What’s In a Name?
When it comes to cloning, just about everything
By Wesley J. Smith
One of the more disturbing hallmarks of the cloning debate has
been the inaccurate and unscientific language used by cloning proponents
to describe human cloning for biomedical research. There is a reason
for this disingenuous approach to cloning advocacy. When cloning
is accurately described as creating a new human embryo, the public
overwhelmingly opposes it– whether the cloning is undertaken
for research purposes or to create children. But when obfuscating
terminology is employed to make it appear that only “cells”
are created in a “therapeutic cloning” procedure, public
support tends to grow.
As it turns out, this also holds true for scientists. A new survey
of biotechnology researchers has just been released demonstrating
both the political effectiveness of the pro-cloning wordplay and
an appalling ignorance among the scientific community about what
human cloning actually entails.
Here’s the story: Genetic Engineering News published the results
of a survey taken by Isaac Rabino of Empire State College, State
University of New York. Rabino asked U.S. and international biotech
researchers about their moral attitudes toward human cloning and
embryonic stem cell research. A total of 1,229 scientists and researchers
responded to the surveys from the United States, and 408 from abroad.
The results are fascinating: A large majority of these researchers
actually oppose all human cloning! But these respondents are apparently
so ignorant about what precisely is created through the cloning
procedure, that they don’t know it.
As reported in Business Wire, Rabino found that 92 percent of U.S.
and 85 percent of international scientists advocate “therapeutic
cloning of human cells for replacement tissue.” Thus, Business
Wire reported, “a majority of international scientists favor
. . . the therapeutic cloning of cells.”
No surprise there. Yet, 73 percent of U.S. and 78 percent of these
same international scientists “believe the creation of human
embryos specifically for research purposes is ethically unacceptable.”
This, of course, is the very action that results from therapeutic
cloning.
There are two ways to create an embryo specifically for research
purposes; sexually, e.g. fertilization, and asexually, e.g. cloning,
as just occurred in South Korea. (See sidebar on opposite page for
a list of different cloning techniques.) Indeed, embryos that come
into being as a result of cloning cannot reliably be distinguished
from those created through fertilization. Indeed, a cloned embryo,
if not defective, would function in the identical manner as an embryo
brought into being through fertilization.
I’m trained in law and even I know that. But apparently these
international researchers trained in biology and other sciences
are ignorant of the fact that the two activities quoted above, while
differently described in the survey, constitute precisely the same
act.
This is the scientific truth that pro-cloners dare not utter: Therapeutic
cloning does not create tissues or cells. It creates a cloned human
embryo. That’s the science and it is biologically indisputable.
Once the embryo comes into being, there are no further acts of cloning.
All that remains is deciding what to do with the nascent human organism
that cloning has created.
If biotechnological experts are so confused about what human cloning
actually entails that they answer questions about its morality differently,
depending on how the question is worded, imagine the perplexity
experienced by the lay public. Which is precisely why the cloning
lobby refuses to tell the unvarnished facts about human cloning
to the American people. They want to win and they are not about
to let the truth get in their way.
Wesley J. Smith is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute and
a special consultant to the Center for Bioethics and Culture.
This article is reprinted with permission of The Weekly Standard,
where it first appeared on February 20, 2004.
|