Human Cloning

1. What is Human Cloning?

How Does It Work?
Why Clone a Human?
Ethical & Moral Issues
Cloning History
Scientific Issues
Cloning Numbers: How Successful Is It?
Societal Issues
2. What You Should Know
Why Should Therapeutic Cloning Be Banned?
The Women’s Health Issue
Quotes From the Experts
3. What You Can Do
Know What the Bible Says
Answers to the Arguments
Christian Medical Association Position Statement
4. Resources
Pro-Life Organizations
Endnotes

Christian Medical & Dental Associations serves as a voice and ministry for
Christian healthcare professionals. Its vision is to “transform doctors to transform
the world.” Founded in 1931, CMDA currently serves more than 16,000 members
and coordinates a network of Christian healthcare professionals for personal and
professional growth; sponsors student ministries in medical and dental schools;
P.O. Box 7500 conducts overseas healthcare projects for underserved populations; addresses
Bristol, TN 37621 policies on healthcare, medical ethics and bioethical and human rights issues;
888-230-2637 distributes educational and inspirational resources; provides missionary doc-
www.cmda.org tors with continuing education resources; and conducts international academic
exchange programs.
 1. What is Human Cloning?
Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, diabetes, spinal cord injuries, Lou
Gehrig’s disease. These are a few of the incurable illnesses
being researched by scientists who believe the answer to a
cure lies in the stem cells of tiny, human embryos frozen in
time and space. These stem cells, precious for their ability to
become any tissue in the body, are accessible only by de-
stroying the human embryo. However, studies are published
frequently documenting the real potential in adult stem cells,
a potential unknown just a few years ago. Therefore, America
is faced with a decision: human cloning versus adult stem
cell research. Below you’ll find information based on science,
research and biblical guidance to help you decide for yourself
which avenue is best.

Definition of Human Cloning

Cloning is asexual reproduction in which an exact genetic copy
of another plant, animal or human is made by fusing the DNA from an adult cell into a human egg from which
the genetic material has been removed, causing it to divide and grow.

By definition of the National Academy of Sciences, a clone is an exact genetic replica of another organism. 1

How does it work?

The same procedure used to create Dolly the
sheep, technically called somatic cell nuclear
transfer, is the procedure used with human clon-
ing as well. Researchers first take an egg from a
female donor and empty its genetic contents by
removing the nucleus. They call this enucleating
the egg. Adult cells, which contain DNA, are then
taken from the person who is being cloned. They
can be taken from almost any place on the body,
including the skin, the mouth, or even from a
strand of hair. These cells are cultured and then
starved of nutrients to cause them to go into a
dormant stage. The enucleated egg and one of
these adult cells are fused together with a jolt
of electricity. This creates the cloned embryo, a
human being with the same genetic makeup as
the person who donated the adult cells. If the
embryo is implanted into a “surrogate” woman’s
uterus through in vitro fertilization, we refer to it
as “reproductive cloning.” If successful, the
surrogate mother will give birth to a clone of the
cell donor. Many scientists do not favor repro-
ductive cloning at this time, but most want to be
able to make human clones to “harvest” their
valuable embryonic stem cells. This destroys the
embryo. It is called “research” or “therapeutic”
cloning, and is done with the hope that these stem cells can be used to cure various diseases.2 It is important
to remember that there is no technical difference between “therapeutic”, or “research” cloning and reproductive
cloning. In “research” cloning, the embryo is destroyed before it has the chance to grow. In reproductive cloning,
the embryo is implanted with the hopes of growing into a cloned human being.

2
Why clone a human?
Replace a child
A genetically identical child (an identical twin) could be reproduced from the
DNA of a dead child.

Homosexual/Lesbian Reproduction
A genetic copy of one of the couple could be created without involving the
opposite sex. “It’s a gay issue,” explained Randolf Wicker, Director, Human
Cloning Foundation, in an article in Gay Today, “because heterosexuality as a
route to reproduction is now historically obsolete.”3

Infertile Couples
Infertile couples could create a child that matches one of them identically. They
wouldn’t have to use donated sperm or eggs.

Desired Traits
Someone with great intellect, beauty or ability could be copied for the “good
of mankind.” People have already purchased eggs or sperm from models and
Nobel laureates.
Spare Organs
A group in England proposed, through genetic modifications, to create clones with only enough of a brain to
sustain body functions. They believe that these “non-persons,” genetic copies of individuals that need trans-
plants, could have their organs harvested, without moral qualms.

Prevent Genetic Defects

A couple could clone the partner who does not carry the genetic defect causing a disease. They would still
have their own child instead of adopting.

Ethical and Moral Issues

To get Dolly, 277 embryos were created. Only 29 embryos began

Destruction of Human to divide after they were fused. These were all implanted in ewes.
Life Thirteen ewes became pregnant but only one lamb, Dolly, was
born.4 Thousands of human beings would be killed in attempts to
create human embryos.

Means to an End It is immoral to turn human beings into commodities and treat them
like property. There is a unique value to human life.

A cloned person is genetically identical to another person who is

Unique Individual Identity older than they are. There will be unrealistic expectations that they
should be like the person they were cloned from. Environmental
and societal factors play a major role in development; therefore,
a clone would not develop to be just like his or her twin. This is
much different than being a twin of someone your own age.

3
 Cloning History
Late 1800s First “cloned” animals were created by Hans Dreisch in an attempt to prove that cell division
does not prevent a loss of genetic material. Dreisch cloned sea urchins by separating a 2-cell
embryo; each grew independently into adult sea urchins. This was not true cloning but artifi-
cial twinning.

1902 Embryologist Hans Spemman separated a 2-cell salamander embryo with a strand of his
son’s hair, then separated a single cell from a 16-cell embryo. Both embryos then developed
into identical adult salamanders. Alhough this was not true cloning, identical twins were cre-
ated.

1952 Using nuclear transfer, Philadelphia scientists attempted to clone frogs with the nuclei of early
tadpole embryos. The cells began to divide and grow.

1957 J.B Gurdon attempted to clone a frog with an adult cell. It never developed to the tadpole
stage.

1962 J.B. Gurdon produced an adult frog from the intestinal cells of a tadpole.

1978 David Rorvik’s book In His Image: The Cloning of a Man was published. The book claimed
the true story of first cloned man but was later determined to be a hoax. Also released was
Boys from Brazil, a fictional tale of Dr. Joseph Mingele cloning Adolph Hitler.

1986 Steen Willadsen, an English scientist, announced he’d cloned a sheep’s embryo. At the same
time, an American researcher, Neal First, claimed to have cloned a cow’s embryo. Although
they were able to keep tissue alive in lab conditions, neither team attempted to clone from
adult cells. It was still thought impossible to enable adult genetic material to convert to an
embryonic state.

1993 The blockbuster movie Jurassic Park showed the risks and wonders of dinosaur cloning.
Michael Crighton, author of the book on which the movie was based, said he wanted to show
that science can’t really control nature and it is too powerful to leave just to scientists.

Robert Stillman and Jerry Hall accomplished the first artificial human twinning through em-
bryo splitting. It was labeled by the media as cloning, but it was not.

1997 After three years of paperwork, six years of experimentation and 277 failed attempts, the first
true mammal, a sheep named Dolly was cloned by Ian Wilmut at the Roslin Institute and PPL
Therapeutics in Scotland.

In October of the same year, researchers at the Honolulu Technique cloned a mouse named
Cumulina from cumulus cells (cells that surround a developing egg cell) using nuclear trans-
fer.
Source: Think Quest - http://www.thinkquest.org/library

Scientific Issues
• Mutation: Genes mutate, or change, throughout life as a result of environmental factors and errors in replica-
tion. Cloning begins with a flawed cell, which passes on these mutations and increases the number of genetic
disabilities in cloned children. For example, a skin cell may have many mutations (like scratches on a CD) that
are not seen (heard) because only a small portion of its genetic material is being expressed (like playing only one
track of a CD). When the cell is used to clone, all of the genes are once again expressed (playing the whole CD).
• Malformation: Large offspring syndrome (LOS) appears in perhaps 30 percent to 40 percent of cloned animals.
LOS results in lung, brain, liver, tongue, heart and other defects that often leads to early death. Cloned animals
typically have malformed placentas.5
• Aging Genetic Material: Recent studies have shown that the clone’s physiological age may be older than their
chronological age; this is why Dolly has arthritis at a young age.6
• Genetic Diversity: In a world where human cloning was common, genetic diversity of humans would decrease.
This would lead to a greater chance of inheritable genetic diseases.
4
Cloning Numbers: How Successful Is It?
Based on the most successful cloning experiments in animals to date, here are the success rates of cloning:7

• Dolly the sheep, first cloned mammal: 1 live birth out of 277 cloned embryos
(0.4%)
• Cloned mice: 5 live births out of 613 cloned embryos (0.8%)
• 5 live births out of 314 cloned embryos implanted (1.6%) (0.8%; 1 survived)
• 26 live births out of 312 cloned embryos implanted (8.3%) (4.2%;
13 survived)
• Cloned pigs: 5 live births out of 72 cloned embryos implanted (7%)
• Cloned goats: 3 live births out of 85 cloned embryos implanted (3.5%)
• Cloned cattle: 30 live births out of 496 cloned embryos implanted
(6%) (4.8%; 24 survived)
• Cloned cat: 1 live birth out of 188 cloned embryos (0.5%); of 87
embryos implanted (1.1%)
• Cloned rabbits: 6 live births out of “hundreds” of cloned embryos (4 survived)
In animal cloning “...the success rate for the standard technique, in which the
nucleus of an egg is replaced with one from a donor cell, is dismal: typically,
1% to 3% of nuclear transfer oocytes survive uterine implantation, gestation,
birth, and early life.”8 —Brian Vastag, Journal of the American Medical Association

Societal Issues
A June 7, 2001 poll by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops showed that 84 percent
People of people believe scientists should not be allowed to clone to create children for infertile
Oppose couples. Most scientists and doctors also oppose reproductive cloning. When asked in
a poll would they “like to be a clone,” 86 percent of people said no.9

Who will be the parents of a cloned child? Is it the person they are cloned from? That
Parentage person is not the clone’s mother or father but his or her twin. Is it the woman who donated
the egg? The child has none of her nuclear DNA. Is it the person(s) who raises them?
Does a clone then need to be formally adopted by whoever provides care for the child?

What will be the legal status of the child? A whole new set of laws will need to be de-
Lineage veloped to deal with inheritance. The child will be dislocated from a family tree without
real grandparents, uncles or cousins. This will differ from adoption where the child is not
genetically related to the family they are part of at all but has been legally adopted into it.

Homosexuals, lesbians and singles will be able to have their “own” children that are ac-
Family tually their genetic twins, yet they will raise them as their children. The traditional family
Structure structure will be increasingly challenged by the mindset that a family is whatever people
want to make it.

Protecting Famous and admired people would be forced to protect their DNA to avoid it being used
Your DNA to create a genetic duplicate of themselves without their permission.

2. What You Should Know

Why should “therapeutic” cloning be banned?
• If therapeutic cloning was allowed but reproductive cloning was banned, the result would be
a legal requirement to destroy young embryonic human beings.
• If there are medical breakthroughs for presently incurable diseases like diabetes, people
who value human life will have the terrible choice of respecting their convictions and forgoing
life-prolonging treatment or abolishing their beliefs and taking the new therapy.
• Therapeutic cloning treats embryonic human beings as valuable biological material. A
person is treated like property. Its genetic twin is its “owner” who decides how their genetic
product will be used.
5
Why should “therapeutic” cloning be banned? cont’d
• It will be impossible to know if an implanted pregnancy has been done with a cloned embryo or a traditional
embryo. How will the IVF specialist say no to parents dealing with infertility, have lost a child or a dozen other
scenarios who desire to implant their clone? The IVF industry is non-regulated at present and human cloning
can be done with the equipment already located in every IVF lab.

The Women’s Health Issue

To get enough eggs to seek cures for just four diseases through human cloning, every woman
in the U.S. aged 18-44 (approximately 55 million) would have to endure two cycles of ovarian
hormone hyper-stimulation and then undergo surgery to have their eggs harvested. The num-
bers below are based on 50 eggs required per patient treatment. Estimates range between 50
to 100 eggs per patient. Since no one has reported successfully harvesting stem cells from
cloned human embryos, no one really knows what the true success rate will be, but it would
likely be worse than in animal models. In vitro fertilization donors average 10 to 15 eggs per
hyper-stimulation cycle. This chart assumes 10 as the average number of eggs that could be
cloned due to the abnormalities found in some eggs harvested that would make them unsuit-
able for use. The total number of women of reproductive age (18 to 44 y.o.) in November 2000
(US Census) was estimated at 55 million.10

DISEASE AFFECTED EGGS DONATING WOM-

PATIENTS REQUIRED EN NEEDED

ALS 20,000 1,000,000 100,000

Parkinson’s 1,000,000 50,000,000 5,000,000

Diabetes 17,000,000 850,000,000 85,000,000

Totals -> 18,020,000 901,000,000 90,100,000

Quotes from the Experts...

David A. Prentice, Ph.D., Professor, Life Sciences, Indiana State University; Ad Hoc
Science Adviser to Senator Sam Brownback:
“All human cloning is reproductive, in that it creates ­reproduces ­a new developing hu-
man intended to be virtually identical to the cloned subject. Both “reproductive cloning”
and “therapeutic cloning” use exactly the same techniques to create the clone, and the
cloned embryos are indistinguishable. The process, as well as the product, is identical.
The only distinction between the embryos is their subsequent use—either implantation in
hopes of a live birth, or destruction in hopes of a medical miracle.”

State laws recognize the embryo as a human being. Following is a summary by

Sam Casey, a lawyer and the Executive Director of the Christian Legal Society:
“Currently at least 29 states recognize… that ‘fertilization’ or ‘conception’ initiates the life
of a human being. At least 25 states protect pre-natal human beings…during some part
of their gestational development. Moreover, state courts continue to expand the reach of
personal injury laws to include compensation for…human beings at the embryonic and fe-
tal stages. As yet unchallenged, a longstanding law in Massachusetts prohibits the use of
‘any live human fetus before or after the expulsion from its mother’s womb, for scientific,
laboratory, research or other kind of experimentation.’”
6
Los Angeles Times, May 10, 2002: “Thomas Okarma, too, has met with senators to advocate cloning, but not
because he sees any business potential in it. As chief executive of Geron Corp., a cell therapy company, he
has no interest in using cloned embryos to produce customized treatments for disease. The odds favoring suc-
cess ‘are vanishingly small,’ he said, and the costs are daunting. Okarma said it would take ‘thousands of [hu-
man] eggs on an assembly line’ to produce a custom therapy for a single person. ‘The process is a nonstarter,
commercially,’ he said.”

There are other ways to prevent rejection of transplanted cells besides using the therapeutic cloning technique.
The March 18, 2002 San Francisco Chronicle reported that researchers from biomedical plant Geron Corp.,
and with Advanced Cell Technologies, admitted that there are other ways, but that “that message has not got-
ten out,” and that “the need for cloning to overcome immune system rejection has been overstated.” The report
also notes that “the scientific community has put out the message that a ban on therapeutic cloning will pre-
vent researchers from solving the immune-system problem - an argument that seems at best a stretch, and at
worst, a deception.”11

President George W. Bush, April 10, 2002:

“Human cloning is deeply troubling to me, and to most Americans. Life is a creation, not a commodity. Our
children are gifts to be loved and protected, not products to be designed and manufactured. Allowing cloning
would be taking a significant step toward a society in which human beings are grown for spare body parts,
and children are engineered to custom specifications; and that’s not acceptable. I believe all human cloning
is wrong, and both forms of cloning ought to be banned, for the following reasons. First, anything other than a
total ban on human cloning would be unethical. Research cloning would contradict the most fundamental prin-
ciple of medical ethics, that no human life should be exploited or extinguished for the benefit of another.”

3. What You Can Do

Know What the Bible Says
1. Unlike animals, man and woman are made in God’s image. This gives human
life special value.

• Genesis 1:26 “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our
likeness…”
• Genesis 9:6 “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood
be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.”
• Job 33:4 “The Spirit of God has made me; the breath of the Almighty gives me life.”

2. God’s design is that each individual is formed by the union of genetic material from a husband and wife. God
creates and men and women procreate.

• Genesis 4:1 “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have got-
ten a man from the LORD.”
• Isaiah 45:11-12 “This is what the LORD says—the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker: Concerning
things to come, do you question me about my children, or give me orders about the work of my
hands? It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the
heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts.”

3. Man cannot comprehend God’s wisdom and His divine will. Man may fight illness and the consequences of
a disease brought by sin into the world but is not to create new forms of life or to take it unjustly.

• Ecclesiastes 3:11 “He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the
hearts of men; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end.”
• Ecclesiastes 8:17 “…then I saw all that God has done. No one can comprehend what goes on un-
der the sun. Despite all his efforts to search it out, man cannot discover its meaning. Even if a wise
man claims he knows, he cannot really comprehend it.”
• Ecclesiastes 11:5 “As you do not know the path of the wind, or how the body is formed in a mother’s
womb, so you cannot understand the work of God, the Maker of all things.”
• Isaiah 55:8-9 “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and
my thoughts than your thoughts.”
7
 • Romans 1:20-21 “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and
divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are
without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him,
but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.”

• Isaiah 5:20-21 “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light
for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes
and clever in their own sight.”

• Luke 6:9 “Then Jesus said to them, ‘I ask you, which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do
evil, to save life or to destroy it?’”

4. We are not to do evil even if some good may result.

• Romans 3:8 “Why not say—as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that
we say—’Let us do evil that good may result’? Their condemnation is deserved.”

5. God pities the orphan, blesses the family and gives special responsibilities to each member of it. Children
are a blessing that God gives to parents. Man should not create “orphans” through cloning.

• Psalm 68:5 “A father to the fatherless, a defender of widows, is God in his holy dwelling.”

• 1 Timothy 3:4 “He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper
respect.”

• Psalms 127:3 “Sons are a heritage from the LORD, children a reward from him.”

Answers to the Arguments

1. This is not a human being. It is only a mass of cells.

• Authoritative scientific texts, congressional testimony and scientific consensus state

that human life begins at the zygote (one-cell embryo) stage

• ”A zygote is the beginning of a new human being.”12

• ”We begin our description of the developing human with the formation and differentia
Log onto cmdahome.org tion of the male and female sex cells or gametes, which will unite at fertilization to initi-
/ate
Voice & Publications embryonic development of a new human individual.”13 —William Larsen, “Hu-
to read this article in To-
man Embryology”
day’s Christian Doctor.

2. Pregnancy begins at implantation.

• “Human pregnancy begins with the fusion of an egg and a sperm,...”14 —Bruce Carlson, “Human
Embryology and Developmental Biology”

• “…Union of these gametes during fertilization produces a zygote or fertilized ovum which is the primordium
or beginning of a new human being (emphasis in original text). Human development begins at fertilization…
This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” —Keith L.
Moore & T.V.N. Persaud. The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th Edition, 1998

• “Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circum-
stances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and fe-
male pronuclei blend in the oocyte.” —Ronan O’Rahilly & Fabiola Muller, 2001 Human Embryology & Teratol-
ogy, 3rd Ed.

• State laws recognize the embryo as a human being.

8
3. If “therapeutic” cloning is banned, we cannot develop cures for chron-
ic diseases like Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease.
• The greatest scientific breakthroughs are much more likely to occur using adult stem
cells. That is why three out of four investment dollars are going into biotech companies
doing adult stem cell research. Already adult stem cells are being used to treat thou-
sands of people in the lab while embryonic stem cells have not been successfully used
to treat even one patient. Embryonic stem cells turn into cancers when transplanted, it
is difficult to control their differentiation and almost impossible to get a pure culture of
differentiated cells.

• Embryonic stem cell therapy requires human cloning. Such therapy would be mor-
ally troublesome to many patients since they themselves would have to be cloned and
their twin cannabalized for its cells. Most Americans would have ethical qualms about
participating in human sacrifice. Testimony by Dr.
Chris Hook, Ethicist at Mayo
• The public is overwhelmingly opposed to human cloning — 80-90 percent of people Clinic before the House of
oppose it categorically. The American Heart Association experienced donor backlash Representatives:”What is a
when they said they would fund destructive embryo research. chimpanzee embryo? It is
a little immature chimpan-
4. The potential for curing disease outweighs the problem of destroying zee. What is an embryo of
embryos. the species homo sapiens?
It is an immature member
• “Peter Mountford, chief scientific officer of Stem Cell Sciences, believes these
problems [with cloning] can be overcome, and argues that it is too early to give up on of the species homo sa-
therapeutic cloning - but his has become a minority view.”15 piens. It is human all the
way in its developmental
• “...The idea of ‘therapeutic cloning’ seems to be on the wane. By creating cloned hu- pathway and it is a being all
man blastocysts, some experts have argued that it should be possible to derive embry- the way as well. It is not just
onic stem cells perfectly matched to individual patients. But most now believe this will tissue. Tissue cannot grow
be too expensive and cumbersome for regular clinical use.”16 into an adult being. Only a
small immature being can
• “[John] Gearhart [of Johns Hopkins University] also says that many scientists ‘feel
do that. It is a unique mem-
there are ways of getting around [the rejection problem of proposed embryonic stem
ber of the species homo sa-
cell therapies] without the nuclear transfer paradigm.’”17
piens, a human being, from
• “[T]he poor availability of human oocytes, the low efficiency of the nuclear transfer the moment conception
procedure, and the long population - doubling time of human embryonic stem cells is completed at syngeny.
make it difficult to envision this [therapeutic cloning] becoming a routine clinical proce- It is not some other spe-
dure...”18 cies, it is human. It is not a
non-being. Any attempt to
Christian Medical Association define some point along the
Human Cloning Ethics Statement developmental pathway
beyond that moment when
As Christian physicians and dentists, we believe that human life is sacred because each a new, unique genetic hu-
individual is made by God in His own image. God’s design is that each individual is man being is conceived is
formed by the union of genetic material from a husband and wife. We further believe that
purely arbitrary. It is only in
the family is the basic social unit designed by God to receive and nurture new human life.
the context of other utilitar-
There are moral reasons to refrain from proceeding with human cloning. First and fore- ian goals that somehow
most, the development of this technology will require the deliberate sacrifice of human our arbitrary thresholds get
embryos. We believe this to be immoral. The use of human life merely as a means to an defined, a process in and
end is likewise morally unacceptable. Another moral concern is the question of the timing
of itself that should lead
and significance of ensoulment. Furthermore, cloning may deviate from the wisdom of
God’s design for human genetic diversity and therefore may be unwise. us to be skeptical of such
designations.”
There are scientific reasons to oppose human cloning such as the potential for mutation,
transmission of mitochondrial diseases, and the negative effects from the aging genetic
material. There are also societal reasons to be hesitant about human cloning such as questions about parentage, lineage,
family structure and the uniqueness of the individual.

Therefore, we believe that human cloning should not be pursued given our current understanding and knowledge. We affirm
the need for continued moral scrutiny as research on animal cloning proceeds and proposals for the application of this tech-
nology to humans are advanced. 9
 4. Resources
Christian Legal Society Life Issues Institute Concerned Women for America
4208 Evergreen Lane, 1821 W. Galbraith Rd. 1015 Fifteenth St. NW Suite 1100
Suite 222 Cincinnati, OH 45239 Washington, DC 20005
Annandale, VA 22003 513.729.3600 202.488.7000
703.642.1070 513.729.3636 www.cwfa.org
www.clsnet.org www.lifeissues.org mail@cwfa.org
clshq@clsnet.org info@lifeissues.org

Focus on the Family Family Research Council The Center for Bioethics
8605 Explorer Drive 801 G. Street NW & Human Dignity
Colorado Springs, CO 80902 Washington, DC 20001 2065 Half Day Road
719.531.3328 202.393.2100 Bannockburn, IL 60015
800.A-FAMILY 800.225.4008 847.317.8180
www.family.org www.frc.org www.cbhd.org
info@cbhd.org

Endnotes
1. NAS, Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Reproductive Cloning (National Academy Press 2002), page E-4)
2. How Stuff Works. 8 Nov. 2002. http://library.thinkquest.org/20830/Frameless/Manipulating/Experimentation/Cloning/longdoc.htm
3. http://gaytoday.badpuppy.com/garchive/viewpoint/052797vi.htm
4. Benoit, B. “Human Cloning and Rengineering,”
5. Vastag, Brian. “Epigenetics seen as possible key to cloning.” JAMA. 286:12. 26 Sept. 2001.
6. Allen JF, Allen CA. “A mitochondrial model for premature ageing of somatically cloned mammals.” IUBMB. Life. 1999 Oct. 48(4):369-
72.
7. http://cloninginformation.org/info/latest_cloning_numbers.htm
8. Vastag, Brian. “At the Cloning Circus Sideshows Abound, While Scientist Seek a Wider Audience.” JAMA. 286:12. 26 Sept. 2001.
9. Elmer-Dewitt, Phillip. “Cloning: Where do we draw the line?” Time. November 8, 1993. 65-70.
10. http://eire.census.gov/popest/archives/national/nation2/intfile2-1.txt.
11. Abate, Tom. “Drugs posited as stand-in for stem cell cloning.” San Francisco Chronicle. 18 March 2002.
12. Keith Moore and T.V.N. Persaud, The Developing Human (Phildelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998. 2.)
13. William Larsen, Human Embryology (New York:Churchhill Livingstone, 1997), p. 20
14. Bruce Carlson, Human Embryology and Developmental Biology (St. Louis, MO: Mosby, 1994) p. 3.
15. Peter Aldhous, “Can they rebuild us?”, Nature 410, 622-625; April 5, 2001.
16. Peter Aldhous, “A world of difference”, Nature 414, 838; Dec 20/27, 2001
17. Constance Holden, “Would cloning ban affect stem cells?” Science 293, 1025; Aug 10, 2001
18. Odorico JS, Kaufman DS, Thomson JA, “Multilineage differentiation from human embryonic stem cell lines,” Stem Cells 19, 193-
204; 2001

10