summary m

According to Sharon Terry, vice-president Genetic Alliance, Washington, D. C from testimony before House Energy Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, wrote an article on March 28,2001. The Genetic Alliance is the largest union of genetics consumer and professional organizations around the world. Terry asserts the need to clone human begins and recommends open and informed societal dialogue on this crucial issue. She cites that the latest scientific reports about the current status of mammalian cloning say there have for mother and child enormous possible human safety risks, those consequence for mammalian cloning shows that these medical risks are like terrible. In fact, according to recent scientific reports, “current cloning techniques to produce a genetically identical human being do not come close to meeting the rigors or minimum human protection, safety, efficacy and medical standards”. Furthermore, the reports also claim that social conversation needs to be noticed social and legally posed by the application of this technology. Quickly coming known scientific research and technologies like cloning human makes us think about the very essential meaning to be human. In all steps in newest technology, we have to ask ourselves whether we are moved by justifiable societal needs or simply by new biomedical opportunities. Also, when we debate about the cloning of human beings we can point to fundamental needs, and those are that all research and clinical projects, are closely watched due to the human subjects’ protections; this is done no matter where the money comes from. This is put in to place to keep the safety of the families and communities involved. Besides, protections have to continue to expand to allow for various types of research and clinical projects. Once again, it does not matter where the money is coming from, whether it be the government, or private sector. We do have to be careful, however, because the fact that new technology has been discovered does not mean that it is ok for that technology to be made available to the public, because it might interfere with public safety and well being.

The author claims “ we know that there are tremendous potential human safety risks for mother and child”. But I partly don’t agree with it because I believe cloning is not always serious safety risks. If the same experiments failed and made mistakes

with babies, it would be serious problems not only medically but also morally. Also, I completely agree with his claim “ At every step in advancing technology, we must ourselves whether we are propelled by justifiable societal needs or simply by new biomedical opportunities”. People have to pay attention whether it has moral problems or not, even if human cloning would become famous. Furthermore, I agree when the author claimed the “Debate about the cloning of human beings highlights a fundamental necessity that all research and clinical projects, regardless of funding source, come under the spotlight of human subjects regulatory protections.” I believe this is a way to guarantee people how safe human cloning is and what human cloning is detail. Than, both of researchers and families should think of it carefully and have their responsibility. To sum up, I believe the claim of the author is mostly persuasive and most reader agree with him. I would mostly agreed with the author if his opinion had been supported with more sufficient data.