Introduction

About a few years ago, the presence of news on cloning, stem cell research, and other sophisticated biological and scientific experiments have emerged. Most of these issues are without a doubt a subject of continuous debate today. The debates usually touch on the issue of morality and ethics, although those with a more progressive view see these scientific breakthroughs as a necessity in the evolution of human society. For example, Dolly the Sheep caused a stir because the idea of cloning was unthinkable, in addition to the idea of putting together animal and human cells as a form of experiment. Evidently, there remains to be the prevailing thought that man remains to be the superior being over other creatures on earth, and setting religious and biblical texts aside, the exclusivity of being human and its supposed values have become an obstacle to a further examination and possibility that maybe, man is not supposed to be that superior in that sense at all.

Incidences

There are two incidences which I distinctly remember to have caused some strong debates and discussion when it comes to the topic of bioethics: the movie Multiplicity (1996) and food shopping.

My friends and I saw on video the movie Multiplicity which stars Michael Keaton and Andie MacDowell. The concept of the film was interesting: a man clones himself in order to do more things. How we ended up renting this movie can be also attributed to another more recent movie, Click, with Adam Sandler. In this movie, Adam Sandler’s character discovers a magic remote control that can control time and the actions of the things around him, and as a result, instead of cloning himself, he manages to freeze reality and do multiple things.

The discussion which roots from these movies stems from a social reality today: more people wish they have more time since there are more things that need to be done and responsibilities to attend to. If they cannot have more time, a typical “joke” is that, like the movie, they wish there were more than one of them. As a result, we discussed possible “solutions”, and eventually, the topic reached cloning.

Although cloning can be said to be an appealing scientific capability and most probably something that only sci-fi novels can extensively talk about, most people still find it hard to accept that it is possible. There is in fact a proof that it has been done, and scientists somehow manage to continue to experiment all these years. However, due to the reactions from the public, especially with Dolly the Sheep, the question of cloning, not just as a concept but a capability, has been met with protests and demand for regulation and control (Harris).

The debate on cloning became heated when opinions about the topic emerged. Most of my friends are not just against cloning but also in any other form of scientific experiment that contests the dignity of the human race and God’s creatures. Basically, the common view is that humans and animals should be reproduced through the “acceptable” means and intervening with how nature operates is a sign of disrespect. My side has always been in support of the scientific community which I believe to be conducting these experiments responsibly and within regulated means.

Another similar and relevant incident to this discussion is the subject of genetically modified foods. While food shopping with the same group of friends, we happened upon a can tomatoes and one of our friends brought up the GM food controversy. As the only one in the group who “supports” science, they told me to buy GM food and consume them. When I protested that I had no plans eating GM food, they told me that I could not stick to my “scientific principles”.

It was not easy to have a strong opinion about these matters; in support for cloning and stem cell research yet without having any interests in GM food, I have to admit there is somewhat a conflict in these opinions. However, I would like to express my opinions on these matters and that although these different sides where I stand on may be conflicting, my opinions intend to clarify this supposed bias.

Opinion: on Cloning and GM Food

Should perceptions on cloning and genetically modified food coincide?

Basically the foundation of the opinions on these issues is based on the power that is given to the scientific community. Given with the knowledge and the continuous development of technology, scientists of today have continued to “experiment” not just for the purpose of seeing the possibilities of science with respect to nature but also to come up with solutions for problems that the human race is facing. For example, science has made it possible to produce vaccines that aim to prevent diseases, and today, another point of controversy is the issue of stem cell research which aims to find cure and treatment for challenging diseases such as cancer and spinal chord injuries.

This necessity evidently shows that science is not just a form of experiment for the pleasure of scientists. Cloning, on one hand, may be seen as an unnecessary science (i.e. cloning humans for the purpose of multi-tasking) although it should be noted that a form of cloning, therapeutic cloning, also involves stem cells (Harris).

The challenge in this is that although stem cells can be obtained from adults, from umbilical cord blood, from fetal tissue and from embryonic tissue, scientists have found that the best source for stem cells are embryos (Harris). The production of embryos, through natural courses, requires the conception which also requires the joining of the two reproductive cells. Although embryos and babies have been made by using in-vitro fertilization (i.e. test tube babies), the intention of having to create an embryo just for the purpose of obtaining stem cells has been another subject of heated debates.

My opinion with regards to this issue is that I support stem cell research and other cloning research which aim to have a better understanding the extent of this practice. This opinion is based on my belief that the scientific community is strongly regulated and it is responsible enough to know which experiments should be suspended (i.e. human cloning) and which research should be done with greater consideration (i.e. stem cell). Basically, I must say that cloning has yet to be successful; there have been a number of attempts before one of them gets properly cloned. In Dolly the Sheep’s case, she did not turn out to be a healthy sheep in the long run. Admittedly, it is still hard to imitate nature, but science has been so far moving forward that in the end, nature can be easily understood in some of its ways.

Hence, is this imitation of nature necessary? I believe that nature is unmatched, but human beings are also given the gift to think and execute an infinite set of possibilities. This is why the scientific community also expresses concerns in a number of issues such as the safety of their activities and the possibility of risk. In this case, the interference in the world of genetics, albeit being practiced by some scientists, should be taken into consideration. Genetically modified babies, those whose genetic information are manipulated to ensure the baby’s health and well-being, can be considered as a step forward in the world of evolution. In a way, the intention to have babies that are deemed “perfect” can be considered as an objective that has lasted for centuries; Charlesworth points out that even as early as Plato’s Republic that Plato expressed the intention to have the “virtuous men and women” to mate in order to reproduce the next generation with enhanced characteristics. Eugenics have been also controversial, but I believe that although this can be considered an intervention of natural reproduction, this practice, in concept, has been actually present.

What about GM food? Given that I have expressed my support for the scientific community’s decisions on cloning- and genetics-related research, should I also support GM foods? My stand on this is that GM foods remain to be a grey area especially when it comes to its safety and other health-related concerns. The purpose of GM foods, I have to admit, can be also noble in a sense that it can improve food production, hence, any shortages can be addressed.

I believe that in one way or another, I have already consumed GM foods, especially those products that are not properly labelled. Since GM foods concern direct consumption, I believe that it is already the corporations’ duty to make sure that their foods are properly labelled and that the safety of these particular food products are guaranteed. Moreover, GM foods have also yet to address environmental concerns, which is why I believe it is important that before GM foods are made available to the public, whose consumption practices can be careless sometimes, people are reassured that what they are eating is safe, healthy, and did not cause any environmental hazards.

Conclusion: The Discussion

The two separate incidents I have previously mentioned clearly put me in the corner; most of my friends are against the practice of cloning and stem cell research knowing that the dignity of humans are “corrupted” as they are also against GM foods because they want to make sure what they are eating is “right”. Although the discussion became heated with my limited knowledge on science and my friends “expertise” on moral issues, I had to take a calm and firm stance when it came to expressing my opinions. I knew that not all my arguments were solid, and in the end, given the numbers, I knew that I “lost” the debate.

However, I think what was important is that I introduced a different approach at thinking which I demonstrated to my friends. Although I have nothing against ethics and I respect morals, I had to point out that these scientific practices have been actually executed within ethical frameworks. Hence, ethics are something that the scientific community always consider before making any daring research; as I point out, scientists are not greedy monsters, they are people too who were raised in similar set of values.

Cited Works / Bibliography

Charlesworth, Max. Life, Death, Genes, and Ethics: Biotechnology and Bioethics. Crows Nest, NSW: ABC Enterprises for the Australian Broadcasting, 1989.

“Consumer Views of GM Foods”. N.d. Food Standards Agency. 8 August 2007. http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/gm_rep.pdf (accessed 20 April 2007).

Harris, John. On Cloning. New York: Routledge, 2004.