top of page
  • Ena Lu & Tiffany Lu


Every human is unique–isn't that how it’s supposed to be? How would you feel if it was possible to create another you? In a picture of 10,000 individuals who all look identical, would you be able to pinpoint yourself? Would you be able to confidently distinguish yourself among a group of people, all of whom have the same hair color and all of whom are the same height? We know for sure that we wouldn’t be able to–how could we ever, especially when every single individual has identical features? It's a big idea, isn't it? Cloning raises questions about what's right or wrong. Is it okay to clone a person? Is it fair to create someone who's just like you? Researchers have been posed with the imminent concept of cloning since the initial successful clone, Dolly the Sheep. 

Since then, so many new developments have been introduced into the cloning environment–let’s break it down together. 

To start, we wanted to bring to your attention one very distinct case–the human clone. As a disclaimer, there hasn’t been substantial evidence to prove the existence of this clone, but there has been witness support from individuals supposedly involved in the cloning process. The first “case” of the human clone dates back to the early 2000s when there was reportedly a human clone, Eve, that was born. The clone was rumored to have been a 31-year-old American woman, born outside of the United States (Dakss, 2002). The goal of the scientists was to produce an identical twin to the original mother. Eve was reported to have been born from a C-section, to which her parents claimed that Eve was born healthy. However, to this day, there has been no photographic or written evidence that Eve exists at all.

So, why did we bring it up? It’s important to note the ethics behind the process of human cloning–while the prospect itself truly does sound intriguing, to what extent do we, as humans, have the right to attempt to make other humans? Well, the answer to this question is truly controversial, but the government seems to have its take on it– Bill 3231 states that “it shall be unlawful for any person or entity, public or private, to intentionally or knowingly perform or attempt to perform human cloning” (Hoylman, 2023).

Despite this rule being established for human cloning, the government doesn’t hold the same standards for animal cloning. This brings us to our second and final topic of today: the cloning of animals in our markets. Think about your typical beef and chicken–you’d expect it to have been raised and birthed in the “natural” way, right? Well, what if it wasn’t? What if the food on your plate was a result of an identical cloning of an animal– would you still eat it and feel the same as you would your typical meat? This dilemma seems as if it will continue to increase, seeing as how in January of 2008, the FDA approved a law that allows cloned animals to eventually be sold in supermarkets, permitting consumers to consume such forms of meat (Tanne, 2008). This brings us back to a similar ethical question as before: to what extent can we manipulate animals to ensure increased consumption of such foods at the expense of humans? Why do we get to dictate the lives of animals when we aren’t allowed to perform such actions on ourselves?

We’re curious as to what the public thinks about this; as such, we crafted a poll asking people about their knowledge on genetic clones. The following questions were asked: Have you heard about genetic cloning? Do you think it’s ethical to genetically clone someone? Do you think it’s possible to create a perfect clone in the future? On a scale from 1-10, how would you feel if your clone was created? (1 being horrible and 10 being awesome!) Below are the results we have gathered:

2 views0 comments


bottom of page