By Ingrid Burger
Arizona Daily Wildcat
September 19, 1997

Stop acting like sheep

Arizona Daily Wildcat

I'm starting off this semester with seven black pens in my backpack. All are the same Bic brand that I love

and trust. All are exactly alike. Identical. I don't really need all these pens. But, it makes me feel better to know that if I lose one, or break one, or loan one to a friend who never returns it or leave one out to melt in the Tucson sun, I will always have a spare. As a society, we tend to buy multiples of the same thing as a type of insurance against loss or damage, or simply because we really like a product and want lots of it. My black, Bic pen fetish makes me think of cloning. That's right, I said cloning. Genetic cloning.

In February of this year, the Scottish scientist Ian Wilmut revealed that his research team had successfully cloned a sheep; they took the DNA from one sheep and used it to make another sheep. Since the "new" sheep has the same DNA as the other sheep, it is called a genetic "clone." This breakthrough in genetic technology excites some and frightens others. I remember walking into my art class the day after the big announcement and finding my TA in hysterics. "In a few years, they're going to clone Sadaam Hussein!" she proclaimed. "The world will be overrun by tyrants, terrorists and hoodlums!" Oh, my. There's got to be more to the story, I thought. And there is.

While working in Washington D.C. this summer, I attended a national "Forum on Cloning" sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). This powwow attracted scientists, philosophers, ethicists, lawyers, theologians and congressmen from across the country. They were there to ponder the science of cloning and its social, legal and ethical implications. I learned a lot that day.

First, the basics. Why was Ian Wilmut's cloning technique such a big deal? Scientists have been cloning things for years - plants, pieces of DNA, etc. Even identical twins are genetic clones produced by nature. Wilmut successfully used a new type of cloning technology called "somatic-cell nuclear transfer." Besides being fun to say, this technique reveals the possibility of something scientists never thought possible - taking DNA, which behaves as if it were in an old, specific cell and "retraining" it to behave as if it were in a young, developing embryo. Genes in the DNA which were turned off in the old somatic cell (a cell which isn't an egg or sperm) are magically turned on again when the DNA is transferred to the inside of a young egg, which has had its own DNA previously removed. Zap it with an electric pulse, implant it in the womb of a female sheep and voilà.

To everyone's surprise, the borrowed DNA was retrained, and the embryo grew up in a few months to the lamb named "Dolly." Dolly was the only one of about 200 experimental embryos to survive through birth. She's named "Dolly" because her DNA comes from a cell in the mammary tissue of another sheep. Cute, huh? Enough of the biology lesson.

We have this shaky new technology to clone animals. What now? Are we going to start cloning people, too? Not in the United States. Shortly after the success of Dolly was announced, President Clinton issued a ban on federal funding for research involving the cloning of human embryos. He and his advisers determined it to be too dangerous and ethically questionable to pursue at this time. Most scientists around the nation agree with him. Several European leaders took similar action. The human cloning ban is scheduled to last for five years. Supposedly five years from now, we will have thought about the moral, ethical and legal issues of cloning enough to make more informed policy decisions. So currently, we have neither the technology nor the authority to clone people.

If you're interested in cloning enough to have read this far, here are some answers to commonly asked questions. In the future, could we develop the technology to clone humans? No one is sure right now, but if research on human cloning is allowed in the future, it seems possible. What would be the reasons for wanting to do so? Supporters of human cloning say that it could provide great insights for curing diseases, and allow couples with reproductive troubles to have children who are biologically related to them, among other things.

Opponents say it is too dangerous, degrading and ethically and morally objectionable; scientists shouldn't be playing God and destroying the mysteries of human life. If I were cloned, would the "new me" be exactly like the "me me?" No. The exact duplication of a person is not possible. A belief in genetic determinism - that the genes in a person's DNA completely predict all aspects of his being, from hair color to favorite mix-in at Cold Stone - is a misconception that is too common among the public. This simply isn't true. It's the whole nature and nurture theory. All scientists, including geneticists, agree that people are more than the products of their DNA.

So just remember that the creation of people is not like the cookie-cutter production of my Bic pens. Environmental factors and life experiences contribute, along with our genes to make us the unique and beautiful people that we are. There are millions of identical black Bics out there. You and I can never be truly duplicated, no matter how advanced the science becomes. For the moment, advisory groups composed of people from a wide range of disciplines are hard at work thinking about questions which human cloning raises.

There may never be an agreement to the answers for these questions. Everyone should think about them, discuss them and voice their opinions to scientists and policy makers. And with the affirmation that there will never ever be anyone quite like you in the world, rest easy.

If you can't, try counting sheep.

Ingrid Burger is a senior majoring in molecular and cellular biology.