Myths of Cloning distort reality, scientists say

THE claim that a human being has been cloned for the first time has fueled concern that science fiction is about to become reality. But scientists this week dismissed popular myths about cloning, saying that images of an exact human replica or an army of identical marching soldiers are preposterous.

They stressed whatever fears people may have, a clone would not be an exact replica of the person being cloned, saying it was more akin to an identical twin one or two generations removed.

"Even in identical twins, where the DNA is identical, they are different people because of the influence of environment," said Janet Rowley, professor of medicine at the University of Chicago and a member of the President's Council on Bioethics that convened earlier this year

The relative influence of genes versus environment on an individual's development is a debate that has raged for more than a century, typically framed in the context of "nature versus nurture."

Sir Francis Galton, a 19th century British psychologist and cousin of Charles Darwin, introduced the idea that the principle characteristics that make up mankind are hereditary and that society could and should selectively breed to improve itself -- otherwise known as eugenics.

Defects In Animals

A fear of such an idea being put in practice lies behind much public concern about cloning. This was only exacerbated by the beliefs associated with the company that did the cloning -- namely that aliens created mankind.

Most scientists agree that it is unconscionable to clone humans when tests in animals have not been perfected.

Cattle, mice, sheep and other animals have been cloned with mixed success. Some have displayed defects later in life and scientists fear the same could happen with cloned humans.

"It's very difficult to imagine that we'll understand what's involved any time soon, so to do this in humans is insanity," said Barry Zirkin, head of the division of reproductive biology at Johns Hopkins University.

The head of Clonaid, which belongs to the Raelian sect which believes that life on earth was sparked by extraterrestrials who arrived 25,000 years ago and created humans by cloning, said last Friday in Florida that it had produced the first clone of a human being, without offering any proof.

Some scientists say it is only a matter of time before cloning technology is perfected, and some argue there could be situations where it is appropriate, as a substitute for in-vitro fertilization for infertile couples, for example.

Even though cloning is a transplantation of an entire nucleus and not of specific genes -- the principle behind genetic engineering -- it is nonetheless an attempt to produce a child with specific traits.

Sinister And Comic

The idea of reproducing specific people, either as individuals or in hordes, has been expressed in popular culture to both sinister and comic effect.

In Woody Allen's 1973 science fiction comedy "Sleeper," the character played by Allen finds himself 200 years in the future where he foils a plot to clone a deceased tyrannical despot, who was blown up by rebel forces, by stealing all that is left of the dictator -- his nose.

In the 1978 thriller "The Boys From Brazil," based on Ira Levin's novel, the Nazi doctor Josef Mengele works in the South American jungle attempting to resurrect Adolf Hitler through cloning and recreate the Third Reich.

Hilarious or terrifying as these scenarios might be, they remain fantasy, scientists say.

"Hitler was the way he was not just because of genes," said Bonnie Steinbock, a philosophy professor at the State University of New York at Albany who focuses on bioethics. "If you tried to clone Hitler, you might instead get the personality of Thomas Jefferson."

That could disappoint people who imagine they can replace a lost loved one.

"It won't replace a dead child," said Zirkin. "It would be terribly burdensome for a child to have to grow up thinking that he or she is a replacement for someone who died."