Jonathan Wayne Riddle

Oakland Community College

25 October 2009

Introduction and Review of the Topic

              Currently the class is debating about the ethics of DNA patenting. From my perspective, there is not a clear position over the ethics of DNA patenting.  However, there are laws that govern what can and cannot be patented.     

              Cloning is defined on the website Dictionary as “the exclusive right granted by a government to an inventor to manufacture, use, or sell an invention for a certain number of years." According to the Wikipedia the free online collaborative encyclopedia in the article “Patent” (2009, para. 1-3), the article states that:

A patent (pronounced /ˈpætənt/ or /ˈpeɪtənt/) is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state(national government) to an inventor or their assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for a public disclosure of an invention.

The procedure for granting patents, the requirements placed on the patentee, and the extent of the exclusive rights vary widely between countries according to national laws and international agreements. Typically, however, a patent application must include one or more claims defining the invention which must be new, inventive, and useful or industrially applicable. In many countries, certain subject areas are excluded from patents, such as business methods and mental acts. The exclusive right granted to a patentee in most countries is the right to prevent others from making, using, selling, or distributing the patented invention without permission.^[1]

Under the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, patents should be available in WTO member states for any inventions, in all fields of technology,^[2] and the term of protection available should be the minimum twenty years.  Different types of patents may have varying patent terms (i.e., durations) (Wikipedia, 2009).

Analysis of Issues Surrounding Topic

              Three purposes of usages of cloning are reproductive, medical and scientific. The trade-off between the pros and cons can be analyzed using cost-benefit analysis.  One of the techniques in creating a clone is a somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). Cloning involves the removal of the nucleus (DNA) from an ovum and then inserting a donor nucleus. Chemicals and electricity is used to stimulate the cell into dividing and  after several divisions the cells will create a blastocyst. The first animal to be cloned was dolly the sheep. Basically a clone is a twin copy.  In nature twinning happens.

            Why should we not allow it? The benefit of usage has to be weighed against the cost socially and psychological, as well as morally and ethically. In the article “Pros And Cons Of Human Cloning” by Darren on the website “www.swiftwits.com” points out the cons of human reproductive cloning.  Let’s elaborate on each point:

1.      No free will for the clone is the number one disadvantage of human cloning. A human clone will not ask to be born. His existence will be because someone else decided to “make him” and bring him into the world. Effectively this puts the person who cloned the clone into a position of God-like power.

2.      Clones themselves will be confused on issues of love and belonging. Clones might very well be emotional wrecks upon learning of their Genesis.

3.      The Human cloning would be an obvious source of “slave labor” if allowed unchecked.

4.      There is no guarantee that cloning is safe, even for the clones. Scientists don’t know how long clones will live or how productive their lives will be.

5.      “It’s hard out here for a clone.” Life for clones won’t be easy. They’ll face routine discrimination from those non-cloned humans who feel threatened by their existence.

6.      The  Justice System will need an overhaul. Imagine how many people will have the same fingerprints.

7.      Humans and/or body parts could become commodities. Clone farms would arise to harvest organs and worse (Darren) .

            In the United States there is constitutional protection involving the ownership of another individual.  A clone could not be owned or sold as a body parts.  The individual would still protected as a person, “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation” (Amend. 13, Sec. 1 and 2, Bill of Rights, US Const.).  The idea that a child clone would love differently could not be determined, because as with any family it all depends on the dynamics of the parent skills involved.   How would a clone be known to be cloned, what will they be tattooed with a bar code. In an article on twins, “Twins And Fingerprints Do Identical Twins Have Identical Fingerprints?” by  Pamela Prindle Fierro, About.com, in the article she states that:

            So, do identical twins have identical fingerprints? The basic answer is NO. Identical -- or monozygotic -- twins form when a single fertilized egg splits in two after conception. Because they form from a single zygote, the two individuals will have the same genetic makeup. Their DNA is virtually indistinguishable. However, fingerprints are not an entirely genetic characteristic.

            The real issue is with twins in general is a question of nature versus nurture.  If we cloned Adolph Hitler, would we get Adolph Hitler?  Probably not, because Hitler's attitudes, values and experiences were shaped by time that has gone by.  Unless all the events in his life could be cloned alone with his DNA we would not get Hitler of World War II. The question the author has is, who would be allowed to be cloned if it was allowed at all? 

Conclusion and Discussion

              Embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells have issues this is the reason why both are important. Over time more these scientific issues will probably be worked out.  Unfortunately there is a concern from the religious community over the issue that scientist are “killing a life” to save a life.  It is the opinion of the author that the benefits out way the cost.  The embryonic stem cells are neither viable nor developing into an organism outside of the uterus.  They are alive, but they are not a functioning organism. 

              Perhaps at some point in the future stems cells will create germ cell lines and with those cell lines they can create the generations of stems cells. Along with genetic engineering and alife, that the stem cells of the future will not come from a “natural human source”, but created in the lab, the human element being eliminated. At this current moment, science needs to move forward in order to advance our general understanding of life on planet earth and the natural life history of all organisms from conception to death.    

 References

Kaplan, E. (2009, October). Bioethics: Stem Cells. Speech presented Oakland Community College, Farmington Hills, MI.

Phillips, T. Pros and Cons of Stem Cell Research. About.com Retrieved October 11, 2009 from  http://biotech.about.com/od/bioethics/i/issuestemcells_2.htm\

Darren. Pros and Cons of Embryonic and Adult Stem Cells: Cell Comparisons: Embryonic vs. Adult. In StemCellResearchFacts.com. Retrieved October 10, 2009, http://www.stemcellresearchfacts.com/pros_cons.html

Stem Cells (2009, September 26).  In Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved September 27, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_Cells

Stem Cells. In Dictionary.com Retrieved September 27, 2009, from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Stem+Cells

Stem Cell Research – Pros and Cons. Experimental-Resources.com Retrieved October 10 2009, from http://www.experiment-resources.com/stem-cell-pros-and-cons.html