubt that it will be about reproducing human life. Just as a cloned sheep was a sheep, so in the case of human cloning, it is a human that will appear, therefore, all moral and legal norms that protect human life are applicable to him.
Primarily, cloning is an experiment. And an experiment in which the subject is a person is unacceptable without his free and voluntary consent. In the case of human cloning, it is impossible to ask for this consent, since the one from whom we are obliged to obtain it beforehand appears as a result of this experiment. Thus, the fundamental right of a person not to be a hostage of someone's manipulations with his life and health is initially violated.
This alone is a sufficient argument against human cloning, but there are also purely medical arguments that strengthen this position. The fact is that, as far as I know, by now it has been possible to clone a fairly large number of animals - a cat, a pig, a cow, a mule, mice. However, according to scientists, deviations from the norm and various forms of disability are common among cloned animals. The first cloned animal, Dolly the sheep, was euthanized in 2003 at exactly six and a half years old, although many sheep live to be over 10 years old. She developed a progressive lung disease that usually affects older sheep, as well as premature arthritis. Some cloning experts have hypothesized that cloned humans may need a hip replacement as early as their teens, and may become old by the age of 20. I'm not talking about the low efficiency of the method (less than 10%), about the syndrome of large offspring, which creates serious problems for the pregnant mother. I think that Sir Wilmut, the creator of Dolly, had every reason to say when he spoke in the US Congress that similar experiments on humans are completely unacceptable.
One cannot but agree that there is a hypothetical possibility of reproducing human life through cloning, but what would that life be like? Why are the interests of science taken into account and the interests of man himself completely ignored? What problems lie in wait for such a person - with his health, psyche, spiritual life? What will become of a society in which a child can become his mother's sister, father's brother or grandfather's daughter? A far from complete list of these issues shows that a firm and intelligible moral position is needed here, limiting the claims of scientists.
No less immoral is the desire to clone a person in order to disassemble him into genetically compatible organs and tissues. Finally, it is dishonorable to raise a person in order to satisfy someone's whim to have a child with given parameters.
A person is not an aggregate that can be disassembled into spare parts, not a raw material for the manufacture of drugs, not a fuel for the development of scientific and technological progress. Good ends are not achieved by bad means.
At the heart of all these inhumane initiatives is a utilitarian attitude towards human life. The very way of thinking is unacceptable, in which a person at the embryonic stage of his development is seen only as a raw material for the production of drugs or experiments with stem cells.
In the language of international law, this moral maxim reads as follows: “No research concerning the human genome, as well as no applied research in this area, especially in the fields of biology, genetics and medicine, should take precedence over respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and human dignity. individuals or, as appropriate, groups of people." (“Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights”, art. 10)
Scientific progress testifies that man is indeed the image of God; he is endowed with the highest gifts of personal freedom, reason and creativity. Unfortunately, these gifts can also be deployed against the person himself. That is why the Church draws a clear line in the field of those scientific achievements that can affect a person. If we talk about cloning, we have no objections to breeding new breeds of animals, creating separate human organs and tissues, but at the same time it is unacceptable to satisfy scientific curiosity by turning human life itself into an experimental object.
Human cloning is one of the most controversial issues from an ethical point of view. Today it is illegal in almost all parts of the world, but this does not mean that in the future it will not be possible. Back in 2005, the UN adopted the Declaration on Human Cloning, which prohibits all forms of cloning, as it is incompatible with human dignity and the protection of human life. Although many countries do not agree with this, the moratorium is respected throughout the world.
Cloning can lead to many problems, even paradoxes. This is such a multifaceted phenomenon that, analyzing one aspect, you begin to ask a lot of questions, answering which only generates new riddles. But let's assume that one day human cloning becomes legal. Here are the dilemmas humanity will face:
Gene control
Let's say you clone yourself. In turn, a clone is an identical copy with the same thinking, set of feelings, views, etc. Now imagine how this full-fledged person will be perplexed why he cannot over himself and, moreover, clone himself. It is necessary to understand that now an exact copy of you has appeared on Earth, which will consider you the same person as the clone itself.
In addition, it is worth referring to the legal side of this issue: the corporation that created the clone can claim ownership of its invention. Sounds creepy, doesn't it? This is one of the main ethical issues that humanity will face in case of successful human cloning. Plus, the peculiarities of patent law: human genomes will not belong to themselves, but rather to mega-corporations that, violating all human rights, will practically take him into slavery.
Illegal cloning
Humanity simply loves to break various laws, so it is not surprising that there will be a risk of illegal cloning. In order to produce a human "duplicate", it will be enough just to get the necessary biological material: blood, skin, and the list goes on. The act is highly immoral and unethical, but not impossible. Why would anyone do this? In addition to religious and commercial motives, it is possible to clone your favorite star, loved one or politician. Speaking of politics: in this case, it would be completely pointless to hold elections in some states.
genetic immortality
A recent one in Japan proved that this is possible. Scientists have cloned 26 generations of mice, namely reproduced 598 individuals identical to each other. This experience will allow you to immortalize yourself from a genetic point of view, which will lead the world into a state of chaos. We will forget about the change of power, eras and generations. The ruling elite will be engaged in constant self-reproduction, lobbying their interests from generation to generation.
Genome improvement
Cloning may lead to the practice of selective modifications that can be made to the human genome. Intellect, memory, hair color and so on can be changed. Each new generation will be devoid of the shortcomings of the previous one, and as a result, it is possible to create an ideal copy of oneself. If this becomes possible, then in a hundred years the original is unlikely to be anything like its "duplicate".
Cloning the dead
It is potentially possible to clone deceased relatives who have recently died, and whether or not the deceased gives consent to cloning - few people will take this into account, because we are extremely selfish in our desires, so personal comfort will be above all. This is not easy from a legal point of view, because in fact the person died, but the physical body says otherwise. Issues of property, inheritance, legal liability - what to do with this dilemma?
While in mourning, parents may want to clone their child who died under any circumstances. But from an ethical point of view, this looks just terrible: we get a completely different person, whose personality will most likely be changed. Plus there is no child's consent to cloning. How to be in a similar situation? People may simply grow puppets to kill the grief that destroys their hearts.
I saw you somewhere
With the first generation of clones, this should not happen, but in the future it can become a real problem of determining the identity of the individual.
People will be sure that they saw the deceased, not realizing that this is a clone. If the clone turns out to be with criminal inclinations, then the “original”, who will be innocent, may well answer for his crimes.
The problem with determining the biological original
An interesting and at the same time inconvenient point is that the clone will have the same anthropometric characteristics as the original. Fingerprints, DNA - everything will be identical, which will make the work of forensics a real hell.
Today there is a precedent that is not related to clones, but caused a lot of problems. In England, a man was accused of raping a girl, but it turned out that the attacker has a twin brother. Various medical tests failed to prove which of the brothers was guilty.
Social environment studies
Clones could help to study in more detail the question of the influence of the social environment on a person. Several clones would be placed in different conditions, which would make it possible to track their development and changes in character. This would give an answer to the question: are there inherent in a person the basic qualities that form his personality?
The issue of cloning is very controversial. An illegally cloned person can simply become someone's property, fall into sexual slavery, or be produced as a biomaterial for donation. Most likely, the ban on cloning was created precisely from these motives.
Science, developing, makes global changes in people's lives. Some discoveries bring creative changes, others negative ones. At the end of the 20th century, the topic of cloning became extremely popular - the creation of an embryo identical to the original individual.
1996 marked the first successful cloning of a mammal. Scientists have created Dolly the sheep. In 2007, Jan Wilmuth, one of the leaders of the experiment, was awarded the title of knight by the Queen of Great Britain. In the late 90s, experts started talking about the real possibility of cloning people. Since Dolly, there have been successful attempts to clone 23 different animal species. At the beginning of 2018, Chinese scientists announced the cloning of two female crabeater monkeys, whose genome is 93% identical to the human one. And again, the scientific world remembered human cloning.
However, despite all the achievements of science, human cloning causes a lot of controversy. In January 1998, the states of 24 countries signed a protocol to the Convention on Human Rights, according to which it is forbidden to clone people. In 2005, the UN raised the issue of cloning, but a final ban on human cloning was never adopted. Currently, a number of states want to criminalize human cloning. The Russian Federation also has a ban on human cloning, introduced by law of 05/20/2002. According to this law, cloning is prohibited in Russia for an indefinite period.
- Technological difficulties.
- At first glance, cloning might solve the problem of immortality. However, if you look deeper into this issue, the clone repeats only the genotype of its prototype, not being its exact copy. A clone, like any person, will have its own consciousness, as well as an individual set of phenotypic features. Since the clone is only a repetition of the appearance of a person and his genome, scientists cannot resurrect such geniuses of human thought as Leo Tolstoy or Nikola Tesla. It is impossible to clone the abilities and consciousness of a person.
- Religious aspect.
The world's major religions have strongly criticized the idea of human cloning, mainly because of the unnatural way life originated. This is seen as an attempt to compete with God. And will a clone created in the laboratory have a soul? Religion also opposes therapeutic cloning, when an embryo that is not allowed to develop to the state of a full-fledged individual is used to grow organs or remove stem cells. - Questions of ethics.
From an ethical point of view, humans should not be cloned for several reasons. First, because of the possibility of obtaining inferior personalities. Especially in the early stages of cloning, many unsuccessful clones with various abnormalities and diseases can appear. Secondly, cloning poses a threat to human individuality. Thirdly, cloned people can become an ordinary commodity in the consumer market, and this is unacceptable. - Questions of jurisprudence.
Lawyers will face great difficulties in matters of inheritance, motherhood and fatherhood, marriage, and so on. - Health issues.
Human cloning is unpredictable in terms of genetic inheritance, and it is not known what abnormalities may occur in those whom clones will give birth to. - Warfare.
The military structures of states may be interested in mass cloning. Clones can become the perfect soldiers. But is our world created for war?
Based on the above, we can firmly answer the question: “Is it possible to clone people?” It is forbidden. It is impossible because it can not only lead to the complete moral decay of society, but simply will not practically help in solving modern problems. And why do we need copies when there are so many individuals around?
