Human clones exist. Animal cloning

Human cloning Is the creation of its genetic copy. If an embryo is created, the stem cells of which will later be used for medical purposes - we are talking about therapeutic cloning. The growth and transformation of an embryo into a ready-made person is called reproductive cloning. It is important to understand that although the genotype is inherited identical, the phenotype will of course be different. Accordingly, the creation of a new Jobs or Pele is almost impossible at the current technological level.

Cloning mechanism comes down to kernel transfer technology. First, an egg cell (oocyte) is removed, from which the “native” nucleus (all genetic information) is removed and replaced with the nucleus or DNA of the future clone. After 5-6 days, a blastocyst is formed from this cell (the first stage of the embryo), which carries embryonic stem cells. The advantage of the latter is that such cells totipotent, that is, they can, by division, turn into any types of cells in the body. (Fig. 1) And this means that a person with a sick heart can grow and transplant a new healthy engine, and not someone else's, but his own. 100% compatibility and no risk of rejection.

It is quite logical that the history of human cloning began with experiments on animals. Everyone has heard of Dolly the sheep born in 1996 during a cloning experiment led by Ian Wilmouth and Keith Campbell. In 277 eggs, nuclei were transferred from the udder tissue of a six-year-old donor sheep. 29 embryos were formed, of which only one survived. Dolly is not alone. The video below will tell you about 15 of the most prominent animal clones.

It should be noted that just a year after Dolly's birth, the Additional Protocol on the Prohibition of Human Cloning 1998 to the Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights in Biomedicine 1996 was adopted in Europe. the role of God for the creation of life, the legal status of future clones, attitude in society, etc.), and of a technical nature (a small percentage of successful cloning, unpredictable development and growth of clones, accompanied by diseases and bodily defects). Nevertheless, now only reproductive human cloning is prohibited everywhere; therapeutic, on the contrary, is allowed in a number of countries, in view of its colossal importance in the field of saving lives. However, there are ardent opponents here, especially in the question of whether a 6-day-old embryo is a human or not.

But can declarative prohibitions prevent those interested in such a tasty and unexplored sphere of being? In this regard, it is worth mentioning the Raelite sect, founded in 1973 by the French racer Claude Varilon (Rael), who claims that humanity was created by the extraterrestrial superrace of the Elohim (by the way, in all the scriptures Elohim is translated as God) through genetic engineering. The Raelite sect advocates the lifting of bans on human cloning and believes that in the future a person will be reproduced as an adult, and memory and personality will be transplanted into a new shell. In this way we will achieve immortality. Apparently for this, in 1997 they created the Clonaid company, which offered the service of human cloning for $ 200,000. On December 27, 2002, information leaked to the media about the creation of the first human clone in history, which was named Eve for greater symbolism. By March 2004, Cloneid had announced 13 successful
clones, but despite the hype and widespread coverage of this issue, no evidence has been provided. The company's website (clonaid.com) has not been updated since 2009, and apparently, if the experiments continue, it is already unofficial.

We cannot fail to mention the name of Samuel H. Wood, the scientist who, in 2008, became the first person to clone himself by transferring his DNA into a female egg. Later, 5 embryos that appeared were destroyed, leaving the possibility of their development in a full-fledged individual undisclosed. As Dr. Wood pointed out, even if such a scenario were real, the implementation of reproductive cloning technology is both illegal and unethical.

We can say for sure that on, the prospects for therapeutic cloning look much brighter than reproductive. Research in the field of embryonic stem cells will help find a cure for incurable diseases, as well as significantly extend the life of a person through the transplantation of "worn out" organs.

Human reproductive cloning is still lagging behind in this regard. This is primarily due to the imperfection of the current technology (a small percentage of successful cloning among animals, gene marriage, high mortality, etc.). But even if we solve the technological flaws, what is the use of a clone with a completely different phenotype and life experience. Until we learn how to load memories into a new body and brain in particular, developments in this area will be legally prohibited in all countries of the world. That, however, will not prevent secret laboratories from regularly supplying clones of world celebrities to the black market for individual use ...

Science, developing, makes global changes in people's lives. Some discoveries bring creative changes, others negative. At the end of the 20th century, the topic of cloning became extremely popular - the creation of an embryo identical to the original individual.

1996 marked the first successful cloning of a mammal. Scientists have created Dolly the sheep. In 2007, Ian Wilmuth, one of the leaders of the experiment, was awarded the title of knight by the Queen of Great Britain. In the late 90s, experts started talking about the real possibility of cloning people. Since Dolly, there have been successful attempts at cloning 23 different animal species. In early 2018, Chinese scientists announced the cloning of two female cynomolgus monkeys, whose genome is 93% identical to that of humans. And again, the scientific world remembered about human cloning.

However, despite all the advances in science, human cloning raises a lot of controversy. In January 1998, the states of 24 countries signed the protocol to the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights, according to which it is forbidden to clone people. In 2005, the UN raised the issue of cloning, but the final ban on human cloning was never adopted. Currently, a number of states want to criminalize human cloning. The Russian Federation also has a ban on human cloning, introduced by the law of 20.05.2002. According to this law, cloning in Russia is prohibited for an indefinite period.

• Technological difficulties.
• At first glance, cloning can solve the problem of immortality. However, if you delve deeper into this issue, the clone repeats only the genotype of its prototype, not being its exact copy. A clone, like any person, will have its own consciousness, as well as an individual set of phenotypic characteristics. Since a clone is only a repetition of the appearance of a person and his genome, scientists cannot resurrect such geniuses of human thought like Leo Tolstoy or Nikola Tesla. It is impossible to clone the abilities and consciousness of a person.
• Religious aspect.
  The world's largest religions have strongly criticized the idea of ​​cloning people, mainly because of the unnatural way life appeared. This is seen as an attempt to compete with God. And will a clone created in a laboratory have a soul? Also, religion opposes therapeutic cloning, when an embryo, which is not allowed to develop into a full-fledged individual, is used to grow organs or harvest stem cells.
• Ethical issues.
  From an ethical standpoint, humans cannot be cloned for several reasons. First, because of the possibility of getting inferior personalities. Especially in the early stages of cloning, many unsuccessful clones with various abnormalities and diseases can appear. Secondly, cloning poses a threat to human individuality. Thirdly, cloned people can become common goods in the consumer market, and this is unacceptable.
• Jurisprudence issues.
  Lawyers will face great difficulties in matters of inheritance, motherhood and fatherhood, marriage, etc.
• Health issues.
  Human cloning is unpredictable in terms of genetic inheritance, and it is not known what abnormalities can occur in those who will spawn.
• Warfare.
  The military structures of states may be interested in mass cloning. Clones can be perfect soldiers. But is our world created for war?

Based on the above, we can firmly answer the question: "Is it possible to clone people?" It is forbidden. It is impossible because it not only can lead to a complete moral decay of society, but it simply will practically not help in solving modern problems. And why do we need copies when there are so many individuals around?

Cloning is a method of obtaining several identical organisms through asexual (including vegetative) reproduction. Nowadays, the term "cloning" is usually used in a narrower sense and means the copying of cells, genes, antibodies and even multicellular organisms in the laboratory. Instances that appeared as a result of asexual reproduction are by definition genetically the same, but they can also exhibit hereditary variability, which is caused by random mutations or created artificially in the laboratory.

What is a clone?

According to the scientific clone (from the Greek klon - branch, offshoot) - "this is a series of successive generations of hereditarily homogeneous descendants of one original individual (plant, animal, microorganism), which are formed as a result of asexual reproduction." A classic example of such a vegetation is the reproduction of an amoeba, the cell of which divides, and each of the 2 formed divides again, forming 4, etc. The cloning technique is based on a reproduction model in which the division of genetic material takes place inside the cell.

A clone is not a photocopy or double of a person

Most people do not really understand how the cloning process itself takes place. Moreover, many people think that a clone of an animal or a person is like a photocopy: once - and your (or someone else's) ready-made double came out of the laboratory.

Since it is possible to copy living organisms by the method of cloning, to grow clones-copies of living beings, including mammals, to the class of which humans belong, by the vegetative (asexual) way, a human clone, thus, is simply an identical twin of another person, delayed by time. For example, in order to get a clone of a person at the age of, for example, 40 years, it is necessary that these 40 years have passed.

But science fiction novels and films have given people the impression that human clones will turn out to be dark, monsters. This, of course, is not the case.

Human clones will be ordinary human beings. An ordinary woman will carry them for 9 months, they will be born and raised in a family, like any other child. The twin clone will be several decades younger than its original, so there is no fear that people might confuse them. The clone will not be able to inherit any of the memories of the original individual. That is, a clone is not a photocopy or double of a person, but a younger identical twin. There is nothing dangerous in this circumstance.

What to expect from cloning

As mentioned above, many people think that cloning can lead to the creation of human monsters or freaks. But cloning is not genetic engineering that can actually create monsters. During cloning, DNA is copied, and the result is a person - an exact twin of an existing individual and, therefore, not a freak.

What is important is that every clone, however that may be, will have at least one parent - the mother who bore and gave birth to him, and, as a result, the born child from a legal point of view will not differ in any way from other children.

Now it becomes clear that neither now nor in the near future our planet will be flooded with crowds of clone geniuses, armies of clone soldiers will not appear anywhere, no one will be able to create clone slaves, harems from clone concubines, etc.

Why clone a human?

There are at least two good reasons for this: to enable families to conceive children - twins of outstanding personalities, and so that childless families can have children.

At first glance, the answer is simple, but the problem itself has many pitfalls. It would seem - why not allow the cloning of famous scientists, representatives of the creative intelligentsia, sports? It would be worth cloning all the Nobel laureates for the future contributions that their twins could make to science.

But a clone, for example, Albert Einstein, in fact, will in any case be a relative of all the descendants of the great scientist. And here is the big question, how can they relate to the fact that their relative appeared in the world, outwardly like two drops of water similar to their genius ancestor, but at the same time, due to different upbringing, education and other things, suddenly after 18 years old he wants to become not a physicist, but let's say ... a shoemaker! But the whole world will expect brilliant discoveries from Einstein's double.

Also with other prominent figures. It is almost impossible to calculate what event in the life of, for example, Mahatma Gandhi or Jules Verne prompted the former to lead the Indian struggle for independence, and the latter to become a famous visionary writer.

Or even worse - all the fans will dump, say, collect money and pay for cloning their idol, and the new sex diva will look around and say: “God, in what a gloomy world I was born! I'm leaving for a monastery. " And that's all ...

It should be noted, according to research by the Gallup Service, 9 out of 10 Americans believe that human cloning, if it becomes possible in the near future, should be prohibited, and 2/3 of Americans oppose animal cloning.

We live in a society in which the opinion of the majority can be decisive, and besides, this opinion can be easily formed with the help of modern PR technologies. And then a child - a clone of an outstanding personality from childhood will become hostage to the reputation of his long-dead twin, and this is already a direct violation of human rights to a number of freedoms.

Thus, the only real and conditioned argument in favor of cloning is the desire of parents who have lost their child, to recreate, or, more precisely, to revive their child.

And this kind of precedent already exists - a certain American company "Clonaid" is already going to start fulfilling the order of one married couple to clone their daughter, who died at the age of 10 months. Payment for the forthcoming operation in the amount of 560 thousand dollars has been made, it seems that the work is already underway. According to the project manager, the company has many other applications.

Cloning and Church Opinion

If everything seems to be in order with human laws, then the law of God is resolutely against cloning.

Representatives of almost all world religions are in favor of banning human cloning. Scientists' studies on the cloning of living beings and humans undermine the idea of ​​the Divine creation of everything on Earth in the minds of believers, insult the person and the institution of marriage.

Pope John Paul II declared the implacable position of the Catholic Church, which has over a billion followers in the world, regarding the cloning of human organs and the person himself, in his speech back in August 2000 at the International Congress of Transplant Specialists in Rome.

So scientists who have swung at the divine are at great risk. At least - to be excommunicated, but as a maximum ... There are many religious fanatics, and pogroms in laboratories are not the worst thing they are capable of.

"Pros and cons"

Empirically, it was possible to establish that even copying DNA does not make it possible to obtain an identical living being. So, for example, a cloned cat had a different color than that of its mother, a donor of genetic material. Many believed that this technology would make it possible to "resurrect" pets, the most daring hoped even to reproduce dead people.

Considering cloning as a branch of reproductive medicine, no one undertakes these days. But it is possible to develop its potential in the therapeutic field. If you follow this path exclusively, then the number of opponents of cloning sharply decreases. To do this, you can consider all the nuances affecting the process called cloning.

The pros and cons can be summarized as follows. The main advantages include the opening possibility of treating many serious diseases, restoring skin damaged by burns, and replacing organs. However, opponents insist that we must not forget about the moral and ethical side of the issue, that such technologies are designed to kill the incipient life (embryos from which stem cells are taken).

1997, February 23 in Great Britain, in the laboratory, under the leadership of genetic scientist Ian Wilmuth, after 277 unsuccessful experiments appeared "the world's first artificial mammal" - Dolly the sheep. Her photographs went around almost all the world's newspapers. But it turns out that back in 1987, in a Russian laboratory, a mouse was artificially created, named Masha.

Exactly 20 years ago, the Protocol on the Prohibition of Human Cloning was signed, which became an addition to the European Convention on Human Rights. The decision was associated with the birth of Dolly the sheep - the first animal created on the basis of the genetic material of an adult. The success of the experiment gave rise to fears that active interference in evolutionary processes will lead to the degeneration of humanity. About the danger of cloning people and the successes of scientists achieved over the past 20 years - in the material RT.

The beginning of the era of cloning

Today, two types of cloning are known: reproductive and therapeutic. Reproductive means the creation of a person who is genetically identical to another (living or deceased) person. In the course of such an operation, the nucleus of a human somatic cell is transferred to a female reproductive cell devoid of its own nucleus.

In therapeutic cloning, an embryo is created from an adult cell. In this case, the development of the embryo stops within two weeks. The embryo itself is used as a product for obtaining stem cells. Such cells can cure a person from various diseases.

For the first time, scientists managed to successfully apply the reproductive approach and create an animal based on the genetic material of an adult in 1996. Experts took a nucleus with genetic material from an adult sheep's cell and transplanted it into an egg without a nucleus, which was then implanted into a surrogate mother. So the first genetic clone was born - Dolly the sheep.

Since that time, scientists have successfully cloned many different mammals - dog, cat, goat, pig, cow, mouse. And they even thought about the possibility of resurrecting extinct animal species. So, Yakut geneticists are planning to restore the population of the wool mammoth - the first animal that died at the hands of humans. According to Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor of the Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology Konstantin Severinov, it is possible to clone representatives of extinct species, provided that their DNA is preserved. According to the idea of ​​Yakut scientists, DNA from mammoth cells can be transferred into the eggs of an Indian elephant, which will have the honor to give birth to a mammoth. Researchers are currently in the early stages of developing this project.

Ethical issues of cloning

Having tested cloning technologies on animals, experts thought about the benefits this method could bring to humans. While the positive results of therapeutic cloning, which allows for the production of stem cells capable of curing many serious diseases, are obvious, then the possible consequences of reproductive cloning, during which "copies" of people will appear, remain unclear.

There are no technical obstacles to human cloning, Severinov notes. However, the lack of knowledge about the consequences of reproductive cloning prompted many states, including Russia, to ban human cloning at the legislative level. However, it is almost always specified that the ban is only temporary. Probably, with the accumulation of scientific knowledge in this area, cloning can be allowed.

“There are no problems in cloning people: this technology is well developed. But will there be a need for cloned humans? I think they may be needed when, for medical reasons, a couple cannot have a genetically identical heir - then the technology of human cloning is important, "said the doctor of biological sciences, head of the epigenetics laboratory at the Institute of General Genetics. N.I. Vavilova Sergei Kiselev.

© Valentin Flauraud

Elena Bryzgalina, PhD in Philosophy, Head of the Department of Philosophy of Education, Faculty of Philosophy, Moscow State University, examines the issue of cloning from the point of view of bioethics - a new type of social institution that analyzes the consequences of the use of new technologies in connection with the development of biomedicine.

"The result of a possible reproductive cloning of representatives of the species Homo sapiens, which humanity may face, is unattainable from the point of view of bioethics," Bryzgalina said in a commentary on RT. - The fact is that when it comes to reproductive cloning, it means not only obtaining an exact genetic copy of any of the representatives of Homo sapiens, but the formation of some demanded personal properties, which, of course, depend not only on genetics, but also on the impact a social environment that is unique ”.

This is not only about ethical risks arising from the use of cloning technologies, for example, an increase in the risk of mutations. The main problem, according to Bryzgalina, is the impossibility of reproducing an integral individual with the totality of all genetically programmed and formed characteristics under the influence of society.

“Bioethics has a negative attitude towards reproductive cloning issues, since it contradicts such key principles as, for example, individual autonomy. A scientist can violate this principle not only during cloning, but also during any manipulations with human DNA, the expert believes. “And besides, there may be a conflict between the interests of people now living and future generations of mankind.”

She noted that it has not yet been determined what the social status of hypothetically possible human clones will be.

“The issue of the status of new objects has not been resolved in any way, in particular the relationship of parenthood, kinship, their relationship with the“ original personality ”. Legal and property issues are not outlined. The emergence of such situations greatly limits the transfer of advanced technologies developed at the natural science level into the sphere of social practice, ”added Bryzgalina.

As for therapeutic cloning, according to Kiselyov, it has no technical limitations and can be in demand. “But today there is a simpler and cheaper reprogramming technology that leads to the same result. Every living person can take some of his cells, for example, of the skin, and reprogram it to the same embryonic state that the cloning technology leads to, ”the scientist explained.

© Sergey Pyatakov

Former Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II said: "Cloning a person is an immoral, insane act leading to the destruction of the human personality, challenging its Creator."

The current Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill also categorically spoke out against the use of cloning technologies, which, in his words, mean "an invasion of God's plan for man."

However, he approved the use of genetic engineering methods "not to create a new type of creation, but in order to improve what is not completely perfect - to heal the disease, in particular."

The 14th Dalai Lama shares a similar perspective on human genetic replication experiments. “As for cloning, then as a scientific experiment, it makes sense if it will benefit a specific person, but if you use it all the time, there is nothing good about it,” said the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhists.

Currently, more than seven billion people live on planet Earth. One side there is talk about the time to colonize Mars or another planet, more or less suitable for human life. These intentions are related to the fact that, as the famous writer said Kurt Vonnegut: « Humanity - you are so overpopulated! » .

On the other hand medicine and science are actively committed to allow cloning of humans on Earth. In order to help those individuals who suffer from infertility, in order to use this procedure to "resurrect" famous personalities who bring real benefits to society and in connection with other less justified needs.

As you can see, an ambiguous picture emerges. According to some sources, humanity is overpopulated, according to others, it is experiencing insufficiency and needs clones.... Do we need Mars or is there a need for twins of different ages all over the world? Why do people need clones, if natural resources will soon not be enough for a normally born person? This will be discussed in this article.

In fact, the topic of the colonization of Mars is clearly worthy of a separate publication, therefore, within the framework of this material, I will only consider the issue of human cloning. Do we need it and is it as scary as various fantastic films and writers paint it in their futuristic novels? Let's consider the most obvious pros and cons Further.

By itself cloning implies accurate reproduction of any object... Respectively, human cloning – this is the creation of an embryo from which a person is subsequently grown, possessing the genotype of the individual whose clone it is.

The concept of cloning came from microbiology, and then began to be actively used in genetics. The topic of creating the same people pretty soon attracted not only the minds of many medical workers and scientific researchers, but also the creative elite - writers, filmmakers and screenwriters. Today, both in cinematography and in literature, there are a lot of books and films that tell about what awaits humanity, if we assume that cloning is the norm in it.

And then it would be reasonable to figure out Why cloning at all? Why did people come to such an idea as reproducing their own kind not by the usual method of merging a man and a woman, and conceiving a child by getting a sperm cell into an egg, but by an artificial method, which allows, in the literal sense of the word, to make armies of identical-looking homo-sapiens?

In this regard scientists give the following reasons:

At first, cloning not just people, but organs and tissues makes a revolutionary breakthrough in transplantation and traumatology... For example, if your liver is failing, then thanks to the presence of a healthy clone of it, you can be implanted with a working copy. Or if, after a profuse burn, you lose a piece of your skin, you can easily replace it with an analog one and live on peacefully and happily. In this plan cloning, roughly speaking, body parts is very necessary and appropriate. These procedures will allow a person to live for a long time, so to speak with the same consciousness and spirit, but with organs simply replaceable like puzzles, which ensure our vital activity.

Thanks to cloned organs, you don't have to worry about whether the spleen or kidney will take root in your body or provoke rejection, it will not be necessary to think that such a transplant will lead to the development of an incurable disease. Just imagine how many lives can be saved and extended on our planet if biologists and other scientists are resignedly entrusted with the possibility of cloning individual organs and tissues? Not a bad prospect in my opinion.

But let's move on and return to cloning a whole person. The second important argument of the position of science in the validity of the reproduction of clones is helping childless families ... According to statistics, in Russia every seventh married couple suffers from infertility, and this, in turn, provokes both the breakdown of marriages, and simply the presence of scandals and quarrels against the background of a natural misunderstanding.

On the one hand, we have overcrowded orphanages, where the "flowers of life" unsuitable for biological parents spend their most intimate years, and is this not a reason for childless family men to make at least some contribution to the fate of humanity? On the other hand, we are all human, and often the problem of “mothers” and “fathers” unable to conceive is that they want their own children, with similar facial features, habits, predictable genetics, and so on.

Here, as you understand, the ability to clone a person comes into force! Why doesn't a sterile mother give birth to her own clone? Perhaps, many will find such a development of events ridiculous, but science has its own view of the evolution of mankind. Even if it does not always coincide with the mass consciousness.

Thirdly, human cloning is designed to save people from a number of genetic diseases ... So, if, for example, the father of the unborn child has some genetically diseased place, then her own somatic cell will be placed in the egg of the future mother - absolutely healthy, as a result, a child will be born who is the prototype of his mother, without diseases of the nominal father. Exactly the same operation with the father's somatic cell will be reproduced if a woman carrying a child has a genetic disease. Instead of a copy of her, the world will see a copy of her husband.

Perhaps the specific rationale of scientists is worthy of recognition from humanity, but just think, how does it feel to grow your own copies? And what will it be like for the children themselves, who know in advance what they will be like at 20, at 40 and at 60? Will the world become too predictable?

The next argument of scientists who prove the need for cloning is the ability to reproduce human genes in animals ... The creation of so-called therapeutic proteins will also allow people to heal. We are talking here about those individuals who have diseases due to mutated genes, for example, hemophiliacs, who need a blood-stopping protein. So, in 1997, American scientists cloned six sheep, three of which were implanted with a specific human gene, and he actively took root in one of the sheep. As a result, when the animal grew up and began to produce milk, human protein was found in the product. Thus, sheep's milk was supposed to be beneficial for those who suffer from hemophilia.

As you can see the effects of cloning a whole person or in parts for the people themselves are quite optimistic- they will increase the life expectancy of individuals, improve the gene pool and resolve the issue of the birth of children from infertile parents. But Why, then, the public majority, the church and the top officials of many states, along with legislation, so rebel against the procedure for the reproduction of human copies?

And here the first reason is, of course, the fears of all the above-mentioned subjects in the appearance as a result of cloning of a high percentage of unsuccessful "copies", namely, defective people. This aspect is considered to be social and ethical. It also includes such unsolvable issues, in the opinion of the authorities and opponents of cloning, as paternity or motherhood, social confusion with inheritance rights, the possibility of marriage and other solutions, sometimes not foreseen by ordinary mankind, of emerging problems in connection with the appearance of copied people.

The second aspect against cloning is the inability of the copied person to fully repeat the consciousness of the original. That is, on the one hand, here it is possible to assure the society with precision that the clones will not be completely identical - repetition is possible only in terms of genetics and appearance. It is absolutely impossible to reproduce people with the same personalities, abilities and habits.

This means that the very concept of cloning is depreciated. Accordingly, the question arises - why are clones needed in this case, if it is not possible to endow the modern world with Einstein or Leonardo da Vinci? Why do we need externally the same people, if internally they all have different characters? Shouldn't we just leave this place to nature with its twins and twins?

But it gets worse. World religions almost unanimously trumpet that cloning goes beyond all the limits allowed by the Lord, since it is aimed at creating artificial life, but not God's. Maneuvers with alteration of nature and God-given schemes, according to religious people, run counter to all existing nature.

This aspect is ethical and religious, and this is what he said about the reasons for not accepting cloning University of Chicago professor Leon Kass:

« Cloning is unethical experimentation on unborn babies and puts them at great risk of being born with bodily defects and problems.. It threatens individuality ... It mixes individuals ... It represents giant leap forward towards commercial production of offspring… And it is a radical form of parental despotism and child abuse. "

Even the head of such a loyal teaching as Buddhism Dalai Lama 14th expressed his position on cloning:

“As for cloning, as a scientific experiment, it makes sense if it will benefit a specific person, but if you use it all the time, there is nothing good about it. »

By the way, about the fact that cloning can result in endless human copies being reproduced for commercial purposes.

Imagine that, say, a man with sufficient means decides to marry Pamela Andersen, the idol of his adolescence. In today's ordinary reality, this is hardly possible. But if human cloning is allowed, then everything will change dramatically! Theoretically, in order to get your own "Andersen" - you just need to put the somatic cell of Pamela of some surrogate mother in the egg and wait 9 months for the blonde clone girl to be born. Then, wait another 18 years - until she grows up and, if the man "customer" is still alive, he can quite become her husband, lover or just a friend, if before that he does not play the role of her own father.

And this is just the mildest example of how cloned humans can turn into a commodity.

But if a full-fledged copying of a person also for sale today looks like an abstraction, then operations with dead embryos, most often aborted, have long turned into a business both for scientific researchers, hatching plans to legalize cloning, and for the beauty industry, which siphons priceless stem cells from dead bodies, which have literally become a hit of rejuvenation!

However, let's not deviate from the topic and return to the reasons for the negative attitude towards human cloning. And here there is the next aspect that warns of biological hazards. That is, according to a number of scientists, in the long term, cloning can lead to irreparable genetic changes in a person... And this, you understand, can play both in our favor and against us. The latter means that the disappearance of humanity on Earth is not excluded, due to unpredictable adjustments of the gene pool cloned individual.

Now let's turn to the law How, in different countries of the world, do these or those authorities relate to the scientific approach to human invention?

According to Wikipedia, in countries such as Germany, France and Japan, human cloning is currently officially prohibited. Moreover, there are states that criminalize human cloning- these are Brazil, Great Britain, Spain, Colombia, Mexico, Moldova, Romania, El Salvador, Slovenia, Slovakia and Estonia, as well as the countries already indicated above. It is worth noting that in the United States until 2009 there was also a complete ban on cloning, but subsequently the authorities lifted the restriction on therapeutic cloning.

It must also be said that such a world-famous organization as Back in 2005, the UN called on the participating countries to adopt prohibitive acts regarding all existing and not yet created forms of cloning.... The rationale was the following wording: "Contradicting human dignity" and "Protection of human life"... Simply put, the UN recommended limiting human cloning to the extent that it is incompatible with notions of human dignity and if it is contrary to the preservation of human life.

The story with the creation of copies of people in Russia was also cut off in the bud. , thanks to the law "On the Temporary Ban on Human Cloning" passed in 2002. Since the decree was in effect only for five years, then in 2007 its term expired, and only after 3 years, that is, in 2010 the law was extended. It should be noted that it is only about the prohibition of reproductive cloning, that is, the reproduction of analog, repeating individuals. Thus, there is no ban on therapeutic cloning in our country – reproduction of other organisms, including any cells, including human ones, for research purposes is permitted.

As for the reason for the prohibition of reproductive cloning, then the Federal Law of the Russian Federation has the following explanation: “ Human cloning is fraught with many legal, ethical and religious issues that today still have no obvious solution. ».

Thus, we can say that along with the public and religious lack of understanding of the need for human cloning, the government of many countries of the world in legislative form is also closing the shop for the conveyor belt production of people of the same appearance.

But, of course, if there is a scientific basis for the progressive cloning of individuals, then there are public figures advocating the creation of copied people.

For example, the well-known to Russians Vladimir Zhirinovsky believes that clones are necessary for our country to raise the economy, as well as to solve demographic problems , and in one of his statements he promised that he would seek to lift the ban on cloning people in Russia.

In addition, in a country as remote from the whole world as Australia, where there may also be a shortage of humanity, like in the depths of the Siberian taiga, since December 2006, the authorities have officially allowed cloning a human embryo, however, again not for reproductive purposes. In 2008, the Australian government clarified that scientists can clone embryos in order to obtain embryonic stem cells from them.

In general, it is definitely impossible to talk about whether it is good or bad to clone a person. On the one hand, it is possible that the reproduction of copies of people will allow humanity to overcome some insoluble difficulties, among which infertility was already mentioned earlier - as the most weighty, in my opinion. On the other hand, on today, even without cloning, artificial insemination is practiced, which allows women to give birth to children, individual in every sense. From the point of view of cloning individual organs, this procedure is more justified, again in my subjective opinion. Since it will allow, with positive development, in fact, to increase the life expectancy, survival rate, wear resistance of the human body.

Based on this, the question remains reasonable - why then do we need to reproduce our own copies in the form of cloned people? Is it perhaps out of vanity and curiosity - to give birth to your own clone, in order to track how a child, identical to you, grows and develops, to cultivate in him what he himself missed during his life, in his youth, and so on?

It is possible that from an economic point of view, clones are still beneficial - in that they can be easily replaceable, visually similar, the appearance of one person can be endlessly exploited for different purposes… But do not forget that they will all have a completely individual consciousness. And if someone still consoles himself with the hope that it is possible to resurrect the brilliant John Lennon or, say, businessman Boris Berezovsky, then it is obvious that apart from the “cover” you will not receive anything, the “filling” will be completely new, and hardly whether it somehow coincides with the original.

If, for a complete picture, we take into account the fact that overpopulation is already noticeable on our planet, especially in its individual parts, and this entails a shortage of drinking water, accelerates the depletion of natural resources and worsens the ecology every day, which in the end, can lead to problems with oxygen on Earth, then the reproduction of clones becomes unnecessary to anyone. Why does the world need artificially appeared people, when traditionally born people are already a dime a dozen? Is that what they can colonize Mars? But this is, perhaps, a completely different story.

What do you think about human cloning? And would you like to have your own clones?