Being Sheepish About Cloning Isn’t Productive

Dolly, the cloned sheep, isn’t much of a writer herself.

Her birth, however, and immediate entry into history as the first mammal ever to be made from a single cell extracted from an unfertilized egg, has prompted college professors around the world to rush to their keyboards and rewrite whole sections of basic science course work.

You see, nobody thought it was possible to create a sheep from a single cell.

“Oh yeah, I was amazed,” said Gary Thorgaard , chairman of the zoology department at Washington State University. Thorgaard has taught the basics of genetics for years at WSU.

Next month the 170 students in Thorgaard’s General Genetics class are scheduled to learn about cloning.

“Usually, when you teach a basic course like this you don’t change the course outline much,” Thorgaard said. “But this development represents a fundamental change that I have to put into the course. It’s a huge jump.”

Dolly, the cloned sheep, is living proof a single, adult cell from a mammal can be coaxed first into reverting to its embryonic state and then brought through a new cycle of development to produce a fully functional, living creature.

Welcome to the 21st century.

Suddenly, the complicated work of biotechnology has become bleatingly mainstream.

People may not understand what it means to map the human genetic code. Diners may not taste the difference between a genetically engineered tomato and one grown in the backyard.

Seeing a sheep that is an exact copy of another living animal has a way of get people’s attention.

Professor Thorgaard, for one, expects his class on Dolly will be a highlight of his students’ year. “And it’s always nice to see them when they wake up,” he laughed.

Not everyone will be laughing about Dolly.

A Time/CNN poll in the days following the announcement of Dolly’s birth, found 65% of those polled thought the government should regulate cloning.And, 74% thought cloning was against God’s will.

These figures suggest even thinking about the possibility of re-creating oneself, or a loved one, or any human being, stretches and pops the human brain.

In the coming decade, thinking about these things will be an essential part of public life.

The cloning of Dolly has put a face, albeit a woolly one, on the ethical issues related to the biotechnical revolution.

At the moment, science is far ahead of the common, collective thought about its implications.

For example, scientists are identifying genes that make people suspectable to certain kinds of cancer, kidney disease and cystic fibrosis.

Research already is underway to find ways to alter these genes, or graft new genes into future generations so they will not suffer from these ills.

Every month another link is found between our biology and our health, welfare and fate.

Asthma has a biological root. Homosexuality may.

Practical applications of this biotechnological research will shape the 21st century in mind-boggling ways.

Genetically-engineered animals will be used to grow and produce drugs to treat all kinds of illnesses and conditions.

Tiny, engineered microorganisms will be used to fight toxic spills and other ecological disasters.

Potatoes and rice will be re-engineered to build protein value to a level that matches meat.

And these are just some of the projects now far along in the biotechnological pipeline.

These are just the Model Ts of biotechnology.

“One way to think about all of this is to remember that 50 years ago we didn’t even know the structure of DNA,” said professor Thorgaard.

“In the next 50 years, I think it might be technically possible to go in and alter any specific gene you want to.”

That means fixing the flaws. No more fat gene. No more high cholesterol. Add a tall gene. Take away the aging gene.

Then, of course, that more perfect person could, in theory, be cloned again and again.

The technology will be there soon.

What is less clear is whether our minds, our ethics, and our understanding can race fast enough to keep up.

“Really, the ethical issues don’t come up all that much,” professor Thorgaard said of the breathless rush in the scientific community to conquer new frontiers in biotechnology. “That sounds bad, but I think (science) tends to get concerned about technology and often leaves those broader questions to someone else.”

Dolly has snapped to attention the non-scientists.

Much good can come from Dolly.

If good is to follow, the public must serve as shepherds, not a bunch of sheep, as we think about the consequences of Dolly’s creation.

, DataTimes