This article informs us on how one of Britain's leading academic institutions has supported calls for a worldwide ban on human reproductive cloning. They endorsed a statement to the United Nations urging them to agree on a convention, which states that countries should not permit the creation of duplicate humans. The plan is to try and put pressure on all governments so they would ban human reproductive cloning. It makes a point not to ban therapeutic cloning, which is the production of embryos for research in treating diseases. Members of the Inter-Academy Panel (IAP) on international issues will present the statement on September 29th about having an International Convention Against the Reproductive Cloning of Human Beings. An Ad Hoc committee of the United Nations is looking into the feasibility of having the convention. However, they have concerns on such a ban, especially whether it should apply to research and therapeutic cloning. The author clearly states there side of the argument repeatedly . The president of the royal society, Lord May of Oxford, said "as scientists and citizens we need to ensure that technology is not misused." ().
My personal opinion is much the same as the United Nations Ad Hoc Committee. If we let it get out of hand it could come back and bite us in the butt. There are many ethical, legal and social implications that need to be addressed regarding reproductive cloning. Carelessness on the part of the scientists would affect the scientific community worldwide. Research indicates that human cloning is a threat to the health of both mother and child. () Animal studies on reproductive cloning show an extremely elevated incidence of fetal disorders, spontaneous abortions, and malformation and death among newborns.() This is why I agree with part of the article and think that it would be careless and unethical to clone human beings. It seems incredibly unfair to use people as "guinea pigs" for something that has so many problems, or even animals for that matter.