Exercising caution

Proposed human cloning ban smart until further research done

Ian Wilmut is the figurative father of the world's most famous sheep.

By giving life to Dolly, the first successfully cloned adult mammal, the British embryologist sparked a massive public debate about the possibility of human cloning.

Scientists, lawmakers and religious officials offered opinions, most of them fearful and negative.

"Clinton's proposed ban is is a good idea."

After Chicago physicist Richard Seed said he would clone a human within 18 months, the government was quick to respond.

Several cloning bills have been drafted by members of Congress, and President Clinton has proposed a five-year ban on human cloning. Clinton's proposed ban is is a good idea. It will give scientists time to perfect their techniques while allowing the public a chance to come to grips with the staggering implications of cloning technology.

It does pose some difficult ethical questions. By creating genetic duplicates of ourselves, would we be toying with nature? Was Dr. Jekyll right when he said this sort of work is best left to God?

There is a concern that large-scale cloning would detract from the diversity of our gene pool, possibly leading to greater susceptibility to defects.

Also, perhaps most ominous, the creation of headless mice in a Texas laboratory suggests that we may someday be able to clone humans without forebrains, ripe for organ harvesting.

But at least for now, no one is advocating human organ farms. Clones would be viewed as people, just like identical twins -- who share the same genes -- are viewed as people. Human cloning could be a boon to infertile couples who want to have genetically identical offspring.

Scientists agree the technology needs a few years to mature. Wilmut, who will speak at 8 p.m. tomorrow in Eisenhower Auditorium, has said there are "serious safety issues" surrounding human cloning. And this is why President Clinton's plea to Congress for a five-year ban on human clones makes sense.

The ban would prevent eccentrics from attempting to make clones before the technology is capable of doing it reliably. And Clinton's ban would allow potentially life-saving DNA, tissue, cell and agricultural research to continue.

Judging from the recent public outcry, this is a sensitive issue that must be researched and discussed thoroughly and approached with the utmost caution.

Clinton's ban would give us a chance to step back, take a deep breath and acclimate ourselves to the idea of taking control of our babies, our genes and our evolution.