This blog post examines the potential impact of adult somatic cell cloning technology on humanity, alongside the ethical issues and social repercussions associated with human cloning.
In 1997, the announcement of the cloned sheep Dolly sparked significant controversy. Dolly became such a major issue because she was the first mammal cloned using an adult somatic cell. This demonstrated that the nucleus of an adult somatic cell could possess totipotency. Following the success of this experiment, many scientists discussed the applications of the nuclear transfer technology used to create Dolly. Among these, the most frequently debated topic was ‘how should nuclear transfer technology be used for humans?’ Ian Wilmut, the scientist involved in Dolly’s creation, argued that this technology could be usefully applied in various fields, such as cloning laboratory animals, stem cell research, and precision gene editing. While nuclear transfer technology holds potential for diverse research applications, some studies could raise issues related to bioethics. Particularly, if nuclear transfer technology is applied to humans for human cloning, it would face serious ethical problems. Therefore, even if applied to humans, nuclear transfer technology should only be used in limited fields such as stem cell research.
This article will examine the history and current status of nuclear transfer technology, as well as the potential problems that could arise if this technology is applied to human cloning.
Nuclear replacement technology involves replacing the nucleus of an egg cell with a somatic cell nucleus. It was originally devised to study animal development processes. Initially developed to test the theory that a miniature adult exists within sperm, which then develops into an organism upon meeting an egg, the technology’s application expanded into animal cloning research as science advanced. Subsequently, scientists used this technology to clone amphibians and later confirmed its potential for cloning mammals. Furthermore, the possibility of creating personalized stem cells with totipotency through nuclear transfer for therapeutic use was predicted. However, the ability to create somatic cell-derived embryonic stem cells with totipotency could also be interpreted as meaning human cloning is possible. For these reasons, discussions surrounding nuclear transfer technology and human cloning persist to this day.
Given how the application of nuclear transfer technology shifted from animal development research to animal cloning, it is anticipated that if applied to humans, this technology would likely be used in research related to human cloning. However, this must never occur. This is because human cloning research could raise various ethical issues. Proponents of human cloning argue that scientific progress will resolve ethical problems, or that limiting the technology’s use when issues arise would prevent major problems. However, even in reality, power imbalances often emerge in human relationships, frequently leading to issues like personal degradation. Given this, the likelihood of treating cloned humans as persons with equal dignity is low. In other words, there is a risk that cloned humans could be treated as disposable commodities. For instance, similar to how animal cloning uses the somatic cell nuclei of superior livestock for mass reproduction, there is a concern that the somatic cell nuclei of physically superior humans could be used for mass cloning, potentially deploying them in illegal military operations or dangerous tasks. This not only raises issues of disregarding the human rights of the cloned individuals but could also lead to an increase in the scale of crime and a deterioration in the nature of criminal acts. Furthermore, as depicted in the film ‘The Island’, there is also the possibility of using cloned humans for organ transplants. If cloned humans are used for organ transplants, their lives would not be guaranteed. While this might be different for organs like kidneys, which exist in pairs and can be removed without major issues, or for organs unrelated to life, it becomes problematic if the organ is essential for sustaining life, as the cloned human’s life cannot be guaranteed.
Furthermore, cloned humans could potentially become subjects for biological experiments. Similar to how chemicals intended for human use are tested on animals to assess side effects, it could be argued that testing on cloned humans would enable the development of safer products. However, this treats cloned humans as expendable goods rather than persons. Similar to the ethical controversies surrounding existing animal testing, biological experiments on cloned humans are likely to continue unofficially despite fierce opposition. Thus, if cloning technology becomes commercialized, viewing cloned humans as expendable could lead to numerous problems.
Admittedly, this argument may seem somewhat extreme. Cloned humans could be treated as equal persons, or understood within hierarchical relationships like those between a boss and a worker. Yet, looking back at human history, periods of treating all people equally have been rare. As recently as just over 200 years ago in the United States, people were bought and sold like objects and treated as inheritable property solely because of the color of their skin. Even in the modern era, racial discrimination persists. Considering our past failure to stop discriminating against fellow humans, the likelihood of treating cloned humans equally should they appear is very low, especially given how they are currently portrayed in popular media. This suggests cloned humans could well find themselves in a situation similar to that of 19th-century slaves.
Furthermore, proponents of limited human cloning sometimes argue that it should be permitted for grieving parents who have lost a child, allowing them to replace their deceased child. However, this is not a suitable solution when considering multiple factors. While a cloned human would be genetically identical, self-formation relies not only on genetic factors but also on mental elements like the environment of upbringing, memories, and experiences. Treating a cloned human as completely identical to the original person also disregards their individuality. Considering these anticipated problems comprehensively, human cloning using nuclear transfer technology is more likely to cause social disruption and loss than to yield benefits. Therefore, research and experiments on human cloning should not proceed.
Technology can lead humanity to prosperity or plunge it into chaos, depending on its direction of use. Nuclear replacement technology will likely become central to stem cell research in the future, contributing to the widespread availability of stem cells at low cost. In this scenario, the number of conquerable diseases would increase, and the suffering of many would decrease. However, if this technology is used for human cloning, humanity will face serious ethical problems. Therefore, nuclear replacement technology must never be used for human cloning, and related research should not be planned.
