The Human Cloning Debate 2nd Edition (Paperback)

by Glenn McGee (Editor)

Editorial Reviews

Product Description
In 1997 Scottish biologist Ian Wilmut successfully cloned a sheep, Dolly, in a controversial act many perceived as the first step toward human cloning. The Human Cloning Debate is the first book to present Wilmut's own thoughts on the troubling ramifications of this technology, along with essays by experts who explore the history and techniques of cloning, ethical issues, and the future possibilities. The previous edition was chosen as one of The New York Times's Top 100 Books for 1998.

About the Author
Dr. McGee, editor of The Human Cloning Debate, is Associate Director for Education of the Penn Center for Bioethics, and Assistant Professor in Penn's School of Medicine. He is a 1998 Atlantic Fellow of the Commonwealth Foundation. Dr. McGee has authored The Perfect Baby: A Pragmatic Approach to Genetics (Rowman & Littlefield, 1997), in addition to over fifty articles, 11 reviews, and 7 encyclopedia entries. His comments have appeared in US and international newspapers, and he has discussed cloning, genetics, and bioethics on national news programs such as CNN, Charlie Rose, and PBS' Jim Lehrer News Hour. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Product Details

• Paperback: 312 pages
• Publisher: Berkeley Hills Books; 2nd edition (May 2000)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1893163121
• ISBN-13: 978-1893163126
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 4.3 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 13.8 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 4.7 out of 5 stars See all reviews (6 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #2,199,890 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent and Engaging, October 30, 1998

By A Customer

This review is from: The Human Cloning Debate (Paperback)

We looked at several cloning books for our coffeehouse conversations series. This was the only one with good science as well as provocative ethics material. The article by Art Caplan and the religious material are excellent. This is the only book with an article by cloning scientists in it, and I found Ian Wilmut's perspective on the difference between adoption and cloning to be fascinating.

6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Most Informative Book I have read yet this year, May 8, 2001

By	Frederick L. Merritt Jr. (Louisville, KY USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

"The Human Cloning Debate" is the most informative book have read this year. The essays are fairly well balanced although there are more that are opposed than in favor. But, there are probably more people opposed to human cloning than are in favor. At any rate this is an excellent book.

There are several really good layman's descriptions of exactly what the biological results of cloning are. Big surprise, it is not what the media have led us to believe. On the other hand knowing the exact results does not seem to change the preponderance of opinion one way or the other.

One of the best essays in the book for describing the science was written by Phillip Kitcher, although I think the conclusions he reached were totally off base. He wrote "Reality is much more sobering, and it is a good idea to preface debates about the morality of human cloning with a clear understanding of the scientific facts" To many of us forced our ideas about cloning before we knew the facts.

Perhaps the whole debate was summed up in a single sentence written by Jonathan R. Cohen n his essay "Cloning in Jewish Thought". "Ultimately, cloning challenges us to consider how important our genetic structure is to our sense of self."

I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in the ethical debate surrounding cloning.

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Useful collection of contributions to this important debate, November 4, 2004

By	William Podmore (London United Kingdom) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

This review is from: The Human Cloning Debate (Paperback)

This is a thought-provoking collection of essays by 25 contributors, pro- and anti-cloning, scientists, doctors, academics, researchers, journalists and the odd US President. The most mind-changing essay for this reviewer was Ronald Bailey's `Cloning babies is not inherently immoral'.
Throughout history, some have violently opposed scientific developments. For example, Guardian columnist Jeremy Rifkin described biotechnology as `a form of annihilation every bit as deadly as nuclear holocaust, and even more profound'. This dispute between science and anti-science, progress and reaction, the materialist and idealist philosophies, can never be resolved. It is a fundamental philosophic divide that cannot be bridged. One or other must prevail.

The argument that we must wait for a consensus to emerge is reactionary, for this would mean waiting forever. No amount of additional debate can ever win round the opposition to progress, because that opposition is entrenched behind ramparts of dogma; faith-based, it is impervious to evidence and reason.
Presidential calls for a moratorium are prevarication. Similarly, the search for absolute safety, like all searches for absolutes, is a delusion, which makes the precautionary principle another recipe for stasis.
Some who oppose cloning opposed In Vitro Fertilisation earlier. Possibly one million babies have been born through IVF since 1978. This safe and beneficial procedure arose from decades of refining techniques in a variety of animals. Safe cloning will similarly result from animal research: a ban on research would prevent work into making cloning safe.
In Germany the government has banned all research work on embryos, so Germany makes no contribution and has no influence on this matter. Britain's parliament passed a law that regulates therapeutic cloning, but unfortunately bans all efforts at reproductive cloning.
Fear of biotechnology has done great harm, because technological stagnation poses greater risks than technological innovation. Banning stem cell research or research into reproductive cloning would prevent many promising developments in medical research; it could drive research to countries less equipped to balance safety with development. The biotechnology revolution has already brought enormous benefits, IVF for instance, and will bring many more, but only if we encourage and support research into cloning.