The act of cloning serves as an historical breakthrough as it has introduced a refined outlook of technology. Within its history the act of cloning is found most common in animals of various species. One such specie is highlighted through the cloning of a sheep named Dolly. Through analyzing the strategic process of Dolly’s birth, arises aspects that are beneficial but also raises controversy of the cause of Dolly’s death and the overall safety of cloning as it expands to include humans. The discovery of reprogramming different nuclei, the significance of Ian Wilmut’s discovery of the benefit of nucleus G/o, and the importance of cultural cell cloning support the beneficial aspect, while the death of Dolly is seen as an example of the various controversies. The birth of Dolly exemplifies an emphatic leap that overshadows the previously accepted “norm” of cloning. This important improvement initiated with the combination of two parts from different types of sheep. The “Poll Dorset” serves as one prominent type as it provides the nucleus necessary to perform part of the procedure. The egg obtained from a “Scottish Blackface”, which is another specie of sheep, completes the resources needed to carry out the cloning process. To continue the cloning procedure the donor cell or karyoplast, combines with the cytoplast or egg. This combination from each sheep is “fused together with an electric current” (Panno 31). Following this fusion the embryo is placed within the body of the Scottish Blackface where it resides until birth. This particular process of cloning Dolly is significant as it provides an answer to a question of whether or not the “reprogramm(ing) of a differentiated nucleus” (Panno p.29) was indeed possible. As the answer was proved to be true through Dolly’s birth, another beneficial aspect arose within the nucleus G/o. The important and beneficial nucleus entitled G/o (Panno 32) highlighted a major difference, which set apart this particular act of cloning from others prior to it. The component G/o collaborates the aspect viewed previously, the reprogramming of various nuclei. As it is “susceptible to reprogramming” (Panno 32) or easily influenced by the act, it shares a connection that supports the cloning process of creating Dolly. In essence it serves as a key component, which boosts the action within the cell cycle allowing the embryo to properly develop, rather than die out as witnessed in previous cloning experiments. In addition to the cell cycle component G/o, the aspect of cultured cell cloning further provides a greater outlook to Dolly’s birth. Due to the fact that Dolly’s cloning occurred from “adult cells grown in culture” (Panno 36), this aspect led to the production of “transgenic animals” (Panno 36). These specific animals are ones that obtained a foreign gene within their original genome. This act occurs through “transfection” (Panno 36), the act of incorporating DNA into a cell. The act of cloning from a cultured cell supports the aspect of technological advances in cloning, as it improved the production of transgenic animals allowing the process to be “simpler, effective and more efficient” (Panno 36). The birth of Dolly introduced an improved outlook of cloning. However it also presented numerous controversies that lingered within the realm of ethics, religion, and the universal moral opinion of whether cloning is right or wrong, each of which essentially highlights the negative and positive aspects of cloning, which gives birth to various controversies. The universal concept of cloning is a controversy that continuously plagues the ethical perspective of the idea that cloning, specifically the cloning of Dolly is not only unsafe but disturbs the natural cycle of life. The central issue that initiates this particular controversy lies in the idea that cloning rejects the natural aspect of reproduction. Through the acts of cloning it seems that this act is altered through the works of science and scientists rather than through the natural act of two species. Cloning, within this society is no longer a mystery or a bizarre asset witnessed in Hollywood productions or a component within one’s imagination. Rather it has evolved into an aspect of reality that is practiced not to prove a point or solve a mystery. Instead it has taken the responsibility to attempt to bring comfort or remembrance of what previously lived. An example of this is witnessed through a group entitled the Raelians, who attempted to “clone DNA from the deceased child of an American couple” (Bruno 18). This highlights the idea that cloning can be practiced in an effort to restore relationships and remembrance. It also illustrates the way in which animal cloning could lead to human cloning, as in this case, and further the idea that cloning is unethical. Reason being is that within the realm of animal cloning, the critical issue of whether or not the process has not been deemed “effective or safe on animal models” (Bruno 21) is vital. As in the cloning of Dolly, the issue of safety was a concern to not only Dolly’s health but also the health of the animals used to carry out the process. This aspect leads to another controversy that arose after the death of Dolly. The death of Dolly the sheep initiated the negative consequences that may indeed result from animal cloning. The controversy of whether or not the act of cloning itself served as a factor or a lung disease triggered differing views. Scientists from the Roslin Institute, where the cloning of Dolly took place, expressed the belief in saying that the cause of her death derived from a “progressive lung disease” (Panno 41). This disease, scientists concluded, derived from a virus, which led to an arthritis infection previously suspected before Dolly’s death. From this evidence arises a majority who agree that Dolly’s lung tumor served as the cause of her death. In contrast to this viewpoint is the idea that the cloning of Dolly, including the fashion in which it occurred, dictated the reason behind her death. Though there seems to be no tangible proof still present that supports this, believers rely on a component, which led to the birth of Dolly. This component is the adult cell, which was used in the cloning of Dolly. Ironically enough this use of an adult cell was what brought fame to Dolly as being the first cloned from such a cell. However, arose from this fact as well. The adult cell, which was utilized, derived from a “six year old poll Dorset ewe” (Panno 29). The significance of this aspect is that the life span of this particular type of sheep is “twelve years” (Panno 29). Oddly enough, Dolly passed at the age of six, which seems to be fairly young. In addition to the fact that Dolly’s breed was of a poll Dorset, this along with her age supports the idea that cloning was the cause of Dolly’s death. The cloning of Dolly also raises issues within the religious portion of society. The aspect of cloning also presents controversy between the religious aspects within society. Though there may be various criticisms that reject the act of cloning within religion, one overrides as the prominent aspect. This is the idea that the act of cloning “violates the structure of nature by encroaching upon God’s domain” (Bruno p.26). This particular perspective is essential when considering the act of cloning. Within this atmosphere, cloning is illustrated as a “cultural force” (Bruno 29). Meaning that it essentially disturbs the core center, which is witnessed within the Gospel of Mark. Within this Jesus teaches that “What God has joined together, let no man separate”. However, within the religious perspective cloning is the force that separates the natural process that God has chosen. Through the alterations of DNA within the process of cloning Dolly and the recycling of various parts this idea seems to be portrayed. Though within religion this is believed, the controversy arises through opinions that religion should not uphold a “say so” in the aspect of cloning. As it is obvious that religion uses scriptures to justify their opinions, those who oppose religious viewpoints degrade scriptures, describing them as “ancient folklores” (Bruno 57). The cloning of Dolly is used as an example to support this opinion. As it was thought that the cloning of Dolly was “ a kind of drive to be our own creators” (Elmer-Dewitt) some religious institutions such as the Christian Life Commission encouraged a “federal law to ban human cloning” (Elmer-Dewitt) in 1997. This served as the spark that intensified the controversy as opposers relied on the constitution’s ban of the separation of Church and State. Though the cloning of Dolly the sheep may not portray the central reason, it nevertheless served as an example that illustrated controversy between religion and society. Controversy also arises when concerning the morality of cloning as right or wrong. The cloning of Dolly the sheep also presents issues of whether or not the act of cloning Dolly and cloning in general is right or wrong. The idea that cloning Dolly was wrong is supported by the opinions that cloning is a “crime against clones” (Bruno 22) and “cloning harms animals” (Bruno 46). From cloning Dolly, the idea of cloning has increasingly been forwarded to include humans. This is where the idea that cloning is a crime against clones derives. Though Dolly may have been a healthy cloned sheep, the aspect of cloning continues to represent a “potential danger to the health of a clone” (Bruno 22). Note that it highlights danger possible to any type of clone not just the cloning of Dolly or any other specie. From this derives the addend of human cloning as a means to restore peace to those who may have suffered previously. As the cloning of Dolly expands to the possibility of human cloning it highlights negative aspects of cloning humans. One such aspect is that it has the capability of “undermining those qualities which are unique to the individual” (Bruno 22). In essence the qualities of a clone are not their own but belongs to essentially the original. As this serves as a possibility cloning, in this sense, could also degrade values and dignity, which could weaken the aspect of individualism. The statement continuously made by Iago; “I am not what I am”, of the well-known play “Othello” plays on this idea that one does not fully possess the concept of self. Upon realization of this, a specific clone who is conscience of his/her being could view oneself as a “manufactured product rather than a person” (Beardsley). This idea of cloning as a crime against clones, shares an identical viewpoint through the idea that cloning harms animals. Within this certain viewpoint cloning has the potential of leading to the abuse of animals through both “animal researchers”(Bruno 46) and the “animal agricultural industry” (Bruno 47). Within these derives the aspects personal attention and financial gain. The cloning of Dolly the sheep serves as evidence that cloning could be practiced as a means of achieving personal fame. This could be highlighted through the Roslin Institution, which is a “company seek(ing) to develop animals as bioreactors” (Bruno 46). This illustrates the way, in which various animals could be produced, solely to be used as experiments to develop a greater amount of clones. This “animal experimentation” (Bruno 47) as it is called is in comparison to the “animal agricultural industry” (Bruno 47), which serves as another way to gain finances. Numerous animals that are not cloned but who serve as normal products to be sold in our society may now increase through the practice of cloning. Therefore increasing revenue, ensuing a larger demand for various animals and a larger form of support for animal cloning. These aspects support the act of cloning as beneficial, which leads to the idea the cloning is right. Cloning is seen as right and therefore beneficial when concerning experiments within the “laboratory” (Kolata 49) and as a means of “conservation” (Kolata 50). The idea that the cloning of Dolly within the laboratory provides “differences due to the procedure and not to genetic differences between animals” (Kolata 49); supports the idea that cloning benefits experiments within the laboratory. The importance of cloning is also highlighted through the effort to “raise herd quality” (Kolata 51). Meaning the production of beef or in Dolly’s case wool is directly proportional to the clones produced. As the clones increase so does the availability of wool. The cloning of Dolly the sheep is a process that presents both positives and negatives within the act of cloning. Many controversies have risen ranging from Dolly’s death to the safety and stability of human cloning. Through the cloning of Dolly the sheep a breakthrough in science has been accomplished. However a new perspective of morality is witnessed. From these two aspects derives the importance of Dolly the sheep as beneficial to some and dangerous to others.


Bibliographic Sources

Panno, Joseph. Animal Cloning: The Science of Nuclear Transfer. New York, NY. Panno, 2005.

Bruno, Leone. Cloning. New Haven, Conn. Bruno, 2003.

Kolata, Gina. Clone: The Road To Dolly And The Path Ahead. New York, NY. Kolata, 1998.

Griffin, Harry Dr. “Potential Benefits of Cloning and Nuclear Transfer.” December 12, 1997. http://www.roslin.ac.uk/public/12-12-97-bn.html

Couzin, Jennifer. “Inheriting Senescence”: Clones might age unnaturally early.” June 7, 1999 http://www.usnews.com/usnews/health/articles/990607/archive_001182.htm

Beardsley, Tim. “A Clone in Sheep’s Clothing: A sheep cloned from adult cells opens vast scientific possibilities and ethical dilemmas.” March 3, 1997. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0009B07D-BD40-1C59-B882809EC588ED9F

Elmer-Dewitt, Phillip, “Dolly, Cloned Sheep.” Time Magazine. Vol. 149, No.10, March 10.