The objections, which are put forward against cloning of the person.

Some politics in the United States now suggest saving us from all misfortunes connected with cloning of people by legislation. In my opinion, it is an interesting idea but if you examine the problem more soberly, you will see that serious problems actually do not exist. In several cases when abusing is possible, it can be prevented with the help of legislation. Unique objection that remains because of the analysis is that the technology of cloning is not perfect yet. It is a justification for future researching, but not for an interdiction.

 

 Cloning would reduce a genetic variety; make us more vulnerable to epidemics, etc.

More than 5 billion people exist on this planet. Obviously, cloning of people will carry out in very modest scales because of prospective cost of procedure. More than the majority of women will not want to be mothers of clones-twins. Many years will pass before the total of clones will reach even 1 million people all over the world. On percentage parity, it would make a microscopic part from the general population and would not influence to genetic variety of people. If in some long-term future cloning becomes widely widespread some restrictions on such activity will can be justified. If the clone of each person on a planet is created, a genetic variety will not decrease, there still will be 5 billion genetically various individuals.

 

 

It can lead to creation of monsters or ugly creatures.

Cloning is not the same as genetic engineering. During cloning DNA is copied. Then one more person appears an exact twin of an existing individual. Therefore, it is not monster or ugly creature. Genetic engineering would mean modification of human DNA. Therefore, there can appear another person, who will not look like to existing. It presumably could lead to creation of very unusual people, even monsters. Genetic engineering has big positive potential. It is valid very much and should be carried out only with the greatest care and under supervision. Cloning is safe and banal in comparison with genetic engineering. If you are afraid of cloning genetic engineering should horrify you.

 

Millionaires can clone themselves only to receive parts of bodies for transplantation.

This is one of silly applications for cloning. The human clone is a human being. In a free society, you cannot make somebody to give you one of his or her parts of body. In addition, you cannot kill other person to receive one of his parts of body. Existing laws interfere with such abusing. You must also notice that if your clone-twin has received a trauma in accident, you can be asked to give one of your kidneys to rescue a life to a clone! If donor of body is a child, society can wish to interfere. Actually, removal of any part of body of a child for transplantation to other person is very disputable practice, which should be adjusted strictly.

Many future appendices of technology of cloning appear in spheres of transplantation of bodies, skin transplantations for victims of fires, etc.

 

 

Do we need 200 clones of Sophie Loren or Sindi Crawford?

If we speak about cloning of an alive person, it is extremely improbable, that he will agree to creation of 200 clones. The person will approve creation no more than 1 or two clones. In addition, we shall recollect, that clones of the person cannot be made in laboratory in big quantity. Each of them should be mature by a woman, as well as any other child. How do critics of cloning represent that it is possible to persuade 200 women to bear these identical babies? If we really worry, that it is possible, the society can simply forbid creation more than two clones of one person.

If we speak about cloning someone, who has already died, the question of restriction of quantity of clones-twins will become a reasonable theme for reflections and debates. Moreover, we will have a lot of time for these debates. Certainly, if there are some individuals with identical appearance it will not lead to degradation of human essence of these people. [5]

                     

 

Cloning of died people.

There is the little-known fact about doctor Vilmut’s procedure of cloning. It is said to be made with frozen cells. It means that there is no necessity for cloning, that donor of DNA must be alive. If the sample of a fabric of the person is frozen properly, the person could be cloned through long time after his death. In case of people, which have already died also whose fabrics was not frozen, cloning becomes more complex, and today's technology does not allow making it. However, for the biologist it would be very courageous to declare, that this procedure is impossible.

All fabrics of people contain DNA and can potentially be a source for cloning. The list of fabrics includes human hair, bones and teeth. Unfortunately, DNA starts to decay and destroy segments of genetic code some weeks after death. After 60 million years only short fragments DNA of dinosaurs were kept. Therefore, chances of realization of guiro-park are insignificant. However, there are good chances of restoration of sequence DNA from samples of a human fabric. Imagine a genetic code as a book which paragraphs or pages were left in the casual image. If we have only one copy of the book, the full text cannot be restored. Fortunately, we have more, than one copy. There can be thousands of cells in a bone or a sample of a fabric. Each of them has its own copy of DNA code. It is possible to restore an initial genetic code by combining the information from many cells. One more encouraging factor is that only small percent from three billions symbols of a genetic code of a person is responsible for individual distinctions. For example, genetic codes of monkey and people coincide on 99%. It means that it is necessary to restore less than 1% of a code, i.e. only that part which defines individual distinctions between people. Certainly, all this tasks are essentially feasible. [9]

One more opportunity, which gives cloning of human being, can lay in partial correction of mistakes of the past. Probably, many millions of Nazi concentration camps victims could be cloned for restoration of the lost genetic branches. The same technology, which would clone Adolph Hitler, is possible to use to clone Anna Frank. Cloning of a human being would be the first offer of the world Jewish public as the constructive answer to the Holocaust. The serious concern in genofund pauperization still exists in Russia. It caused by Stalin’s mass executions of the best and brightest members of a society. Cloning could give a chance of a new life to people of the past, whose lives were unfairly and finished early.