Human cloning? Limits to eugenics

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2019.792n2003

Keywords:

Human evolution, genetic therapy, germinal therapy, cloning, ethics, society, culture

Abstract


Mankind has not only evolved; but continues to do so. Where is human evolution going? Biological evolution is directed by natural selection, which brings about genetic changes that often appear purposeful because they are dictated by the requirements of the environment. The end result may, nevertheless, be extinction. Genetics, molecular biology and biomedicine have opened up the means to rapidly and effectively manipulate the genetic makeup of humankind. Gene therapy can be somatic or germ-line, which can correct a genetic defect, not only in the organs or tissues impacted, but also avoid transmission of the genetic impairment to the descendants. No interventions of germ-line therapy are currently being considered by scientists, physicians, or pharmaceutical companies. Human cloning may also refer to therapeutic cloning, particularly the cloning of embryonic cells to obtain organs for transplantation or for treating injured nerve cells, or for other health purposes. Some proposals have suggested the cloning of human individuals of great intellectual or artistic achievement or of great virtue. Such utopian proposals, however, are grossly misguided. It is not possible to clone a human individual, even if its genome is cloned. Identical genomes yield, in different familiar, social and cultural environments, individuals who may be quite different. Moreover, ethical, social, and religious values come into play when seeking to decide whether a person might be allowed to be cloned or not.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ayala, F. J. (2015). Cloning humans? Biological, ethical, and social considerations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112 (29), pp. 8879-8886. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1501798112 PMid:26195738 PMCid:PMC4517218

Baltimore, D., Berg, P. y Botchan, M. (2015). A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germline gene modification. Science, 348 (6230), pp. 36- 38. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab1028 PMid:25791083 PMCid:PMC4394183

Callaway, E. (2016). Embryo editing gets the green light. Nature, 530, pp. 18- 36. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2016.19270 PMid:26842037

Crow, J. F. (1958). Some possibilities for measuring selection intensities in man. Human Biology, 30 (1), pp. 1-13.

Dobzhansky, Th. (1973). Genetic Diversity and Human Equality. New York: Basic Books.

Doudna, J. A. y Charpentier, E. (2014). The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9. Science, 346 (6213), pp. 1077-1086. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1258096 PMid:25430774

Ledford, H. (2015). CRISPR, the disruptor. Nature, 522, pp. 20-24. https://doi.org/10.1038/522020a PMid:26040877

Morange, M. (2015). What history tells us XXXIX. CRISPR-Cas: From a prokaryotic immune system to a universal genome editing tool. Journal of Biosciences, 40 (5), pp. 829-832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12038-015-9575-8 PMid:26648028

Slaymaker, I. M., Gao, L. y Zetsche, B. (2016). Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science, 351 (6268), pp. 84-86. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad5227 PMid:26628643 PMCid:PMC4714946

Zimmerman, C. (2015, 15 octubre). Editing of Pig NDA May Lead to More Organs for People. The New York Times. [En línea]. Disponible en http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/20/science/editing-of-pig-dna-may-lead-to-more-organs-for-people.html

Published

2019-06-30

How to Cite

Ayala, F. J. (2019). Human cloning? Limits to eugenics. Arbor, 195(792), a502. https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2019.792n2003

Issue

Section

Articles