I. Introduction.

I have chosen this problem because I am extremely interested in biology,
ecology and the history of mankind. The problem of genetic modification
and cloning is very important at the present time. The theme of
genetically modified food is actual as every year it takes the greater
place in our diet. Many scientists declare danger of the use of
genetically modified food stuffs to health. They warn that consumption
of similar products is capable to lead to unpredictable consequences,
including mutations. One of big problems of a condition in that area is
that genetic engineering is being moved by extreme commercial interests.
The biotechnological companies aspire to patent and deduce on the market
all new products and new genetically modified organisms (plants and
animals), not caring about what collateral consequences genetic changes
can have.

To please commercial interests of some huge companies any precaution is
rejected: in fact being guided by only scientific approach, it would be
necessary to test some generations of plants to be convinced of their
safety. It has not been made in a case with modified plants as process
of testing can borrow millennia. In my work I will try to describe the
positive and negative features of genetic engineering, having resulted
possible reasons and examples. In fact now there is a set of disputes
and discussions so even the urgency of this theme is proved by a simple
example — quantity of existing films and serials about this problem.

Genetically modified products can be toxic and dangerous for people. In
1989 the modification of L-Tryptophan, the food additive, caused death
of 37 Americans and made invalids 5000 persons because of causing
sufferings and potentially fatal illness of blood. Only after that event
the product has been withdrawn from the use. According to special
explorations, genetically modified L-Tryptophan was equivalent to
previous substances which were made with the help of bacteria of natural
type. However it did not correspond to these preparations on parameters
of safety. If other tests had been carried out, for example, the test
for assimilation by animals and people, the fact that this product was
not safe would have become obvious. But such tests had not been carried
out.

People have different points of view about whether the genetic
modification of food is a good thing – in fact it is quite a
controversial topic. Those involved in the biotechnology business insist
it is safe and that genetic modification can increase yields, reduce
waste and improve the flavour and keeping qualities of products. For
example, soft fruits can be made firmer to prevent spoilage during
transportation. People in favour of genetic modification also say that
better use can be made of agricultural land as crops can potentially be
modified to grow in hostile conditions, such as those of a drought; this
will help in feeding the world. The later is a vital issue. The same
goes for improving the nutritional value of foods. More than 800 million
people still go hungry, and 82 countries (half of them in Africa)
neither grow enough food, nor can afford to import it. In India alone,
85% of children under five live below the normal, acceptable state of
nutrition.

It is well known that the fear of new and unknown things is a peculiar
feature of people. People have already forgotten that a few dozens of
years ago the world was shocked by the discussion about an opportunity
of cloning of human beings. This opportunity appeared after the
successful cloning of frogs.

Several years ago the mankind was shocked by reports in mass media about
Dolly the Scottish sheep, which was represented as its founders assert,
an exact copy of its genetic mother. American bull Jefferson and the
bull, deduced by the French biologists appeared later. The prospect of
work on cloning of a human being is publicly discussed.

Cloning of bodies and fabrics is the problem number one in the field of
transplantology, traumatology and in other areas of medicine and
biology. Cloned bodies become a kind of rescue for people who have got
in automobile failures or any other accidents or for people who need
radical help because of diseases caused by age.

The latest months enabled experts to comprehend soberly the situation,
to estimate some methodical and technological difficulties lying in the
field of mammal cloning. Cloning of a human being can create
unsuccessful copies, ugly creatures, but all humankind will be
responsible for his or her ugliness. Opponents of female equality and
feminism assure that men will not be necessary if cloning is developed.
It is absolutely incorrect from the biological and social points of
view. Women were compelled to live without men who had not come back
from wars. Hardly it was useful to somebody. And hardly women will be
always able to do without man’s sexual cells for continuation of future
generations.

So first of all we shall try not to fear of new and unknown things. And
we shall recollect that cloning constantly occurs in natural conditions
when identical twins are born. They are identical in their genetic set.
It can be easily proved by an opportunity of changing body parts and
fabrics between them. Thus, emotional objections against cloning of
people have no rational base.

I would like to be a scientist and carry out the experiments of cloning
parts of human body. I am absolutely sure that nobody can clone a person
because it is not a biological object, but it is the result of
socializing, communication, background mentality, language etc.

II. The Main Body.

Genetically modified food.

What is genetic modification?

Unlike normal methods of reproduction, genetic modification is done in
the laboratory by cutting, joining and transferring genes between
totally unrelated living things. As a result, combinations of genes
which would never occur naturally are produced.

Everyone has heard of Dolly the sheep and experiments in the medial
field, but genetic modification is also happening in the food industry.
It is possible to isolate and transfer different characteristics between
unrelated species or between plants and animals. For example, the
introduction of an “anti-freeze” gene from an Arctic fish into tomatoes
or strawberries made them resistant to frost.

Around 40% of the world’s total crop production is lost to pests and
diseases, despite the heavy use of pest-killing chemicals. Cauliflowers
are no exception, and suffer damage from aphids and other insects.
Scientists have looked to nature to find a solution to this problem and
discovered that snowdrops are able to survive attacks from some of the
most devastating pests. Snowdrops produce a substance called lectin,
which affects insects by interfering with their digestive systems. The
task is to transfer the gene for lectin production, and thus the
property of insect resistance, into cauliflowers.

It is known that tomatoes, carrots and peppers are rich in carotenoids,
which help prevent cancer ant coronary heart disease. To make things
easier for us, scientists are working to produce vegetables that are
genetically modified to contain increased carotenoid levels. They have
already succeeded in creating tomatoes with more than three times the
normal “anti-cancer” power.

Animals can also be “engineered”. When salmon were modified with the
gene for cold resistance from the flounder fish, they grew 10 times as
fast as normal salmon because the inserted gene had interfered with
their grown harmone gene. A pig was modified with a human gene to make
it grow faster and leaner. But these efforts have resulted in numerous
problems and serious diseases among the experimental animals. [6]

Genetic modification can save the world.

People have different points of view about whether the genetic
modification of food is a good thing – in fact it is quite a
controversial topic. Those involved in the biotechnology business insist
it is safe and that genetic modification can increase yields, reduce
waste and improve the flavour and keeping qualities of products. For
example, soft fruits can be made firmer to prevent spoilage during
transportation. People in favour of genetic modification also say that
better use can be made of agricultural land as crops can potentially be
modified to grow in hostile conditions, such as those of a drought; this
will help in feeding the world. The later is a vital issue. The same
goes for improving the nutritional value of foods. More than 800 million
people still go hungry, and 82 countries (half of them in Africa)
neither grow enough food, nor can afford to import it. In India alone,
85% of children under five live below the normal, acceptable state of
nutrition.

Many, if not all Southern countries, posses the indigenous genetic
resources – requiring no further genetic modification – that can
guarantee a sustainable food supply. For instance, in a single village
of northeast India, 70 varieties of rice are grown… Farmers repeatedly
used and enchanted some varieties that were resistant to disease,
drought and flood, some that tasted nice, some that were coloured and
useful for ritual purposes and some that were highly productive. It
seems obvious that there is no need for genetically modified crops. On
the contrary, they will undermine food security and biodiversity. The
best thing is to sustain existing indigenous agricultural diversity as
the basis of a secure and nutritious food base for all. [6]

Genetic modification can be dangerous and unpredictable.

But on the other hand, many professional independent observers believe
genetic engineering is unpredictable and dangerous. They think that the
risks are not worth taking, especially since they are not safe. This
science is too new to guarantee that problems will not occur in the
future. When moved from one species to another, genes can create new
unknown dangers. Small changes could have big impacts. Once released
into the natural environment, genetically modified plants interbreed
with those in the wild. The spread of modified genes from one organism
to another in the wild is technically termed “a gene flow”. It has
already led to the creation of new strains of “super weeds” that are
resistant to herbicides. Perhaps most worrying of all, there is no way
of recalling a genetic modification. Once released into the environment,
genetic pollution cannot be cleaned up; it will survive so long as there
is life on Earth. The environment will be irreversibly altered. Natural
plants and animals could be driven out.

Mistakes have already been made in genetic engineering. Use of
genetically modified bacteria in the food supplement Tryptophan may have
caused 37 deaths in the USA since 1989 as well as permanently disabling
thousands of people.

A company called Pioneer Hi-Bred developed a variety of genetically
modified soya spliced with a Brazil nut gene to increase its protein
content. When it was discovered that individuals allergic to Brazil nuts
also reacted to the modified soya, the company had to withdraw the
product.

In a 1994 field test, natural potatoes were planted at a distance of up
to 1,100 metres from a batch of genetically modified potatoes. When
seeds from the unmodified potatoes were later collected, it was found
that 72% of the natural plants grown near the modified batch had
absorbed the modified gene, and 35% of those grown further away had also
done so. In another study in the same year, scientists at the Scottish
Crop Research Institute found that pollen from genetically modified
rapeseed had fertilized plants up to 2.5 kilometers away.

The company Ciba Geigy PLC recently introduced genetically modified
maize, which is altered to be resistant to a herbicide and contains a
marker gene for resistance to the widely used antibiotic ampicillin.
Microorganisms in the stomach could absorb the gene for resistance to
the antibiotic and spread into the environment, leaving a vita medical
resource useless. The European Parliament expresses fear that
consumption of the maize might weaken the effect of some antibiotic
medicines in the human body. And the finite risk could be absolutely
catastrophic if it occurred.

A soil bacterium was modified to break down a particular herbicide. It
did so, but the unexpected end result was a substance highly toxic to
vital soil fungi, which were destroyed.

Now just twenty-odd years since this was discovered, experiments have
produced genetically modified types of most major food crops and these
have recently started to be given legal approval despite opposition from
thousands of organizations who have high lighted the dangers, and
without informed public debate. A report by 100 US scientists suggested
that genetically modified organisms could cause “… irreversible,
devastating damage to the technology”. British scientists have also
spoken out – Dr. Michael Antoniou, a senior molecular biologist who has
experience in conducting genetic engineering experiments in the
laboratory said: “This is an imperfect technology with inherent
dangers”. The Prince of Wales also speaks out about genetic foods. He
urges scientists to stop playing God by tinkering with food. He says
there is no way of knowing the long-term consequences of producing and
eating genetically modified crops, and points to the “man-made” BSE
disaster an example of the dangers of the quest for cheap food. The
Prince says that genetic engineering “takes mankind into realms that
belong to ‘God and to God alone’, “and raises ethical and practical
considerations. “Apart from certain highly-beneficial and specific
medical applications, do we have the right to experiment with and
commercialize the building blocks of life? We live in an age of rights –
and it seems that it is time that our Creator had some rights too.”
Later, an article from The Daily Telegraph continues, “We simply do not
know the long-term consequences for human health and the wider
environment of releasing plants bred in this way … The lesson of BSE and
other entirely man-made disasters on the road to “cheap food” is surely
the greatest cause for concern. Even the best science cannot predict the
unpredictable.”

The author of a report on genetic engineering from Brussels, Doug Parr,
says, “It’s like the genie in bottle: once it’s out, you cannot put it
back. Already there are too many cases of things going wrong.”

Susan Leubuscher of Green Pease’s European Unit in Brussels says, “The
science of genetic engineering is unpredictable, but few, from
scientists to governments, dare raise the fact that today’s Golden Goose
of industry is laying some rotten eggs.” [6]

The problems of labeling genetically modified food.

Do not be surprised if you have not heard much about genetically
modified foods, because neither the chemical companies who produce them
nor the governments are exactly running public information campaigns
about them. Agricultural biotechnology is big business, and science has
been absorbed into industry to an unprecedented extent. Practically all
established molecular geneticists have some industrial ties, thus
limiting what they can do research on particularly with regard to
safely. The transnational companies will soon be in a position to
dictate the future of the food industry. And they know just how they
want our food to be produced – in ways that will maximize their own
profits. That means using the gene technology which they have patented
and can control, despite the risk of irreversible global consequences
for the rest of us.

Some of the food companies are refusing to segregate crops which contain
modified genes from those which do not. This makes it impossible to have
a proper labeling scheme, which would allow people to make up their
minds about weather or not they should eat the products of gene
technology. Only a few genetically modified products are on sale in the
supermarkets of Great Britain at the moment. Unfortunately, the
situation is changing because of the soya bean. Soya beans are grown
mainly in North America and find their way into 60% of all processed
foods. For example they are in bread, biscuits, baby foods, chocolate,
ice cream and many vegetarian products. The inclusion of soya makes it
more than likely that people in Britain are already eating modified
soya, whether they like it or not. Monsanto , a giant chemical company,
modified a soya bean with genetic material from a virus and a petunia
linked to a bacterial gene, which has made the soya plant resistant to a
weed-killer called Roundup, which is also manufactured by Monsanto.
Companies like Monsanto do not spend millions on a new soya bean because
it will feed the poor and starving. They believe it will make their
shareholders fabulously wealthy. Farmers have to sign restrictive
contracts promising to use Monsanto’s weed-killers and not grow their
own seed. In the race to spread their modified crops all over the world,
little attention is being paid to the dangers. Perhaps it is the danger
to human health that it most worrying. As our food becomes more and more
refined and synthetic, its nutritional value falls, and unexpected
health effects are continually surfacing. Some of these do not appear
for years, even decades, after the food was eaten. At the same time,
unchanged, unprocessed, natural food may actually become more expensive
and harder to find. Even when toxins aren’t produced, allergies can be
triggered unexpectedly. [6]

There is one more thing that comes into question – is it ethical to move
genes around? Introducing genes from bacteria, viruses and even animals
into plants raises serious concerns for many people, in particular
vegetarians and those with certain religious beliefs.

Cloning.

A huge quantity of disputes and discussions concerning cloning are
carried out nowadays. It is well known that the fear of new and unknown
things is a peculiar feature of people. People have already forgotten
that a few dozens of years ago the world was shocked by the discussion
about an opportunity of cloning of a human being. This opportunity has
appeared after successful cloning of frogs.

Several years ago, the humankind was shocked by reports in mass media
about Dolly the Scottish sheep, which was represented as its founders
assert, an exact copy of its genetic mother. American bull Jefferson and
the bull, deduced by the French biologists appeared later. The prospect
of work on cloning of a human being is publicly discussed.

The latest months enabled experts to comprehend soberly the situation,
to estimate some methodical and technological difficulties lying in the
field of mammal cloning. Cloning of a human being can create
unsuccessful copies, ugly creatures, but all mankind will bear the
responsibility for his or her ugliness. [3]

Problems facing to cloning.

Cloning of bodies and fabrics is the problem number one in the field of
transplantology, traumatology and in other areas of medicine and
biology. Cloned bodies become a kind of rescue for people who have got
in automobile failures or any other accidents or for people who need
radical help because of diseases caused by age.

The most evident effect of cloning is that childless people will be able
to have their own children. Today millions married couples all over the
world suffer because they are doomed to remain without descendants. In
our country each sixth or seventh married couple is barren. This problem
generates so many tragedies and family dramas! This situation can be
changed. It is possible to have your own child, your real continuation
in time. [2]

Cloning will help people who suffer genetic diseases.

And still. Fans of exotic things will always exist among humans. They
bequeath to send their ashes on a rocket aside the Sun. They spend
thousands of dollars for saving their bodies in cryogenic chambers till
that time when medicine will manage to return them into a normal
condition and to relieve them from illnesses which are incurable today.
Moreover, there also will be fans of exotic things in the field of
cloning. Somebody will wish to see his or her own copy during his or her
lives. Others wish to revive during another historical epoch: 50 — 100
years later.

Cloning of the person: arguments in protection.

Cloning of a human person is close to reality due to historical
scientific breakthrough of the doctor Yang Wilmot and his colleagues
from Great Britain. This opportunity potentially gives all of us
fabulous advantages. Unfortunately, misleading reports of mass-media
and negative emotional reaction (which was generated by erroneous
science fiction) influenced to the discussion of this theme. The
negative attitude towards cloning of people is only consequence of
fascinating and new idea. If the public entered into error will impose a
full interdiction on cloning of a person, a sad episode in the human
history would appear. [1]

What is the human clone?

Actually, the clone is not simply an identical twin of some other person
and they differ in periods of time. However, science-fiction novels and
films have created an impression as if human clones are thoughtless
zombies, monsters like Frankenstein, etc. But it is complete nonsense.
Human clones will be usual human beings, perfect as you and me. They
will be born by usual women after 9 months of pregnancy; they will be
born and will be grown up in a family, as well as any other child. They
will need 18 years to become adults, as other people do. Hence, the
clone-twin will be some decades younger than the original; therefore
there is no danger, that people will confuse the clone-twin to the
original. Just as identical twins, a clone and his donor of DNA will
have various fingerprints. The clone will not inherit anything from
memoirs of the original individual. Due to all these distinctions, the
clone is not an x-copy or the double of his donor, but a younger
identical twin. Human clones will have the same legal rights and duties,
as any other person does. Clones will be human beings in the fullest
sense. You will not have the right to use a clone as a slave. The
slavery was forbidden in the USA in 1865 and then by the United Nations
Convention of the Human Rights.

It is necessary to emphasize, that the cloning of human beings should be
carried out on an individual voluntary basis only. The alive person,
should give his or her legal permission. As well as the woman who will
bear a clone-twin and then grow this child, should take her own
decisions. The woman is required for cloning to bear the child. So,
there is no danger that scientists-villains will create thousands of
clones in confidential laboratories. Cloning will be done only after
requests and with participation of usual people.

What can we expect from human clones? The answer can be found from
exploration of identical twins. The clone repeats the original
individual on appearance completely and has the same growth and a
constitution. For well-known supermodels and movie stars, it can be the
most important quality.

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.

The first genetically modified monkey.

On January 11, 2001 in the USA the first genetically modified monkey was
born. It was named Andy. This name means “inserted DNA” in return
perusal.

The monkey was born from ovule in which (маркерный) gene was included.
This gene can be seen with the help of a special microscope. Scientists
speak, that similar technology can be used for strong modification of
genetic material. With the help of this modification, it is possible to
enter genes of human diseases, for example, a cancer of a breast.

«We can easily make introduction, for example, a gene of Altsgamer’s
illness to speed up manufacture of a vaccine against this disease», —
told one of researchers, Professor Dzherald Satan.

Altsgamer’s Illness is the specific form of senile dementia (full
degradation of the person and disintegration of intelligence).

Cloned kitten was sold for $50 000.

Biotechnological company Genetic Savings and Clone (GSC), located in
California, has sold the first cloned kitten for $50 000.

A certain woman from Texas got the kitten. Her personal name is not
disclosed because of fears of prosecution by opponents of cloning. Small
Nikkei reminds its «parent» not only in appearance, but also in
character and behaviour.

GSC Company is going to offer owners of died animals to get its copy.

For similar operation, future clients will need to hand samples of their
animal’s fabrics in a special depository. Alas, until now there are
fears about smaller security of clones from every possible illnesses and
infections, and also smaller duration of life. [9]

Stanford University will create the mouse with a human brain.

In 2005, the American National Academy of Sciences plans to present
recommendations about ethical experiments on creation of chimeras. The
chimera is the mutant, which combines cells, fabrics and parts of bodies
of people and animals. Now in the USA the laws, which limit such
experiments, do not exist. Meanwhile, the quantity of such experiments
constantly increases.

In particular, director of Steam Cells Institute of Stanford University
professor Irving Vajssman is going to carry out an experiment on
creation of mice, which will have a human brain.

The scientist plans to enter human neurons into rodent’s brain. Directly
ahead of a birth the rodent will be killed. After opening of its brain,
Vajssman hopes to learn, whether the architecture of a human brain will
be generated. If it will take place, he will search for traces of
«cognitive features», peculiar to people.

The Californian professor insists that his experiment will lead to the
best understanding of mechanisms of work of a brain. It will be useful
for struggle against a number of diseases.

Another experiment, which causes fear of the American academicians, is a
creation of a human who will be born by mice. For this purpose, rodents
will be genetically modified to make human gametes (sperm and ovules)
from which a human embryo will be grown up.

The first hybrid embryos were created by the Chinese scientists from the
Shanghai medical university in 2003. The scientists managed to connect
cells of a human skin with ovules of rabbits. More than hundreds of
embryos during several days developed in laboratory saucers. Then they
have been destroyed for reception from them embryonic steam cells. [9]

Chronology of cloning.

Date Event

1883 Opening of ovule by the German cytologist Oscar Gertvig.

1943 “Science” Magazine informed about successful fertilization of the
ovule in a test tube.

1978 Birth in England Louise Brown, the first child « from a test tube
».

1981 Professor Shultz received three cloned embryos of the person, but
stopped their development.

1985 On January 4 in one of clinics of northern London the girl was born
Her mother was Mrs. Cotton (the first-ever substitute mother who was not
the biological mother).

1987 Experts of G. Washington’s University, using special enzyme,
divided cells of a human germ and cloned them to a stage of 32 cells.
Then germs were destroyed. American administration forbade such
experiments.

1997 On February 27, «Nature» placed on its cover on a background of a
micro photo of ovule well-known Dolly, born in institute Roslyn in
Edinburgh.

1997 In the USA Michael Smith issued the book «Clones» in which he told
about cloning of people in underground tunnels around of Los Angeles.

1997 Right at the end of December magazine “Science” informed about a
birth of six sheep. They were received on Roslyn’s method. Three of them
bore a human gene, which is necessary for people who suffer hemophilia.

1998 Chicago physicist Sinai declares creation of laboratory on cloning
of people: he asserted that there would not be release from clients at
it.

1998 In Moscow the American film «Newcomers. Revival» was shown.
Storyline: In 22-century military researchers clone the terrestrial
woman to withdraw a small unearthly essence, which was developing in her
stomach).

1998 The French scientists declared about the birth of the cloned cow.

II. Conclusion “The future development of cloning and genetic
modification as I see it”.

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 which remains as a result of the
analysis is that the technology of cloning is not perfect yet. It is the
justification for future researches and experiments, but not for any
interdiction.

Cloning of a human person is close to reality due to historical
scientific breakthrough of the doctor Yang Wilmot and his colleagues
from Great Britain. This opportunity potentially gives all of us
fabulous advantages. Unfortunately, reports in mass-media and negative
emotional reaction (which was generated by erroneous science fiction)
influenced the discussion of this problem. The negative attitude towards
cloning of people is only consequence of fascinating and new idea. If
the public entered into error will impose a full interdiction on cloning
of a person, a sad episode in the human history would appear.

Actually, the clone is not simply identical twin of some other person
and they differ in periods. However, science-fiction novels and films
have created an impression as if human clones are thoughtless zombies,
monsters like Frankenstein, etc. However, it is complete nonsense. Human
clones will be usual human beings, perfect as you and me. They will be
born by usual women after 9 months of pregnancy; they will be born and
will be grown up in a family, as well as any other child. They will need
18 years to become adults, as other people do. Hence, the clone-twin
will be some decades younger than the original; therefore, there is no
danger, that people will confuse the clone-twin to the original. Just as
identical twins, a clone and his donor of DNA will have various
fingerprints. The clone will not inherit anything from memoirs of the
original individual. Due to all these distinctions, the clone is not an
x-copy or the double of his donor, but a younger identical twin. Human
clones will have the same legal rights and duties, as any other person
does. Clones will be human beings in the fullest sense. You will not
have the right to use a clone as a slave. The slavery was forbidden in
the USA in 1865 and then by the United Nations Convention of the Human
Rights.

It is necessary to emphasize, that the cloning of human beings should be
carried out on an individual voluntary basis only. The alive person
should give his or her legal permission. As well as the woman who will
bear a clone-twin and then grow this child, should take her own
decisions. A woman is required for cloning to bear a child. Therefore,
there is no danger that scientists-villains will create thousands of
clones in confidential laboratories. Cloning will be carried out only
after requests and with necessary participation of usual people.

What can we expect from human clones? The answer can be found from
exploration of identical twins. The clone repeats completely the
appearance of the original individual and has the same growth and a
constitution. For well-known supermodels and movie stars it can be the
most important feature.

One more opportunity, cloning gives a human being a possibility to
correct some 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 makes it possible to clone
Adolph Hitler, can be used to clone Anna Frank. Cloning of a human being
would be the first offer of the World Jewish Community as the
constructive answer to the Holocaust. The serious concern in genofund
pauperization still exists in Russia. It is caused by Stalin’s mass
executions of the best and brightest members of the Soviet society.
Cloning could give a chance of a new life to people from the past, whose
lives were unfairly and finished early.

It is obvious, that cloning of a human being has enormous potential
advantages and some possible negative consequences. The unique threat is
our own narrow intellectual self-satisfaction. As well as it has
happened with many scientific achievements of the past, such as planes
and computers. Clones of a human can make a contribution in the field of
scientific progress and cultural development. In the certain cases
possible abuses of cloning can be prevented with the help of the special
legislation. With a drop of common sense and reasonable regulation,
cloning of people is not something, which is necessary to be afraid of.
We should expect it with impatience. In addition, we should support
scientific researches, which will speed up realization of cloning.
Exclusive people are the greatest treasures of the world. Cloning will
allow us to keep and restore these treasures.

As you have already understood, there are two opinions concerning
cloning: «to be afraid of the further cloning» and «to thumb the tub of
the project». I support the second opinion. Let’s remember those far
years when people’s religious beliefs forbade visiting doctors. But now
the humankind cannot live without medicines and medicine. However, there
are people who reject medical aid. Dozens of years will pass and cloning
will be as natural satellite for humankind as now medicine is for us.

Let’s remember genetic modification. It is well known that there is the
big progress in this area at the present time.

It is known that tomatoes, carrots and peppers are rich in carotenoids,
which help prevent cancer ant coronary heart disease. To make things
easier for us, scientists are working to produce vegetables that are
genetically modified to contain increased carotenoid levels. They have
already succeeded in creating tomatoes with more than three times the
normal “anti-cancer” power.

Animals can also be “engineered”. When salmon were modified with the
gene for cold resistance from the flounder fish, they grew 10 times as
fast as normal salmon because the inserted gene had interfered with
their grown harmone gene. A pig was modified with a human gene to make
it grow faster and leaner. But these efforts have resulted in numerous
problems and serious diseases among the experimental animals.

In a 1994 field test, natural potatoes were planted at a distance of up
to 1,100 metres from a batch of genetically modified potatoes. When
seeds from the unmodified potatoes were later collected, it was found
that 72% of the natural plants grown near the modified batch had
absorbed the modified gene, and 35% of those grown further away had also
done so. In another study in the same year, scientists at the Scottish
Crop Research Institute found that pollen from genetically modified
rapeseed had fertilized plants up to 2.5 kilometers away.

Учитывая то, что генная инженерия может привнести в продукты ранее не
известные опасные свойства, каждый генетически модифицированный продукт
должен быть подвергнут обследованию, способному выявить самый широкий
спектр возможных опасностей.

Taking into account that genetic engineering can introduce unknown
dangerous properties in products; each genetically modified product
should be subjected to the inspection (which should be capable to reveal
the widest spectrum of possible dangers).

h

_

`

h

k

t

?

!

v } © A I a i ss

c

e

e

h

e

h

h

h

h/

h

— -«-\-c2?2 3

h

N N N N&N(NaNhN?N1/2NyNeO»¦»¦»¦»¦»?v^vFv. h°

. h°

. h°

. h°

h›

h›

??$??$?????,[email protected]/4Y1/2YEYEYIYIY?YeYoY

h›

h›

^\^?^^i^i^ _-_c_h_?_F__ `

h(d

kqkyk…k“k›k?kYk3/4kAkIkl

h(d

t

xDxbx»xAExIxOxOxaxaxoxuex

ha

ha

i‚?‚ ?

ha

h/

h

hN

h

????

hN

h

h/

/‘o‘ue‘ ’

h

h

ha

h

—’—±—µ—?—e—o—

?

ha

ha

?

ha

h

ha

h

ha

ha

ha

?

ha

hUe

& !

ha

THcacececucthcDFEFFFbF?FYFueF¤

#vY•YAYaYaY

¦

¦+¦H¦J¦Z¦i¦j¦p¦y¦“¦›¦¦?¦A¦a¦eOeAOeA¬—|—AOe—gOegOegOeRg=gOe( h°

ha

( h°

( h°

j h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

[email protected]???…p[pFp1( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

( h°

ha

ready for these great events, to create the laws to control the projects
connected with cloning and genetic modification.

The list of used literature:

1. Н. Грин, У. Стаут, Д. Тейлор, «Биология». «Мир», 1993.

2. Ф. Киберштерн. Гены и генетика. Москва, «Параграф», 1995.

3. «Знание-сила», №4, 1998 г.

4. «Природа», №1000, декабрь 1998 г.

5. С. Г. Мамонтов, «Биология». «Дрофа», 2001.

6. «Иностранные языки в школе», №7, 2004.

7. «Химия», 9 класс, Л. С. Гузей. «Дрофа», 1997.

????????? ? ????????? ? ????????? ? ?????? ? ?Љ?Љ??????????? ? ?????? ?
?????? ? ????????? ? ?????? ? ?????? ? ????????? ? ????????? ?
?Љ?Љ?????????$?$?Љ?Љ?логии», 9 класс, И. Н. Пономарева. «Вентана-Граф»,
2001.

9. www. rambler. ru

BSE – bovine spongiform encephalopathy, a usually fatal disease of
cattle, believed to be caused by either prions or virinos.

To thumb the tub – to promote and push the project as quickly as
possible.

PAGE

PAGE — 18 —

Похожие записи