Analysis of an epigenetic argument against human reproductive cloning.

Publisher: Elsevier Country of Publication: Netherlands NLM ID: 101122473 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 1472-6483 (Print) Linking ISSN: 14726483 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Reprod Biomed Online Subsets: MEDLINE

Publication: <2009->: Amsterdam : Elsevier
Original Publication: Cambridge, UK : Reproductive Healthcare Ltd.

Epigenesis, Genetic*; Cloning, Organism/*ethics; Animals ; Cloning, Organism/legislation & jurisprudence ; Cloning, Organism/methods ; Humans ; Risk Factors

Human reproductive cloning is a much disputed ethical issue. This technology is often condemned as being contrary to human dignity. However, there are also risk arguments. An ethical argument that is often put forward by scientists but seldom developed in more detail focuses on health risks in animal cloning. There is a high risk that animal clones exhibit abnormalities and these are increasingly believed to be due to errors in epigenetic reprogramming. The argument is that human reproductive cloning should not be carried out because human clones are also likely to exhibit abnormalities due to inappropriate epigenetic reprogramming. Different versions of this epigenetic argument are analysed, a categorical version and a non-categorical. The non-categorical version is suggested to be more well-considered. With regard to policy making on human reproductive cloning, the categorical version can be used to prescribe a permanent ban, while the non-categorical version can be used to prescribe a temporary ban. The implications of the precautionary principle--as interpreted in the European Union--are investigated. The conclusion is that it seems possible to support a temporary ban by reference to this principle.

Date Created: 20060810 Date Completed: 20061207 Latest Revision: 20190917

20221213

10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60627-x

16895647