Language and values in the human cloning debate: a web-based survey of scientists and Christian fundamentalist pastors

Over the last seven years, a major debate has arisen over whether human cloning should remain legal in the United States. Given that this may be the 'first real global and simultaneous news story on biotechnology' (Einsiedel et al., 2002, p.313), nations around the world have struggled with the implications of this newly viable scientific technology, which is often also referred to as somatic cell nuclear transfer. Since the successful cloning of Dolly the sheep in 1997, and with increasing media attention paid to the likelihood of a successful human reproductive clone coupled with research suggesting the medical potential of therapeutic cloning in humans, members of the scientific community and Christian fundamentalist leaders have become increasingly vocal in the debate over U.S. policy decisions regarding human cloning (Wilmut, 2000). Yet despite a surfeit of public opinion polls and widespread opining in the news media on the topic of human cloning, there have been no empirical studies comparing the views of scientists and Christian fundamentalists in this debate (see Evans, 2002a for a recent study of opinion polls assessing religion and attitudes toward cloning). In order to further investigate the values that underlie scientists' and Christian fundamentalist leader's understanding of human cloning, as well as their differential use of language in communicating about this issue, we conducted an open-ended, exploratory survey of practicing scientists in the field of molecular biology and Christian fundamentalist pastors. We then analyzed the responses from this survey using qualitative discourse analysis. While this was not necessarily a representative sample (in quantitative terms, see Gaskell & Bauer, 2000) of each of the groups and the response rate was limited, this approach was informative in identifying both commonalities between the two groups, such as a focus on ethical concerns about reproductive cloning and the use of scientific terminology, as well as significant differences including concerns over 'playing God' for the Christian pastors, focus on therapeutic cloning by scientists, and subtle but informative differences between the two groups in their use of scientific terminology and their interpretations of human cloning as scientific progress.     

Abortion rhetoric in American news coverage of the human cloning debate

Abstract

The issue of human cloning has received intense media and political attention since the cloning of Dolly the sheep was announced in 1997. This research explores the discursive basis for support and opposition to human cloning by examining the role of abortion-related rhetoric in constructing the concept of human cloning within the American press. An in-depth content analysis of human cloning news coverage was conducted on a sample of articles collected from the mainstream press as well as advocacy publications with either a pro-science or Christian fundamentalist orientation. Statistically significant differences were found indicating an important role for abortion rhetoric in the human cloning debate. This expansion of abortion rhetoric into the domain of science policy portends a unique and growing problem for resolving bioethical debates within American politics over the future development of biomedical technologies such as human cloning.     

Managing the boundaries between maverick cloners and mainstream scientists: the life cycle of a news event in a contested field

Abstract

In January 2004, the ‘maverick cloner’, Dr Panos Zavos called a press conference in London to announce that he had implanted a freshly cloned human embryo in the womb of an infertile woman. Reports of this press conference gained prominent coverage in the national newspapers the following day and led television bulletins that evening. This article discusses the ways in which expertise was claimed by or attributed to Dr Zavos and other key media sources. It argues that three key boundaries were demarcated in the coverage as journalists framed the stories in terms provided by Zavos's antagonists, ‘mainstream scientists’. It also discusses the engagement in tactics of news management by an organised grouping of UK scientists who attempted to shape the terrain of news coverage on the subject of cloning. The question of the extent to which interested scientists should be able to set the terms of media debate is explored.     

Developments in stem cell research and therapeutic cloning: Islamic ethical positions, a review

Stem cell research is very promising. The use of human embryos has been confronted with objections based on ethical and religious positions. The recent production of reprogrammed adult (induced pluripotent) cells does not - in the opinion of scientists - reduce the need to continue human embryonic stem cell research. So the debate continues. Islam always encouraged scientific research, particularly research directed toward finding cures for human disease. Based on the expectation of potential benefits, Islamic teachings permit and support human embryonic stem cell research. The majority of Muslim scholars also support therapeutic cloning. This permissibility is conditional on the use of supernumerary early pre-embryos which are obtained during infertility treatment in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics. The early pre-embryos are considered in Islamic jurisprudence as worthy of respect but do not have the full sanctity offered to the embryo after implantation in the uterus and especially after ensoulment. In this paper the Islamic positions regarding human embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning are reviewed in some detail, whereas positions in other religious traditions are mentioned only briefly. The status of human embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning in different countries, including the USA and especially in Muslim countries, is discussed.     

Regulating stem-cell research and human cloning in an Australian context: an exercise in protecting the status of the human subject

Abstract

Over 12 months prior to the recent United Nations decision to defer a decision about what type of international treaty should be developed in the global stem-cell research and human cloning debate, the Federal Parliament of Australia passed two separate pieces of legislation relating to both these concerns. After a five-year long process of community consultation, media spectacle and parliamentary debate, reproductive cloning has been banned in Australia and only embryos considered to be excess to assisted reproductive technologies in existence on the 5th of April 2002 are currently valid research material. This paper argues that underpinning both pieces of legislation is a profound belief in the disruptive potential of all types of human cloning for the very nature and integrity of human species being. A belief, moreover, that is based on a presumption that it is apparently possible to conceptualise what being human even means for all Australians.     

Genes, language, cognition, and culture: towards productive inquiry

The Queen Mary conference on “Integrating Genetic and Cultural Evolutionary Approaches to Language,” and the papers in this special issue, clearly illustrate the excitement and potential of trans-disciplinary approaches to language as an evolved biological capacity (phylogeny) and an evolving cultural entity (glossogeny). Excepting the present author, the presenters/authors are mostly young rising stars in their respective fields, and include scientists with backgrounds in linguistics, animal communication, neuroscience, evolutionary biology, anthropology, and computer science. On display was a clear willingness to engage with different approaches and terminology and a commitment to shared standards of scientific rigor, empirically driven theory, and logical argument. Because the papers assembled here, together with the introduction, speak for themselves, I will focus in this “extro-duction” on some of the terminological and conceptual difficulties which threaten to block this exciting wave of scientific progress in understanding language evolution, in both senses of that term. In particular I will first argue against the regrettably widespread practice of opposing cultural and genetic explanations of human cognition as if they were dichotomous. Second, I will unpack the debate concerning “general-purpose” and “domain-specific” mechanisms, which masquerades as a debate about nativism but is nothing of the sort. I believe that framing discussions of language in these terms has generated more heat than light, and that a modern molecular understanding of genes, development, behavior, and evolution renders many of the assumptions underlying this debate invalid.     

The importance of valid disclosures in the human embryonic stem cell research debate

Abstract.  Misinformation erodes the legitimacy of any public debate. Since the start of human embryonic stem cell research deliberations in the USA, misinformation concerning the nature of human embryos, their availability for research, and the potential for using them to develop new medical therapies have been widespread and persistent. Basic facts, well understood by physicians and biologists, have been so misstated and misrepresented in the news media and political speeches that the general public has been put in a state of constant uncertainty. The solution to the present troubling condition is better education in the form of diligent, honest, and complete scientific disclosure by responsible scientists and physicians; and more care given to accurate reporting by news media. Several key aspects of newly emerging embryonic and non-embryonic stem cell technologies are defined and discussed as they relate to the debate over the use of human embryos for medical research. An important topic for consideration is how to disclose with clarity the scientific basis for human embryonic life. Thereafter, failings in proposed technologies for developing new therapies with human embryonic stem cells, that have been grossly under-reported, are examined. Finally, properties of adult stem cells are presented in contradistinction to embryonic stem cells, both in terms of adult stem cells as a scientifically better alternative to embryonic stem cells and in terms of the technological challenges that must be overcome to realize the potential of adult stem cells for new medical therapies.     

In vitro gametogenesis and reproductive cloning: Can we allow one while banning the other?

In vitro gametogenesis (IVG) is believed to be the next big breakthrough in reproductive medicine. The prima facie acceptance of this possible future technology is notable when compared to the general prohibition on human reproductive cloning. After all, if safety is the main reason for not allowing reproductive cloning, one might expect a similar conclusion for the reproductive application of IVG, since both technologies hold considerable and comparable risks. However, safety concerns may be overcome, and are presumably not the sole reason why cloning is being condemned. We therefore assess the non‐safety arguments against reproductive cloning, yet most of these can also be held against IVG. The few arguments that cannot be used against IVG are defective. We conclude from this that it will be hard to defend a ban on reproductive cloning while accepting the reproductive use of IVG.     

Philosophical arguments for and against human reproductive cloning

Can philosophers come up with persuasive reasons to allow or ban human reproductive cloning? Yes. Can philosophers agree, locally and temporarily, which practices related to cloning should be condoned and which should be rejected? Some of them can. Can philosophers reproduce universally convincing arguments for or against different kinds of human cloning? No. This paper analyses some of the main arguments presented by philosophers in the cloning debate, and some of the most important objections against them. The clashes between the schools of thought suggest that philosophers cannot be trusted to provide the public authorities, or the general public, a unified, universally applicable view of the morality of human reproductive cloning.     

克隆技术引发的伦理之争

自从克隆羊多莉诞生以来,有关克隆人的伦理学争论就一直喋喋不休。世界上的各种政治组织和各国政府都明确反对生殖性克隆,而科学家们则对克隆技术的不完善心存疑虑。为了克服克隆过程中的伦理学障碍和技术缺陷,科学家们在核移植技术的基础上,又发展了异种核移植技术、诱导多能干细胞技术等。诱导的多能干细胞可以分化成各种组织,甚至能发育成个体,这些方法使克隆技术不再破坏胚胎,避免了伦理学纠纷。尽管科学技术在进步,但是人们对克隆人仍有很多不解和困惑。从自主、不伤害、行善和公正等四大生命伦理学原则着手,在技术层面上提出了尽管克隆人不会搞乱人际关系,不会减少人类基因多样性,也不会克隆出类似希特勒的战争狂人,但是,人类的生殖性克隆却剥夺了克隆人的自主性,对克隆人的生理和心理都有所伤害,违反了公正和行善的原则。因此,是否可以克隆人在伦理上仍然是需要长期讨论的问题。     

The pros and cons of human therapeutic cloning in the public debate

Few issues linked to genetic research have raised as much controversial debate as the use of somatic cell nuclear transfer technology to create embryos specifically for stem cell research. Whereas European countries unanimously agree that reproductive cloning should be prohibited there is no agreement to be found on whether or not research into therapeutic cloning should be permitted. Since the UK took the lead and voted in favour of regulations allowing therapeutic cloning the public debate has intensified on the Continent. This debate reflects the wide spectrum of diverse religious and secular moralities that are prevalent in modern multicultural European democratic societies. Arguments range from putting forward strictly utilitarian views that weight the moral issues involved against the potential benefits that embryonic stem cell research may harbour to considering the embryo as a human being, endowed with human dignity and human rights from the moment of its creation, concluding that its use for research is unethical and should be strictly prohibited. Given the current state of dissension among the various European states, it is difficult to predict whether 'non-harmonisation' will prevail or whether in the long run 'harmonisation' of legislation that will allow stem cell research will evolve in the EU.     

Scientific Citizenship and good governance: implications for biotechnology

In the wake of public distrust regarding biotechnology, it has been suggested that the debate should be moved "upstream", whereby the public help to set research priorities. Although many scientists see this as an illogical reaction to a loss of faith in science, we argue that the boundaries between science and its technological applications have become blurred and this produces conflicts of interests that have led to this crisis of trust. Furthermore, this distrust is also a crisis in governance that calls for a new open and democratic approach to scientific research. We propose that the concept of Scientific Citizenship, based on good governance, will help to restore public trust and bridge the gap between science and the society that it serves. Integral to this is the suggestion that the governance of science forms part of the training for scientists.     

Regulating stem-cell research and human cloning in an Australian context: an exercise in protecting the status of the human subject

Over 12 months prior to the recent United Nations decision to defer a decision about what type of international treaty should be developed in the global stem-cell research and human cloning debate, the Federal Parliament of Australia passed two separate pieces of legislation relating to both these concerns. After a five-year long process of community consultation, media spectacle and parliamentary debate, reproductive cloning has been banned in Australia and only embryos considered to be excess to assisted reproductive technologies in existence on the 5th of April 2002 are currently valid research material. This paper argues that underpinning both pieces of legislation is a profound belief in the disruptive potential of all types of human cloning for the very nature and integrity of human species being. A belief, moreover, that is based on a presumption that it is apparently possible to conceptualise what being human even means for all Australians.     

No ethical divide between China and the West in human embryo research

This is a discussion of the reaction to the recent research article publication in the journal Protein & Cell by a group of scientists at Sun Yat‐sen University using the CRISPR/Cas9 technique on editing non‐viable human zygotes. Many commentators condemned the Chinese scientists for overstepping ethical boundaries long accepted in Western countries and accused China of having lax regulations on genomic research in general. We argue that not only did this research follow strict ethical standards and fully comply with current regulations, but China also has a well‐developed regulatory framework governing such research comparable to many developed countries. We see the reactions among Western commentators as a misunderstanding of the current situation and an expression of a lack of willingness to acknowledge China as an equal partner in the international debate about proper limits to the development of new biotechnologies.     

Anatomy of a media event: how arguments clashed in the 2001 human cloning debate

This paper studies the distinctive role that staged media events play in the public understanding of genetics: they can focus the attention of the media, scientists and the public on the risks and benefits of genetic advances, in our case, cloning; they can accelerate policy changes by exposing scientific, legal and ethical uncertainties; the use of images, metaphors, cliches, and cultural narratives by scientists and the media engaged in this event can reinforce stereotypical representations of cloning, but can also expose fundamental clashes in arguments about cloning. The media event staged by two fertility experts in 2001 is here analysed as a case study.     

Ethical issues in animal cloning

The issue of human reproductive cloning has recently received a great deal attention in public discourse. Bioethicists, policy makers, and the media have been quick to identify the key ethical issues involved in human reproductive cloning and to argue, almost unanimously, for an international ban on such attempts. Meanwhile, scientists have proceeded with extensive research agendas in the cloning of animals. Despite this research, there has been little public discussion of the ethical issues raised by animal cloning projects. Polling data show that the public is decidedly against the cloning of animals. To understand the public's reaction and fill the void of reasoned debate about the issue, we need to review the possible objections to animal cloning and assess the merits of the anti-animal cloning stance. Some objections to animal cloning (e.g., the impact of cloning on the population of unwanted animals) can be easily addressed, while others (e.g., the health of cloned animals) require more serious attention by the public and policy makers.     

Expert,healer, reassurer,hero and prophet: framing genetics and medical scientists in television news

Abstract

This paper is concerned with representations of the human genome and medical applications of modern biotechnology in Finnish television news. The main focus is on the way that news stories are framed by various linguistic and visual means and on how scientists appearing in the news are positioned. The qualitative analysis shows that in the national frame, biotechnology was treated as a field with great future promise, weighing the prospects of Finnish scientists to succeed in international competition. In the disease frame, the focus was on the achievements of genetic research in the treatment of serious diseases. In the breakthrough frame, it was predicted that genetics will revolutionise the treatment of diseases in ‘the near future’. Finally, news stories presented in the threat frame were mainly concerned to predict and avert problems arising from the potential abuse of genetic research. The analysis suggests that these frames implied certain speaking positions to the scientists appearing in the news stories.     

Stem cells and cell therapy. Contribution to the ethical debate

Divergent and sometimes conflicting positions with respect to human stem cells and cell therapy do not merely reflect disagreement among scientists and conflicts of interest. They attest the ethical tension resulting from recent progress in understanding the earliest stages of development of the human being that can be observed in vitro. Can the extremely potent notion of the human person starting with conception apply to the very first stage of artificial in vitro fertilisation and disregard the fact that to be a real substitute for natural conception, implantation in the uterus that enables the oocyte to nest and a new human being to develop must also be included? Several arguments are presented that plead in favour of making a clear distinction between the status of in vitro cells obtained by artificial fertilisation and that of the embryo, which becomes a developing human being from the moment it implants in the endometrium of the uterus. This subject could have remained in the sphere of the individual conscience, but it has now become a theme for social debate! The revision of the French 1994 so-called Bioethics Laws, which was recently approved on first reading on 22 January 2002, authorises research on spare embryos from in vitro fertilisation under certain conditions. However, for the sole reason that there is a risk of opening the door wide to reproductive cloning, which is unanimously rejected and condemned, all research on stem cells deriving from the nuclear transfer of a somatic cell is prohibited, irrespective of the distinction between cloning for therapeutic purposes and reproductive cloning. It is undeniable that if the efficacy of somatic stem cells could be demonstrated, they would offer a far more preferable solution, for several reasons, than those involving stem cells obtained from spare embryos from IVF or nuclear transfer. Nevertheless, how will a comparison of the two methods be possible if one of them is prohibited a priori? At present, many fear that French researchers will be prevented from doing essential research that, even if it has far to go, is indispensable if we wish to attempt to control the failures of natural procreation and open the way towards the new regenerative medicine that so many look forward to.     

“Faith which conquers the world”: Swedish fundamentalism and the globalization of culture*

This paper argues that the international spread of Christian evangelicalism is of interest for anthropologists examining the effects of the globalization of culture on local contexts. A fundamentalist group is interpreted as transferring the religious symbols of one politico‐religious context (the USA) to another (the Swedish), where they gain new and challenging implications in a very different cultural arena.     

Biocontrol of Pests on Plant Crops in Denmark: Present Status and Future Potential

In this review, the status of biocontrol in plant crops in Denmark is analysed and factors governing the present use and future potential are described. In glasshouse vegetables, biocontrol is the dominant method to control pests while it is much less used in glasshouse ornamentals. On outdoor crops, the use of biocontrol is negligible. The main factors determining future prospects include: research, political initiatives, the scale of organic farming, the interest of companies marketing and advising on biocontrol, and public opinion. Good communication between scientists, advisers, growers, government authorities and the public has occurred for many years in Denmark, and has been essential for the successful implementation of biocontrol in glasshouses. Future development of microbial control (to which some organic growers and some members of the public show concerns) will require both research and a debate among the partners, particularly about environmental safety.