Human Clone

Reports Say One May Be On The Way -- Like It Or Not
By Laurie Barclay
Reviewed By Michael Smith, MD
WebMD Medical News



Nov. 26, 2002 -- We may soon be able to drop the fiction aspect from the science fiction surrounding human cloning. A fertility specialist in Rome announced today he has cloned a healthy human embryo that will be born in January, according to published reports.


The controversial doctor, Severino Antinori, would not say where the birth would take place or disclose any other information. Last year, Antinori announced that his team had unlimited funding for cloning research and up to 700 couples willing to be cloned.


Although the issue of whether we can clone a human may now be put to rest, the issue still remains of whether we should clone a human.


Is it necessary, is it ethical, and what are the risks?


Immortality -- or Immorality?

"Adoption is always an option, but many couples want a child with their own genes, even if that means cloning," Panayotis Zavos, EdS, PhD, associate director of the Kentucky Center for Reproductive Medicine, told WebMD in a previous interview.

Still others make no bones about their own bid for immortality, wanting to re-create themselves in miniature.

"Having babies is fun, and having clones would be even more fun," Richard G. Seed, PhD, told WebMD. "Having a little Richard Seed in the house would be great!"

American politicians have introduced legislation to prohibit it, fearing that the FDA might be powerless to exercise its jurisdiction over this emotionally charged issue. Officials have even considered a bill imposing a minimum $1 million civil fine for any efforts at human cloning. President Bush has made it clear he would sign any bill outlawing cloning in the U.S.

"In the last 20 to 30 years, the Supreme Court established reproductive rights that the government can't interfere with," said Seed, a physicist with expertise in infertility treatment. "You would have to go through difficult contortions of logic to make abortion legal, but cloning illegal."

"We're not as revolutionary as the so-called ethicists call us," said Zavos, president of his own company, which markets infertility technology worldwide. "Like any novel pioneering development, people are afraid of it, but they're going to have to learn to live with it."

To Clone or Not to Clone?

As in the case of the atom bomb, say cloning critics, just because we have the technology doesn't mean we should use it. With human cloning, experts raise serious practical as well as ethical issues that call the technology itself into question.

"Cloning mammals has been thus far a dismal record of failures -- dead, dying, and deformed clones, and threats to the health and life of the females bearing cloned fetuses," Thomas H. Murray, PhD, president of the Hastings Center in Garrison, N.Y., told WebMD.

"Dolly the cloned sheep is grossly obese, and probably not normal," said Rudolf Jaenisch, MD. "Molly the cloned cow dropped dead in the field one day for unknown reasons."

Jaenisch, professor of biology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Boston and a pioneer in animal models of gene transfer, is concerned that clones could have subtle genetic defects showing up later, with tragic consequences like brain damage.

"We can't assess that in a sheep that just eats grass all day," he said.

Possible risks to the mother include the relatively gargantuan size of the fetus. Because of the clone's excessive weight and a placenta seven times normal size, a cesarean section is always needed in cloned animals, Jaenisch explained.

If cloning works as rarely in humans as in animals, 95 to 99 of every 100 pregnancies would fail, causing physical and emotional trauma for the mother, he says.

Bouncing Baby Clone

"We're not sure that babies won't be born with defects, but to aim for perfection is our goal. We're just humble human beings wanting to assist couples in having a child," Zavos said.

Jaenisch and others contend that screening may be inaccurate or misleading: "It is totally irresponsible to undertake reproductive cloning. People who want to do this are misleading the public and should be stopped."

Even more compelling than the medical risks are the ethical concerns, Patricia A. Baird, MD, told WebMD in a previous interview.

"Human reproductive cloning is unethical and unsafe and should be prohibited," said Baird, professor of medicine at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver.

As polls indicate that 90% of society opposes human cloning, a democratic government cannot ethically support it, she testified before the California legislature.

Who would decide who gets cloned? In the absence of public funding, those who can afford it will be first in line.

"Cloning raises deep issues about the meaning of parenthood and the flourishing of children," Murray says. The presidential bioethics committee, of which Murray is a member, also cites "effects on the moral, religious, and cultural values of society."

Psychological damage to clones could include losing their sense of identity or uniqueness, worry about premature death or ill health, and loss of social and family supports and relationships. Would the DNA donor be the clone's twin, or parent?

Baird recommends that individual reproductive rights be weighed against societal values. Cloning affects not only the parent, but the child, the society, and future generations.

As mankind has not yet dealt successfully with hunger, poverty, pollution, or warfare, "we are unlikely to have the wisdom to direct our own evolution," she says.