My Conclusion or Just the Beginning?

When I first picked my topic and started to research it I honestly had no idea which way my findings would take me. I am satisfied with the information I have found and it has answered most of the initial questions I had set to find out. 
All my sources were very helpful in my quest. Although some contradicted what others said like the words of Dr. Zavos compared to some articles and academic journals I read, they were all very helpful. In conclusion they all helped me reach the answer that was most suitable to the idea I was exploring.
As for my main question: To what extent should we allow cloning? It can still be argued intensely with ethics and other reasons but I have found the answer I wanted. We should allow cloning to the extent of stem cell research of all kinds of stem cells whether they be adult or embryo. 
The questions that still linger in my mind though are when America will open up to this idea  and why it had not been legalized a long time ago. One question that has arisen through all this is very hard to answer but makes me wonder: why do people make such an issue ethical and political, when it is clearly logistical?
I'm sure I will keep to speed with the rulings of Lamberth and the further information of the ruling, in order to see where this goes. It is a very interesting subject and I really do want to know what the courts will do about it.
I will definitely want to argue for the side of stem cell cloning especially if it comes to the point of voting I will vote yes. I really do believe stem cell research cloning could do wonders if governments would just give it a chance.

Legalization of Stem Cell Research Cloning

Wow, this site was AMAZING: Stem cells: Research tools and clinical treatments by Michael C Fahey and Euan M Wallace. I have gained so much information about stem cell research by reading this academic journal. I have also gained information on adult stem cells whereas much of my focus was on embryonic stem cells.

According to this journal a team of scientist, Takahashi and Yamanaka (at left) were able to make adult stem cells omnipotent.

By making them into Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells or iPS. They are still doing work on it attempting to perfect it but they were able to create it which is a breakthrough! The embryonic stem cell still remains the "golden standard" but if perfected the iPS would be able to surpass all ethical dilemmas cloning has created! All the problems with getting the law passed because of pro-life republicans will go down the drain because we will not be using embryos.

Australia (at right) has already jumped on this wagon and legalized somatic cell nuclear transfer or SCNT which is basically cloning an embryo and using those stem cells. Reproductive cloning as Zavos had attempted is still illegal but therapeutic cloning, as they call it, is legal now. This still brings up controversy and is harder to accomplish but they are farther than all other countries such as America.

I think the United States of America seems to be taking one step forward and three steps back. If the United States would just allow the ability to start cloning and further the research of iPS that could create a gateway to saving, like I said and will keep saying, COUNTLESS lives.

We could have bone marrow transplants done by only using one needle and one person. We could cure sickle cell anemia, leukemia, cystic fibrosis and other types of cancer. We could actually cure cancer, the one disease that all doctors are stumped on. No more chemotherapy, and all the awful and horrible side effects along with it.

So all the information that I have gathered leads me to ask one last question:
Why have we not legalized Stem Cell Research Cloning?

Stem Cell Research Cloning

This article in the New York times "U.S. Judge Rules Against Obama's Stem Cell Policy" by Gardiner Harris, I found when looking at the Boston Children's Hospital site. It explains the decision made by the Obama Administration to let the use of embryos that would be thrown away be used for stem cell research . It mainly focuses on the overturn of this decision by Royce Lamberth (at right) who claims the excretion of stem cells kills the embryo, although the embryo is anyways going to die in the trash can. Lamberth was so harsh he stopped all processes of stem cell research, for now.

Since Obama made an executive order he was able to overturn it. Now this issue MUST go through the courts.This decision honestly has no science to back it up what so ever. I cannot believe that the only reason science is not being advance and millions of lives are not being saved is because republicans such as Lamberth are pro life. Why does an issue that is purely scientific and logistic be discussed in politics? The embryos are anyways going to die so why not use them to save a few lives? Stem cell research is not bad for you and has no problems connected to it so why are we not taking advantage of this? Scientists are shocked and angered because all the labs that have been made since 2009 are now being shut down because of Lamberth. They have every right to be mad after getting so close to being able to save lives and being shut down because of a bogus reason. Although they are allowing adult stem cell, embryonic stem cell research is pluripotent and will not be rejected by its host. Also adult stem cells are much harder to grow and are very limited to what they can become. I'm just wondering when will the government finally fund and legalize stem cell research?

This hospital: Boston Children's Hospital was the most outraged by the decision made by Lamberth since this is the hospital to go to for stem cell research.

The hospital (at left) uses stem cell research to attempt to cure genetic diseases such a Leukemia, Cystic Fibrosis and Fragile X Syndrome. I just think that is amazing. They have accomplished in stem cell research of hemoglobin disorders such as Sickle Cell Anemia. They do stem cell treatments to re-correct the deformed cells. This work is even leading to attempts to reverse cancers such as Leukemia. They can be able to cure forms of diseases if the government would just give them a chance! It makes me so sad that people are dying because of a simple ethical argument! Although this research is not fully effective the ability to make it effective, which Lamberth has now put a stop to, seems to be no longer capable. By being able to advance in this research Boston Children's Hospital could find cures to many genetic diseases and even cancers.

I believe I am focusing now more on stem cell research and the legalization of it. I believe there is no reason not to legalize stem cell research. Reproductive cloning is much to controversial and is much riskier but research cloning is effective and doesn't cause damage.

Pros and Cons of Cloning

I found this paper: "The Pros and Cons of Cloning" by Nisha Agarwal, to be very helpful and it truly described the pros and cons in ethical and logistical terms of cloning. It defines reproductive and research cloning, which are the 2 types of cloning and gives pros and cons of each. Reproductive is making a new embryo and placing it in a surrogate mother to grow and later be delivered. Which obviously to many people is a problem because they don't want creation of the same exact human being which they believe is god's job. Which brings me to wonder: Is it more of an ethical issue in people's minds or a logistical one? The problem with reproductive cloning is the survival rate of mother and clone/baby is very low. Most the clones don't make it to birth and the few live births there was created many complications and often death for the mothers. So if reproductive cloning is so harmful, should we ban it and allow research cloning? Research cloning is created by stem cell research which literally uses tissue to stem out and create a specific body part. This is the ideal type in which we can save countless lives (as I said in my last post) by creating an exact replica of a body part so the body cannot deny it and it functions perfectly. After reading this article it makes me wonder if there are any bad effects of research cloning it seems to be quite ideal... 

Another site I found talked about mainly reproductive cloning. This article about Dr. Zavos in The Independent, covers the works of Panayiotis Zavos who is a fertility doctor has claimed to have created 14 clones of humans and has put 11 of those into surrogate mothers, in 2009. 

Dr. Zavos (at left) said none of the babies have successfully been born, but he has reached a level that no doctor or scientist has ever been able to. I wonder if Zavos got this far how long will it be until we are able to actually clone a human? This confuses me because in "The Pros and Cons of Cloning" by Nisha Agarwal, it explains how reproductive cloning is harmful to the mother and baby. So it makes me wonder: is reproductive cloning truly harmful for the surrogate mother and child? Zavos had a lab in the Middle East where cloning is not banned and had private clientele who gave money in order to become parents or get back the ones they had lost. In the article it also talks about one of Zavos' clients that wanted their 10 year old daughter Cady (at right) back who had died in a car crash. This is very controversial because it brings up the question of should we allow the ability to clone a person who has died? Also what is the line between bringing back the dead and living forever? The controversy over his "taboo" act caused a lot of rustle in the minds of many people but there is no doubt that his creations are historical and are huge advancements in cloning and the science of it.

Comparing these two sources it brings up the question is cloning truly as harmful as everyone makes it out to be? If Zavos was able to achieve all that he did without truly harming anyone, then why should we not pursue this? Also, in my next blog I will hope to do more research on stem cell research cloning and find more information on the pros and cons of it.

Cloning of Humans

My main research question will be “To what extent should we allow cloning (at right) of humans?” I will be specifically focusing on humans and not other animals. I will also try to explore the idea of whether cloning is ethical or not. There are many opinions    and insights of this stance and a major reason we have not already legalized cloning is because of the peoples’ ethical stances on it. So the idea of whether or not it is ethical is very important and must be addressed. Since it is a very controversial topic so I know I will be able to get a good amount of information from many cites. I will try to stick to cites that have a more medical focus on them as to get information that is credible and not just completely opinion. There are many questions that will arise because subject such as: What kind of cloning? Where will the money come from for cloning? Is this ethical? What people are eligible for cloning? What is the point of cloning? Is it against religion to clone? And several other questions. Hopefully I will be able to answer these with the information I get. As a student studying in the medical field I find cloning very interesting and very amazing. The idea of copying a human being into an exact replica is very astounding. The medial gain the human race would get by doing this could save lives and if we can clone a human being, who’s to say we can’t clone body parts? We could use the body part for people who need a kidney, heart or brain. Just clone the body part and use it, we would be able to save COUNTLESS lives. No more deaths because of being too low on the transplant list or not having a match. There is also an idea that people have addressed before that we could make clones of ourselves and use their body parts if we need them. Of course this is a very controversial idea and seems very unethical but it brings up the thought of would the clones feel anything such as emotions? Would we truly be able to clone the human completely down to emotions, memories and senses? Also would the clone feel the same as their original person? Would they be able to remember everything their original person has done and feel what they feel and be able to live their life after they die? That thought brings up a complete other controversy of if people were intended to live forever. I love this topic because it has endless information and is a very interesting topic!

Sosun Sayied, Hello!

Hi, I'm Sosun!! Blogging sounds fun, I'm excited!!