February 7, 2007
UNIT 2: CellsControversy and Confusion over the Word Cloning
Stem cell researchers are hard at work trying to make somatic cell nuclear transfer, or SCNT, a reliable way to produce stem cell lines that can be used in medical research and treatment. SCNT is also known as therapeutic cloning because the cells produced are to be used to treat human disease. However, some scientists think that the word cloning is giving people the false impression that the object of the research is to clone human beings.
It would appear that the scientists may be right. Polling by the Genetics and Public Policy Center found that public support of embryonic stem cell research was just 29% when the term therapeutic cloning was used, whereas the term SCNT yielded 46% support.
Scientists fear that opposition to the cloning of humans, also called human reproductive cloning, will result in a ban of SCNT. If legislators ban SCNT as a means of preventing human cloning, then they will effectively ban embryonic stem cell research as well.
Three prominent stem cell researchers have called for scientists, lawmakers, and other people to stop referring to SCNT as cloning, citing confusion and the potential for legislation that will stop research that has nothing to do with making human clones. These scientists propose the term nuclear transplantation to describe when SCNT is used for the purpose of making stem cells. This term, they hope, will prevent people from equating stem cell research with efforts to clone humans.
The differences between nuclear transplantation and human reproductive cloning can be compared below:
| Nuclear Transplantation | Human Reproductive Cloning | |
|---|---|---|
| End product | Cells growing in petri dish | Human being |
| Purpose | To treat a specific disease of tissue degeneration | Replace or duplicate a human being |
| Time frame | A few weeks | 9 months |
| Surrogate mother needed | No | Yes |
| Sentient human created | No | Yes |
| Ethical implications | Similar to all embryonic cell research | Highly complex issues |
| Medical implications | Similar to any cell-based therapy | Safety and long-term efficacy concerns |
Source: GENETICS: Please Don't Call It Cloning!, Vogelstein et al., Science 15 February 2002: 1237, DOI: 10.1126/science.1070247
Comments
Comment from: Jade
February 9, 2009 10:43 AM [#]
When going through my choices this caught my eye. They make it very clear that Nuclear Transplantation is not Human Reproductive cloning.
Comment from: Sarah
February 9, 2009 02:42 PM [#]
"Cloning", a few years ago that was as far fetched to people as the word spacecraft and alien, it was in a Star Wars movie, how did it go from science fiction to current event?
Comment from: Shelby
February 25, 2009 03:10 PM [#]
After reading through this article again, I have a better understanding on the difference between cloning and SCNT. At first they sounded similar, but now they sound much different. Cloning a person is much different then cloning stems cells.
I think that the SCNT would be helpful now days with treatments and other medical things.
Comment from: daiellen leur
October 22, 2009 01:19 PM [#]
wow. sensational. i'm now inspired to look at the cell archives in biozine.
Comment from: Franco J
October 22, 2009 02:24 PM [#]
i think this is great and i think they should continue, but there are people that don't agree with us
Comment from: Holli <3
March 2, 2010 09:25 PM [#]
i dont see why we don't do it i know there are many minus but there are also many pluses to this
Comment from: anna
March 12, 2010 04:47 PM [#]
this is awesome!!!
Comment from: marian
November 29, 2010 08:22 PM [#]
i think that cloning in genral is a bad idea, espesialy with humans. i know that all of cloning isnt about cloning humans, but a lot of it is. i think that it would be terrible to live as a clone because you would know that you would have been created for one persons benifit, and not your own. it would be hard to live as a clone, if you live at all, and you would only live a short while if you did. i vote agenst cloning!