Mayorquin1

Gabriel Mayorquin
Writing 39C
Olga Moskvina
December 8, 2014
Cloning in the United States: Animal Abuse and Potential Risk
The connection between humans and animals is greater than many of us think. Liverpool
John Moores University research states that animals share many of the emotions as humans.
Scientists have disregarded this fact and have begun performing animal cloning experiments
since the 1850s. After many fail attempts and countless number of tortured animals, the first
successful clone was birthed, Dolly. Even though Dolly was the first successful mammal clone to
be developed she still suffered the abnormalities that come with being a clone. Dolly Died in
2003 after suffering from lung disease and severe arthritis. Although there have been other
successful clones the number of successes does not outweigh the number of failures. Animal
cloning should not be allowed, the animals that are cloned are developed but the clones appear to
create serious abnormalities in majority of the embryos. The abnormalities are rare syndromes,
undeveloped limbs, painful mutations and agonizing deaths. Even though researchers managed
to develop a successful clone after years of trial and error there was still great amount of
uncertainty of this new technology. After many attempts, In various laboratories, only 0% to 4%
of adult or fetal somatic cell constructs have developed to become live fetuses; in addition, there
is a high rate of fetal, perinatal and neonatal loss.(Hare) In order to prevent the continuousinhumane actions, the United States of America needs to execute a policy banning all types of
cloning. This policy will prevent everyone from practicing cloning. Through this policy, the
United States will put a permanent end to the animal cruelty that is still being allowed in cloning

Mayorquin2
research and cloning farms. This policy will also put an end to the future problem that will result
from cloning research that the world is not ready for.
Although there have been plenty of years of research, there is still a very high
failure rate. More than 95 percent of the animals that are cloned are fails. According to the
FDAs assessment of animal cloning risks, abnormal fetal development is common in clones,
which translates into abnormal pregnancies with a host of complications that threatens the lives
of the unborn clones and their surrogate mothers.(Food and Drug Administration) The surrogate
mothers experience a horrible pregnancy
and often have a pregnancy lost in the
second or third trimester. These rates are
extremely unpleasant and cause damage
in the mother as well. (The image to the
left is a baby geep made by combining
a goat and a sheep embryo. It is clearly
visible that the geep isnt at a normal
state and not healthy.) The mothers encounter so much pain and after all the suffering they end
up losing their baby. The animals are suffering for no reason since the clone is not even a
success. Out of those many failed births there are very few successes. However some may argue
that those that are successful births, actually grow up and end up, as a successful clone is not a
promising number. The cloned newborns that do survive often suffer from respiratory diseases,
very weak immune systems, developmental problems, deformities, serious problems with their
internal organs and other life threatening diseases. It is not fair for these animals to encounter
such pain and torture for a very few success rate.

Mayorquin3
After the cloning of Dolly in 1997, scientist began to seek more information and the
possibility of human cloning was present. Human cloning is an immoral process that involves no
human dignity. Safety concerns is a huge factor when dealing with human cloning. Out of the
276 failed attempts, there was one successful clone that was Dolly. (In the graph produced by the
FDA it shows the percentages of
animals that suffer from long term
pregnancy loss, Hydrops, large
offspring syndrome, and neonatal
mortality). As shown in the graph a
lot of these embryos dont make it
out of the womb and even after they
make it out of the womb there is a
30 percent chance that that clone
will die from a neonatal mortality.
It

is hard to identify what actually causes

theses deaths but the fact that they result
from cloning is evident. This graph shows

the

death rates and the success rates that result

from cloning in different types of animals)
what this graph also shows is that the
species of the animal does no matter the
success rates are still very low. The type

of

risk that scientists are taking on animals

Mayorquin4
certainly cannot be taken on human lives. Animal cloning is also a form of animal eugenics since
the alteration of the genes leads to improvement of the characteristics they have. Not only will
human cloning have no benefits or contributions to bettering society but also it is crossing ethical
boundaries. The grant of animal cloning leads to the approval of human cloning and it must not
be allowed.
Currently there is no policy that prohibits cloning. This is due to the support that the U.S
government has given to the companies that rely on animal cloning. The first step that the U.S.
government took to regulate cloning was in the food supply. The food supply was the major
place where animal cloning was being practiced. In 2001 when it became a reality that animal
clones were going to be introduced into the food supply the government assembled the risk
assessment which forced the FDA to evaluate the safety of the consumption on cloned meat and
dairy. After the evaluation, The FDA concluded that meat and milk from cow pig and goat
clones and the offspring of any animal clones are as safe as food we eat every day.(U.S. FDA).
Other than The Risk Assessment the United States has done very little in regards to cloning
regulation. This is because the United States has found that by using cloned animals in the
market they will better the quality of their food and overall help the food market and its
economy. The United States main focus was on the benefit and growth of the economy and
thought very little of the damage it was causing to the animals. Therefore the U.S did no effort to
address the problem of animal cruelty that results from cloning.
Although there is no current law in the United States that protects from cloning the
European Union has suggested two proposals. The European Union novel Foods regulation is the
only EU legislation that has intended to regulate animal cloning in the food supply. The first
proposal on animal cloning would ban animal cloning for all farming purposes. The EU proposes

Mayorquin5
this ban placed for five years while the FDA conducts another risk assessment. The second
proposal is the regulation of the EU internal market, banning the marketing of food from cloned
animals. This proposal has many advantages that correlate with the problem of animal cruelty
from cloning. The first proposal bans animal cloning in farms, it would eliminate the deaths and
the suffering of animals that are involve in the process such as the animals that have to carry the
embryo and die from miscarriages or failed C-sections. It would also save animals from being
born with rare mutations and syndromes. The second proposals main advantage is that by
eliminating cloned meat from the market it will significantly decrease it popularity. By
decreasing the popularity of the cloned animal meat it will also result in the decrease animal
farms that rely on cloning. Both of these proposals are able to attack a major part of the problem
that comes with animal cloning and should be taken into consideration.
The proposals that the E.U stated in December 18, 2003 still fall short from the real
problems. Cloning has too many flaws and not enough benefits. The United States need to
establish a law that Bans all cloning in commercial and private fields. The United States did not
have an issue in the value of nutrition in the diary and meat products prior to animal cloning.
Animal cloning is only allowed because it will better the nutrition of these products but it comes
at a heavy price. This policy will eliminate private cloning that goes on whenever a pet owner
wants to clone their diseased pet. There is too much sacrifice of innocent animals that goes in to
the development of one successful clone for a private investor. These investors do not care if one
hundred animals are sacrificed in the process of resurrection their old pet they are just concerned
for that one successful clone. By banning cloning the American community will also no longer
worry of the health risk that comes from cloned meat. According to The Risk assessment the
meat that comes from cloned animals does not affect the consumer, but it is proven that, If the

Mayorquin6
animal is stressed before and during slaughter, the glycogen is used up, and the lactic acid level
that develops in the meat after slaughter is reduced. This will have serious adverse effects on
meat quality. ( FAO) This means that if the animals that are born with the syndromes or
abnormalities such as arthritis which causes the animal to become stress increasing the chances
of the consumer eating meat that can cause harm to their health. Another positive aspect that will
result from banning cloning is the fact that issue of human cloning will never surface in the
future.
Despite the fact that there has been many failed attempts at animal cloning some still
support it. Even though the arguments related to animal cloning are mainly dealing with farms
and livestock, people clone for their own favor. Some people favor animal cloning because they
have the opportunity to clone their pets before their truly loved dog dies. However even
companies who support rich pet lovers argue that conducting this practice doesnt always please
the customer. The pet owners expect to have their pet back but this is impossible. The pet may
look exactly the same but will be born with a different personality, characteristics and will not
have the same bond with their owner. A similar argument to this one mentions supporting the
clone to help the blind. Some dog trainers argue that they would rather clone the dogs that are
trained to help the blind because of the long and strong relationship they have with one another.
The human argues that they have to cope with the loss of their guide dog and have to go through
the process of retraining another dog. This is not a valid argument because facilities that train
dogs begin training as their puppies so it would be pointless to clone dog since they would have
to undergo the same process. As I mentioned before the human will have to establish a new
relationship with their guide dog anyways. With the costs of cloning it is ridiculous to believe
that people would rather clone their old guide dog than receive a new one for free. Also, many

Mayorquin7
dogs that have the capabilities of being guide dogs will lose their opportunity of helping
humanity of guide dogs get cloned repeatedly. Animal cloning is also not healthy or beneficial to
the human when trying to bring back their beloved pet. Humans have to be able to cope with
death and have to face the fact that death is natural and happens daily. It is known that people try
to avoid death as much as possible but reality is that death is natural and normal. If they get the
opportunity to bring their pet back by cloning them they are not allowing themselves to deal
with death. Dealing with death is extremely important because it is part of life.
As a result of natural disasters and effects that humans have on the environment hundreds
of species die each year. Instead of approaching the problem and really digging deep and
formulating a solution to this catastrophe CSG suggests that cloning is the answer. The Genetic
Savings and Clone Company believe that not only could cloning prevent the endangered species
from becoming extinct but also create genetic diversity. This argument is invalid because it is
proven that cloning is only creating the identical genetics and is resulting in animals becoming
more similar and alike to one another. Technology has significantly improved over the centuries
but it is not yet capable of altering with nature. Nature has its way of taking its own course and
this should not be something that humans should try to alter. A person that supports cloning
would argue that cloning is a young research and will eventually get perfected. They can also
argue that once cloning get perfected animals that are involved in the research will no longer
suffer. This statement may be true but how many animals would have to be sacrificed in order to
develop this new technology of perfect cloning. Two decades after cloning has been discovered it
still maintains a very low success rate. For the first clone it took scientist 277 tries to develop
dolly. That is 276 animals that had to die in order for one clone to exist. If cloning was to be
perfected human cloning would be experimented with. Human cloning is something that is still a

Mayorquin8
very delicate topic and would be very hard to handle it would change the world we live I
completely. it would bring to many rare scenarios that the world has never dealt with such as
Having the capability to make a copy of a dead person, being able to conceive a child with only
one parent, having a clone of yourself without consent and black market cloning. The problems
that will rise from human cloning are never ending.
Animals have always been used for the benefit of humans since as far back as the
existence of humans. Animals have been killed for many different resources and the qualities
they present to human life but even back then humans would value animals and show a sign of
appreciation and respect towards them. When Indians hunted the bison they made sure they used
every part of the animal. This was there way of making sure that the death of the animal was
worth it and not just thrown away. Now animals are more and more being viewed as objects that
can be discarded and thrown away with no care. Cloning has only made this conflict worst and
increase the mistreatment of animals. Animals are not being treated very poorly and humans do
not take into consideration the gravity of this problem. The cloning success rates began very low
and up to today still continues to be below 10 percent. Animals continue to be sacrificed day to
day without given the proper chance of life. There needs to be a proposition that permanently
bans all cloning. By banning all sorts of cloning, it will save thousands of animals that are
victims to this cruel technology. Not only will banning cloning save the animals from harm but
will ensure quality of the meat that is being sold on the market. Humans will probably grow to
appreciate animals more like they once use to and how they deserve to be treated if this policy is
enacted. By banning cloning it will also result in the elimination of any recent discoveries that
does not lead to growth in our society but only failure. Although cloning and it is technology is
part of the 21st century, not all new discoveries are beneficial and should not be allowed.

Mayorquin9
Annotated Bibliography

Cells, Cloning Stem. "Food Consumption Risks Associated with Animal Clones: What Should
Be Investigated?" Australian Veterinary Journal 82.11 (2004): 706. Web.
The authors of this article are part of the Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug
Administration, discussing the risk assessment that has been developed to identify
hazards and pointing out the risks that result from cloning. The authors construct a thesis
based on these ideas to inform the public. In order to prove the credibility they refer to
the Food and Drug Administration. The authors audience is very broad, it is relevant to
all of those who consume meat and want to know whether or not it is really safe. There
central purpose is to inform and explain the hazards and potential risks that clone
produce.

"Center for Food Safety | Issues | Animal Cloning | Animal Welfare." Center for Food Safety.
N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.
The authors of this article are part of the Center for Food Safety, a non-profit public
interest and environmental advocacy organization. The authors construct main ideas that
relate to protection of human health and the environment by attempting to reduce and
eliminate the use of harmful food production. The CFS uses legal actions, scientific and
policy reports and other material to prove their reliability. Their audience is mainly
focused on the people and those who care about eating safe and living in a good
environment.

Mayorquin10
Chambers, Philip G., Temple Grandin, Gunter Heinz, and Thinnarat Srisuvan. Guidelines for
Humane Handling, Transport and Slaughter of Livestock. Bangkok, Thailand: Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2001. Print.
The authors of this article are Philip G Chambers, formerly Deputy Directory of
Veterinary Public Health, Temple Grandin, Assistant Professor, and Department of
Animal Sciences at Colorado State University. These authors publication is provided by
FAO and NGO Humane Society to offer guidance to animal welfare, transporters,
farmers and slaughterhouse managements. These authors present their credibility and the
importance of this topic because of their own knowledge and they refer to companies that
are highly valued. These articles audience can be narrowed down to those who are
involved in the process of animal cloning.

Drew. "I Cloned My Dead Dog." CNN. N.p. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.
Dr. Drew an American board-certified internist, addiction medicine specialist and media
personality, produced this video. This video is noted between CNN an American basic
cable and satellite television channel, with the first all-news television channel in the
United States. This video shows a first hand experience with a personal investor that
cloned her dead pet. This videos audience is directed towards people who want to know
the process of private animal cloning and its outcomes.
"European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press Release - Food: Commission Tables
Proposals on Animal Cloning and Novel Food." European Commission - PRESS
RELEASES - Press Release - Food: Commission Tables Proposals on Animal Cloning
and Novel Food. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.

Mayorquin11
The authors of this article are in connection with the European Commission Press
Release. The author further discusses the laws that the European Commission had
adopted on animal cloning and novel food to inform the society. In order to prove the
importance the author quotes the EU Commissioner in charge of Health, Tonio Borg. The
authors audience is mainly focused on those who are involved in animal cloning since
they have to know what they can or cannot do after the laws have been passed.
"Mosaicism and Chimerism." Mosaicism and Chimerism. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.
The authors of this article are from the Colorado State University. The article discusses
the reasons for some of the cloning that goes wrong. It explains cloning on more of a
biological level and into a lot of detail. The authority of this article is present with the
references that are being used and the images. The audience for this article are those who
want to know what exactly goes wrong in cloning and why.
Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Reproductive Cloning. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy, 2002. Print.
The authors of this text are Irving L. Weissman, Chair Professor of Cancer Biology,
Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Arthur L. Beaudet, Department of
Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine and others. This book
explains what cloning is and the effects it has. The authors show their credibility with
providing panel and staff biographical information. The audience is mostly referred to
students in college and those who are interested in this topic and want to further expand
their knowledge on it.

"U.S. Food and Drug Administration." Risk Management Plan. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.

Mayorquin12
The authors of this article are the FDA, the Food and Drug Administration does and does
not regulate and the laws FDA enforces. This article provides the background, the
summary of the risk assessment, the risk management plan and other concerns. The
importance of this article is shown when the author references to the National Research
Council and the Center for Veterinary Medicine of the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration. The audience is for the public that is concerned about consuming cloned
meat and the dangerous of it.

"United States Mission to the European Union." United States Mission to the European Union.
N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.
The authors of this article are from the United States Mission to the European Union. The
author explains the two proposals that are being proposed on animal cloning for food
production. The argument fights for the two proposals to be passed that would ban animal
cloning for food purposes and ban the marketing of food from cloned animals. The author
uses a lot of facts and background information to show the importance. The audience can
be for two different types of people, those in favor of banning and those who oppose it.

Vajta, Gbor, and Mickey Gjerris. "Science and Technology of Farm Animal Cloning: State of
the Art." Animal Reproduction Science 92.3-4 (2006): 211-30. Web.
Gabor Vajita, one of the authors from this article is part of the Institute of Genetics and
Biotechnology. Mickey Gjerris is an associate professor of the University of
Copenhagen. The authors express their ideas and their encounters in regards to the
science and technology of farm animal cloning. The authors prove their interest and

Mayorquin13
importance in this topic since they go into such particular detail, not only the different
kinds of cloning but also the process of cloning. The audience is directed towards those
who want to know more about cloning and the severity of it.