Cloning vs. Frankenstein (so Far)

649 Words3 Pages
| Frankenstein Vs. Cloning | Do you believe humans should have the right to create life, be it human or otherwise, or alter nature? | | | Cloning which is an umbrella term for processes where scientists duplicate biological material. At the end of the 20th century, new discoveries and experiments produced the first cloned animal Dolly. Dolly caused many people worldwide to question cloning’s “ethical, religious, legal, and regulatory implications” (Human Genome). Cloning is ethical because it can save many lives and creates many jobs. Cloning has a negative connotation because of today’s media, but in reality cloning can be the way to save our future. Cloning, like Frankenstein’s creature, takes place without a sexual union. According to the Human Genome Project, there are three types of cloning: DNA, therapeutic, and reproductive cloning. DNA cloning involves transferring DNA from a donor to another organism. Therapeutic cloning, known as embryo cloning, involves harvesting stem cells from human embryos to grow new organs for transplant. Reproductive cloning creates a copy of the host. Cloning is often unsuccessful. According to the Human Genome Project, sometimes it takes “100 attempts to create one successful clone”. If low success rates are improved cloning can be a reliable way in keeping up with food demand. Though Dolly ignited a spark for debate, cloning has been around for more than a century. Examples of cloning already exist in nature. Many crops already “clone themselves naturally to reproduce” (cloning plants) by sending a runner into the soil, the runner then grows into a genetically identical plant. Mammal cloning though began in the late 1800’s, Hans Dreisch created the first cloned animal. Dreisch wanted to prove that “genetic material is not lost during cell division” (History Of). Dreisch used a 2 celled sea urchin
Open Document