Is human cloning really dangerous? Why am I in favor of human cloning?

I’m in favor of human cloning because I don’t think it’s dangerous. Here’s why.

 

The birth of Dolly the cloned sheep 20 years ago made waves around the world. The idea that a new life could be created not from reproductive cells, but from the somatic cells of a fully grown adult human being was unprecedented. The future of biotechnology seemed rosy, and people began to hope for further human cloning. But the joy was short-lived, as Dolly was obese, suffered from lung disease and arthritis, and there were concerns that she would age quickly. In the end, Dolly was euthanized six years after she was born, further strengthening the arguments of those who oppose human cloning. So is human cloning dangerous and should it be stopped? I think not necessarily. To explain this, let’s take a look at the arguments of the anti-cloning crowd.
First, there are ethical concerns. According to Article 20 (Prohibition of Human Cloning) of Chapter 4, Section 1, Article 20 of the Act on Bioethics and Safety of the Ministry of Health and Welfare (Bioethics Policy Division), ‘No one shall implant a somatic cell cloning embryo in a human or animal uterus, keep it implanted, or give birth to it. The movie Ireland also features clones, which are copies of real people whose organs can be harvested and transplanted as needed. They are portrayed as tools, not human beings, incapable of feeling love or pain. Anti-cloning advocates warn that the movie Ireland could soon become a reality: humans will do whatever it takes to survive, and in the process, mass human cloning for purposes such as organ transplantation could become a reality.
Second, there is the issue of identity. People created through human cloning, including the general public, could have serious identity issues. When a child grows up and realizes that there is someone who looks exactly like him or her, it can cause psychological confusion and lead to identity issues.
These arguments against cloning are certainly valid and have their place. However, the arguments against cloning are less valid when we look at the ethical and identity aspects.
Let’s start with the ethical aspect. Even if the technology is advanced enough to allow for large-scale mass cloning, it would still require a lot of uteruses and surrogate mothers to implant them. However, there are obviously limits to the availability of uteruses. Eggs are expensive to obtain, and a surrogate mother needs about nine months of gestation to give birth to a cloned human. Furthermore, even if a human clone is created out of necessity, there are significant maintenance costs to feed and house it. The time and cost implications make mass human cloning impractical. The image we have of cloned humans has been exaggerated by the media and mass media, so mass human cloning is unlikely to be used for commercial purposes, as many people fear it will be in science fiction movies. Moreover, cloning humans is a controversial topic, and there are strict legal restrictions on it, so it’s not a big ethical issue.
Also, from the perspective of identity, the arguments of opponents that human cloning should be banned lack validity. As long as the bioethical aspect is respected, there is no problem. However, bioethics is currently underrepresented in science education. There is also an absolute shortage of specialists to teach bioethics. To this end, we can consider creating bioethics education programs for the general public and cloned humans to minimize the psychological disruption caused by human cloning. In other words, by systematically practicing bioethics education, we can promote the internalization of pro-life values and identity formation.
So, what are the positive aspects of human cloning? Of course, there are many, but I think the biggest advantage is the ability to treat genetic diseases. When a couple suffers from a genetic disease, there is a possibility that it can be passed on to their offspring. Of course, with current technology, it is possible to treat some genetic diseases using donated sperm or eggs from a third party, but these are not the parents’ genes, so there are side effects. However, human cloning has the advantage of preventing parents from passing on their genetic diseases to their children.
In addition, genetic analysis has changed the concept of incurable diseases such as cancer and AIDS, which were previously known as terminal diseases. As such, biotechnologists have revolutionized the development of treatments for incurable diseases through methods such as gene sequencing as part of their research into human cloning. It will also be used to treat diseases such as Alzheimer’s and diabetes. Furthermore, there is currently a huge shortage of organs for transplantation compared to the demand for transplant recipients. Organ cloning through human cloning could be a ray of light for people who want to receive transplants. Other benefits of human cloning research include the gift of life to infertile couples.
So far, we’ve looked at the ethical and identity arguments against human cloning, and we’ve shown how these arguments lack validity. We’ve also outlined the benefits of human cloning, and we’ve put a positive spin on them. This shows that human cloning is not as dangerous as many people think. The birth of stem cells has given us hope that we can cure incurable diseases, and the average life expectancy of 100 years is not far off. As such, science is always trying new things and taking on multiple opportunity costs. Science and technology have progressed after countless failures, and without these trials and errors, genetic engineering would not exist today. The road to human cloning is still long and unfamiliar. Perhaps we are still paralyzed by fear of the unknown. We must continue to challenge human cloning research.