Cloning Research; A Scientist’s View

from a Christian Perspective

By Denis M. Boyle, Ph.D.

The News

The headlines really don’t tell half the story. A recent report of the most significant advance to date made in human

therapeutic cloning from a laboratory in South Korea may not have raised red flags upon first hearing, although it should have. The stakes in the cloning issue just ratcheted up very significantly. The news revolved around the claim that 30 human embryos were grown beyond the 16 cell stage, then embryo growth was stopped and a new cell line was created from the individual cells (stem cells) and these stem cells allowed to grow separately. While this may not sound like much, a record cloning efficiency in one instance of 29% was achieved from starting with 242 human eggs from 16 unpaid women donors. This is a major scientific achievement in the cloning world because research progress on living cloned cells is painstakingly slow and very complex.    Since this technique is now universally referred to as ‘therapeutic cloning,’ we all knew

Denis Boyle

immediately that this was the ‘good’ type of cloning. Just the use of the word ‘therapeutic’ sounds like it almost guarantees benefits for patients, that miraculous treatments for diseases will surely be realized if research efforts and funding are expended. However, it seems that defining the field this is an attempt to sell the public on unethical research, by reinforcing the connection to the many people anxiously awaiting deliverance from debilitating diseases.

But if you look behind the scenes to recognize the motivations of this research, and project it into the future a little bit, you might reflect a little deeper and become more alarmed.

What the Scientists are Saying

The differences between therapeutic and reproductive cloning (cloning for people) are discussed below, but a recent article discussing these new findings urgently felt the need to assure the public that the link to cloning for people will never happen. They are saying that just in case you were wondering, everyone is thinking clearly and everything is under control in the major labs and mainline technical community.

In the February 12, 2004 edition of The Scientist, it was reported: “The findings may spur those on the scientific fringe to become more vocal on the subject of reproductive cloning.” The report went on to down play the possibility of future attempts of cloning for people by rogue scientists by stating, “The thing is, these people [those with objections] can talk but they can’t do the experiments; the people who can do those experiments wouldn’t do them. I would say there is nothing to fear except for the response of the public to them. They [those doing the experiments] listen too much to these people [those who object].” In addition, the report related “this should also serve as a wake up call to U.S. scientists. The work should have been done in the U.S., it should have been published by researchers in the U.S. first.” The remarks in this report are consistent with many, if not most, scientists made previously in the scientific community.

Little discussion occurred around the ethical questions involved in using embryos for research while assuring the public that the scientists are able to police themselves. It also appears that cloning scientists want to serve notice to not oppose the pace of research, but also to expand these programs in the U.S. to maintain scientific leadership. However, most significantly, there is an awareness that acceptance by the greater public is essential to continued research. Mr. and Mrs. Public seem to carry some weight on this issue (fear?) with the scientific community. On such a significant question as this, should we then leave it strictly to the cloning scientists to make the cloning decisions for us regardless of the consequences?

What Cloning Is

Because we can now easily manipulate and combine just about any cell or parts of a cell we desire, such as eggs from the female, we can foster the growth of newly constructed cells in the lab to develop in ways as never before. However, only the reproductive cells have the capacity to create embryos that can develop into the complete organism, which is why they are specifically used as the cell factory in cloning labs.

The two types of cloning, therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning, differ only by the time embryos are allowed to live, not by anything different in the lab. The technology is the same. Therapeutic cloning is different than reproductive cloning only because therapeutic cloning stops the growth process soon after embryo creation just to collect the few cells available at this stage for implantation to re-grow and replace diseased tissues. These collected cells are referred to as stem cells and can be expanded and grown further to obtain large amounts of them. Since all of these steps occur in the laboratory and are removed from the clinical setting, one can’t possibly object to ‘just a bunch of cells’ because it is argued they don’t really constitute anything of value of themselves.

On the other hand, reproductive cloning requires embryo implantation into the womb of an adult female and a complete pregnancy to take the embryo to birth. If that were to happen, someone would have to justify something very different than cells in a tube. In the mainstream media, we are regularly reminded, and urged to believe, that the experts would never allow this to happen; only the nutcases would attempt such a thing. Yet, we continue to hear of more and more attempts.

This distinction in the media between the two types of cloning is important, because in stating emphatically what should never be done, the conclusion is more freedom should therefore be granted in the areas that are desirable, i.e., of therapeutic cloning. The language has been structured to get your personal buy-in to support ‘therapeutic’ applications and help fight diseases with the cloning community. The pressure to develop this research for the clinic is strong, and it would be difficult to expect dying or bed-ridden patients to refuse effective treatments on ethical grounds alone.

The other type of stem cell research, referred to as adult stem cells are naturally occurring in your body and as such do not have ethical concerns because they lack embryonic potential. Recent research results using adult stem cells to treat disease in the same way as proposed for cells made artificially by cloning may actually be more promising.

What Cloning Means

The objections to therapeutic cloning are two-fold and are centered on the source of the starting material. First, because reproductive cells (eggs) must be used to be successful, the result is called an embryo, which can result in a live birth. A continuation of the idea that these are just cells and it’s OK to destroy them for therapeutic purposes cannot possibly be justified if we claim we have any unique standing or moral value as humans. It is still the destruction of human life even if it occurs at the earliest stages.

Second, without regulation, cloning techniques will continue to advance, the nature of which will involve embryos grown to larger stages suggesting even more experiments, that begs the question “should we stop experimentation here or proceed further?” This is the meaning of the recent findings from Korea, and given the excitement and priorities of the cloning research community, the nature and variety of cloning experiments will continue unabated. If the research really progresses to repugnant consequences as many predict and history has proven we are capable of, exactly what has to happen for the majority of people to raise a shout for an end to this type of experimentation? Is 29% an acceptable efficiency to sacrifice humans to be used to benefit others, or should the number be higher?

Maybe we have resigned ourselves to rely on our government or the ‘expert’ bodies for proper guidance in complicated matters because it’s too difficult to sort through and weigh all the technical details to know what’s at stake. Many probably feel that it just cannot be stopped, and instead prefer to focus on the potential good.

The world expects the Christian Church to express a forceful moral response because of its claims to truth and moral absolutes. But if there is no outcry, there will be no stopping it. If all the Christians shouted at one time, unethical practices would be brought to a standstill. There are few defining issues in one’s lifetime but I believe this is one of them. What is your opinion Mr. and Mrs. Public?

Dr. Denis M. Boyle has a Ph.D. in Medical Biochemistry with over 20 yrs. experience in the life sciences field and has published numerous scientific research articles. He has worked in biotechnology research and development for over 10 years, and is currently a Fellow at Liberty Leadership Institute and Lecturer at Liberty Classical School.