The earliest recorded scientific experiments in cloning animals are from the 19th century and involved frogs, sea urchins and salamanders.1 Scientists believed that each cell division results in two new cells that have only half of the genetic material of the original. Men and women come pleasurably together to mix their genomes and to bring about new life that is not identical with theirs. And they reduce procreation to reproduction by perceiving children as projects and products instead of gifts.5, Fletcher took the diametrically opposite view to Ramsey’s, and argued that humankind would be better off replacing the clumsy traditional way of making babies and the ensuing genetic roulette by well controlled cloning and genetic engineering. The industrial production of lower-class citizens, the potentially reduced self-esteem of cloned individuals, and the effects of mass cloning on the gene pool are matters that should be reflected on carefully, not just ignored in the hope that everything will be fine.10 A thorough risk assessment of cloning combined with genetic engineering would be a start, although philosophers are also becoming increasingly aware of a need to involve citizens in such evaluations, and subsequent decisions.11, The next scientific milestone was the successful cloning of the first mammal by somatic cell nuclear transfer at the Roslin Institute in Scotland. They see personhood as disembodied and abstract, although it is embodied and sexual. Davion herself also rejected cloning, although ‘naturalness’ was not the reason. J Med Ethics. (2) Justice. Here is a discussion about the ethical issues that have arisen concerned with cloning humans.  |  Sources of data: Find NCBI SARS-CoV-2 literature, sequence, and clinical content: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sars-cov-2/. The continuous renewal of humanity, according to … The discussion is currently not progressing, as the same arguments have been in use since the 1970s. Matti Häyry, Ethics and cloning, British Medical Bulletin, Volume 128, Issue 1, December 2018, Pages 15–21, https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldy031. Tooley M. The moral status of the cloning of humans. This is why the truly interesting details of Chadwick’s contribution are in the snide remarks she makes against the unquestioned utilitarian confidence in technology. The same happened with salamanders, and further observations showed that, at some point, later divisions did in fact result in the emergence of more specialized tissue instead of entire copies of the original individual. Scientists have cloned animals since the late 19th century, but the crucial step for ethics was the cloning of the first mammal by somatic cell nuclear transfer in 1997. Ethicists joined the discussion after John Lederberg, a Nobel Laureate for Physiology or Medicine, advocated in a 1966 article cloning and genetic engineering as appropriate means to improve the human race.4 Two Protestant theologians were among the first to react – Paul Ramsey and Joseph Fletcher. This suggested that scientists could also clone, and possibly enhance, human beings. Although cloning is not crucial to Huxley’s dystopia, which works mainly by conditioning and pleasure control, the imagery of copying humans that he offered has been central in later ethical debates. All rights reserved. 2004 Dec;36(10):3188-9. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.10.076. HHS Add to this that utilitarians root for a moratorium (at best), while many others champion a categorical, complete and interminable prohibition, and the narrowness of the agreement becomes clearly visible. USA.gov. Ethics of research on stem cells and regenerative medicine: ethical guidelines in the Islamic Republic of Iran. (1) Risk assessment. Embryonic stem cell research in Iran: status and ethics. In the meantime, philosophical ethicists would use their time well by proceeding to the questions that they have flirted with in the past but seldom seriously addressed. Habermas J. These touch upon worthwhile lives and possible side effects to society, individuals and the gene pool. 20 Apart from the spontaneous disgust that we feel when we think about unnatural ways of making babies, 21 we have good grounds for rejecting cloning as an asexual form of procreation.