low. Second, even though clones are genetically identical, physical characteristics such as weight and size, as well as behavior characteristics, may not be the same because the DNA has been modified during the cloning process. These issues undeniably affect the expression and activity of some genes in hard to predict ways. Third, the technology necessary for animal cloning is still very costly. Finally, consumer advocates and other activists question the safety of cloned animals for human consumption and the ethics related to cloning technology. Health problems in cloned animals, such as weaknesses, abnormalities, and inbreeding, have arisen, which many feel have not yet been adequately addressed by scientists. Others argue that cloning would create a monoculture of animal breeding vulnerable to diseases due to a lack of genetic variation. Cloned animals should be grown and observed for yet a longer period of time in order to assess possible problems that develop in time. The cloning of some animals risks possible contagion of pathogens. For example, some technologies use viruses as a culture that could be expressed in hosts, human or nonhuman. And yet others question the moral viability of some of the cloning processes and issues, such as those pertaining to the manmade generation and destruction of animal and human life, even if in early embryo form.
Policy Issues and Farm Animal Cloning
As it became clear that animal cloning would eventually become a potentially widespread element of commercial industry meant to help improve livestock quality, the federal government through the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requested that researchers and livestock producers keep food produced from animal clones and their offspring out of the food supply. The FDA has conducted a detailed assessment that includes examining not only the safety of food from these animals, but also risks to their health.
After years of intense study and analysis, the Food and Drug Administration concluded, in 2008, that meat and milk produced from clones of cattle, swine, and goats are as safe to eat as if it came from conventionally bred animals, and the offspring of these, traditionally consumed as food, is included in this assessment. The agency did not have enough information available to reach a conclusion on the safety of clones of other animal species, such as sheep.
The FDA found that the naturally reproduced offspring of clones are not the same product as clones and thus, do not seem to show the same adverse outcomes that are observed in their progenitors or parents, such as obesity and other health problems. The FDA agrees with other government entities, such as the European Food Safety Authority, that no evidence exists of differences in safety between food products derived from conventionally bred animals and cloned animals and their offspring. They observed, however, that the food consumption risk assessment was conducted primarily on clones rather than on their offspring, because some milk from dairy clones may be introduced into the food supply, and once their breeding usefulness is over, clones are very likely to enter the food supply as meat. To this day, however, the main use of animal clones is as breeding stock, rather than food. Their conventionally reproduced offspring become the food-producing animals.
As pertains to related technology and ethical issues, the FDA declared that it does not regulate animal breeding nor assisted reproduction technologies, and thus, has no official position on those issues. The agency basically considers cloning as another breeding technology, which can be used to introduce traits that benefit animal health, such as resistance to certain diseases, or human preferences, such as softer meat. These conclusions agree with those of the National Academy of Sciences, published in 2002. Since its own publication in 2008, the FDA has updated its findings. Also, it is not the responsibility of the FDA to address non-science-based concerns such as the religious, moral, and ethical topics related with animal cloning for agricultural purposes, the economic impact of its products in the market, or other social issues unrelated to its public health impact.
Animal Cloning and Related Ethical Issues
Many ethical issues exist in reference to both actual and potential usage of cloning technology with animals today, covering controversial issues such as the well-being of the animals and their progeny, the usage of cloning in preserving or reviving endangered and extinct species, and, as a commercial offshoot of these practices, actions such as the cloning of deceased favorite pet animals. Many are concerned about cloning pets, for example, because pet owners may expect their cloned pet to be a perfect copy of the progenitor or parent pet, which is not the case. In addition, cloned animals are known to suffer distinct health issues. Many of these issues overlap with the possibility of animal cloning crossing the frontier into cloning of humans.
Many argue that the benefits are greater than the unfavorable issues associated with the cloning procedure. Others oppose it because of the novelty, uncertainties, and the ethical risks involved. Those who oppose or remain wary of cloning warn of the possibility of unwitting transmission of trans-species pathologies. Still others are concerned that a scientist may attempt to proceed beyond animal cloning for currently accepted purposes and create a human being. The development of animal cloning then, has sparked a scientific controversy among those who hope to find a cure for diseases, better food quality, and a greater supply of food on one hand, and ethical and religious opposition—or those who prefer to err on the side of caution—on the other.
To date, however, no human being has yet been cloned successfully. Still, the possibility of this event is a cause for trepidation not only for policymakers and the public at large, but also for the majority of ethical scientists. Nevertheless, most scientists are firmly opposed to reproductive human cloning. Animal cloning advocates argue that with responsible policies, risk assessments, government and institutional oversight, and conscientious monitoring in place, cloning technologies can be performed ethically and appropriately in sustainable ways.
In order to be medically and commercially applicable, advances in biotechnology require not only an understanding of scientific knowledge, but also of policy-related and ethical implications. In this regard, legislative and funding imperatives—as well as conflicts of interest—need to be addressed. Considerations for the future should include a formal distinction between therapeutic and reproductive cloning and their risks in policy-making and legislative formulations. Cloning has opened many doors that lead to remarkable medical advancements but, as with all new technologies, it raises many ethical and social dilemmas.
Trudy M. Mercadal
Florida Atlantic University
See Also: Cloning, Ethics of; Embryonic Stem Cells, Methods to Produce; Gene Patents; Genome Sequencing.
Further Readings
Cibelli, Jose, Ian Wilmut, et al. (eds.). Principles of Cloning. Waltham, MA: Academic Press, 2013.
Levine, Aaron D. Cloning: A Beginner’s Guide. London: Oneworld Publications, 2007.
Woestendiek, John. Dog, Inc. How a Collection of Visionaries, Rebels, Eccentrics and Their Pets Launched the Commercial Dog Cloning Industry. New York: Avery Trade, 2012.
Anversa, Piero
Anversa, Piero
53
54
Anversa, Piero
Physician and scientist Dr. Piero Anversa was born in Parma, Italy, where he earned his doctorate in medicine. His interest in cardiovascular research began in his final years in medical school, and his commitment to science has remained intact in the last 50 years. Shortly after graduation, he obtained a NATO fellowship and moved to the United States in 1971. Although he lived most of his life in the United States
