Chiquita Banana Overview Essay Example for Free

Chiquita Banana Overview Essay Chiquita Brands International, Inc. is one of the most important international marketers and distributors of food products derived from bananas, as well as other fruits and healthy snack products. Chiquita Banana revenues for about $3 billion dollars a year and employs more than 21,000 people and operates in about 70 countries worldwide. Chiquita Banana  together with Dole, Del Monte and Fyffes control about 80% of the global banana market. In 1993 the EU created the Common Organization of the Market in Bananas (COMB) to deal with the harsh competition between these companies. They would allow duty free access to the EU but subject to quotas to bananas from the Africa’s, Caribbean and Pacific, while bananas from Latin America were subject to an import tax of 176 Euros per ton and a quota of 2533 t. As an American company we have decided to take advantage of the new treaty restricting Latin American and ACP countries from exporting bananas to the EU. It will not be an easy task because we still have to compete against European banana producers, but we are an established company and we are determined to benefit from this event and gain market share in the European Union. PESTEL analysis for the European Union POLITICAL: †¢The European Union is composed of 28 member states. †¢The EU has created a single market by standardizing laws within the member states. †¢Some of the objectives of creating this union is to create a better flow on the circulation of goods, capital, people and services within the union. Once a good or service is accepted within the union it is protected from customs, taxes and import quotas as long as they remain within the union. †¢Free movement of capital is intended to allow investment of properties between countries, something that could help banana growers since they can look for more fertile land in neighboring countries. †¢The monetary policy is the Eurozone and is governed by the European Central Bank. ECONOMIC: †¢The European Union’s GDP is ranked as number one in the world accounting for $16.58 trillion dollars. †¢Export goods account for $1.687 trillion, some of the main export partners of the European union are: oUS 17.3% China 8.5% Switzerland 7.9% Russia 7.3% Turkey 4.5 % †¢Food, drinks and tobacco account for 5.9% †¢Import of goods account for $2.302 trillion dollars and the main import partners are: China 16.2% Russia 11.9% US 11.5% Switzerland 5.8% Norway 5.6% †¢Food, drinks and tobacco account for 5.2% of import goods. †¢The service sector is the most important one in the EU making up 69% of the GDP followed by the manufacturing industry with 28.4% GDP and agriculture for only 2.3% of GDP †¢The agricultural sector is supported by subsidies from the EU and currently represents 40-50% of the EU’s total spending. SOCIOCULTURAL FACTORS: †¢There is limited data on European children’s fruit intake, but the data shows that the average fruit intake is about 141 g per day. Fruit intake is highest in Austria and Portugal and is the lowest in Iceland and Spain. †¢Girls and women consume more fruits and vegetables and boys and men do, there is no simple explanation to this but it’s believed to be because women in general are more concerned about their weight and keeping a slim fit figure. †¢Children tend to eat less fruit as they age, but it’s the exact opposite with adults. Intake levels increase with age, possibly because income and knowledge increases and one becomes more aware of the benefits of good eating habits. †¢Men once they are married have an increase in fruit intake. Women seem to have an impact on their husband’s fruit intake as well as the variety of fruits eaten. Women tend to handle ‘health-related’ issues more commonly than men so they tend to buy and cook more food than men. †¢Children’s fruit intake levels directly correlate with how much their parents consume. But pressure to eat fruit does not positively affect children’s intake, but it is enhanced when parents are good role-models and encourage them to eat fruits and vegetables. †¢People with self-efficacy tendencies have a higher fruit intake in adults, also people with a high self-esteem tend to eat more fruits and vegetables because they take their health into account. TECHNOLOGICAL: †¢The EU is funding a project for pesticide free fruits and vegetables by removing the threat of fruit flies. Helping farmers meet customers’ demands for safe fruits while being environmentally conscious. oThe project pretend to use an insect attractant to draw insects and pathogens such as: infectious micro-organisms, virus, fungus that cause diseases in fungus. oThis attractant will be applied in the form of an insect trap near plantations to take bugs away from plantations, this will be a long-lasting and biodegradable baiting station. †¢Europe is becoming more conscious about maintaining a cleaner environment, the EU is committed to providing a better future for the next generations. So they specialize on clean energy, from turbines in Germany to solar panels in Spain, and countries across the EU are using natural resources of sustainable energy bringing investment to businesses and citizens. LEGAL: †¢With the birth of the Single European Market in 1993 the Common Market Organization for Bananas was put into effect (COMB). COMB is concerned on the importation, sale and distribution of bananas. †¢A policy was set in motion allowing EU suppliers to export duty free bananas to all EU states. Also quotas were set for African, Caribbean and Pacific countries (ACP) imposing import licenses for a fixed rate of volume of bananas, and limited imports through excessively high tariffs. oA quota of 857,000 tons for duty free access from ACP countries †¢Three types of licenses were issued in order to regulate this quota to ACP countries †¢Third countries that were not considered in the quota are subject to a tariff of Ecu 850 per ton. †¢In order to prevent any loss of income by EU banana producers a compensation of payments for 850,000 tons were granted in case the prices fell below the production costs. ENVIRONMENTAL: †¢Flat-free water chargers are common in some countries in Europe. This does not encourage efficient behavior to households and agriculture according to a report from the European Environment Agency (EEA). †¢The EEA is considering water pricing in the following countries: Croatia, England and wales, France, Germany, Netherlands, Scotland, Serbia, Slovenia and Spain. †¢In most countries, farmers are allowed to use as much water as they want  for a flat rate. By charging the amount of water used in Europe it prognosticated to cut down on water used by agriculture for about 10 – 20 %. This will push farmers to not only cut down on their water consumption but to invest on better irrigation system as well as fixing water leaks. †¢The general population in the European Union seem to support this motion to cut down water overuse, about 84% of the population agree with this principle. Marketing Mix In order to better penetrate the European market we have to better understand our own products, so a marketing mix was created to see what we can offer to the market and this will help us to better oversee our operations in the European market. PRODUCT: Chiquita banana takes pride in their first class bananas. But banana consumption vary from country to country so they have other products to fulfill the change in each countries demand. They always keep in mind the environment and consumer’s health, so they have products that meet these two qualifications, products such as: readymade salads, fruit snacks. An independent survey was conducted about people’s preferences and attitudes about bananas, and the poll indicated that the taste of Chiquita bananas was better than competing brands and people preferred it 2 to 1 to the leading brand. The bananas by Chiquita banana are 100% organic approved and certified by the USDA which means that they adhere to the requirements and meet the organic standards of growing bananas. PRICE: These are the prices for bananas per metric ton for the last few months. Bananas prices vary depending on the location where they are being sold. In France the average price for a kg is about $2.00 dollars. In Spain is about $1.00 per kg. But these prices tend to fluctuate with the seasons as well, and some variables take place to why this happens. One of the reasons is that bananas grow in tropical areas so they need hot weather to grow, but it’s harder to maintain them fresh during summer. PLACE: Chiquita banana sells its products internationally to about 70 countries worldwide. The majority of the products grown come from South America and the Caribbean which are then sent to distribution centers. Europe is the largest consumer and importer of bananas in the world, so this would be the best place for the largest banana producer in the world to invest and tap into this gold mine. In the year 2011 people living in the European Union consumed an estimate of 5 million tons of bananas and about 4.6 million tons were imported. Europe would be the best market to try to penetrate and take market share from. Sweden, UK, Denmark, Finland and Portugal are the main consumers of bananas in Europe (see Appendix A). These are the countries within the EU for Chiquita banana to penetrate first. PROMOTION: The way that Chiquita banana promotes their product is very innovative. They have sticker contests and they encourage people to send drawings for possible logos for their stickers. But their latest promotion is endorsing the charismatic minion characters from the movie Despicable Me, they have even worked on an app game available for apple and droid. The point of this game is to run and get as many bananas as possible without running into any obstacles. There is no record for the increase in sales of Chiquita bananas yet because the game is recent, but it’s safe to say that this gamification strategy will work well for the company. Also, as a part of their promotion they attend school lunches, celebrate major anniversaries and sponsor Olympics. They use the slogan â€Å"quite possibly, The World’s Perfect Food† SWOT Analysis STRENGTHS: †¢Chiquita Banana is number one in the fruit market in the world and sells its products to more than 70 countries worldwide. †¢The company had a $3 billion dollar revenue last year. †¢Its net income is about $405 million dollars. †¢The company is committed to being socially responsible A decade ago they implemented social accountability 8000 which has helped improve their practices to better serve the community. â€Å"SA 8000 provides standards based on national laws, international human rights norms and the conventions of the International Labor Organization. Management system  requirements ensure that these standards are consistently implemented over time, and independent audits and certification help measure progress and identify areas for improvement.† WEAKNESSES: †¢The company has not been able to reach out to consumers in Europe, they had a $2 million profit during the last quarter, better compared to the previews year where there was an $11 million loss. †¢Sales fell 2% from $793 million to $774 million in one year. †¢There was an 18 an article was published of ‘Chiquita secrets revealed’ by the enquirer, where the company had been accused of mistreating workers in Central America, polluting the environment and allowing cocaine to be brought to the US in its ships. OPPORTUNITIES: †¢With the new regulations from 1993 the European market has opened for banana companies that do not belong to the ACP countries and Latin America. †¢Our opportunities go hand in hand with the highest consumers of bananas in the EU. According to appendix A, they are: oSweden UK Denmark Finland Portugal †¢These are the first countries that we must try to focus our internationalization efforts into, since they are the highest consumers of our product. †¢Even with the new regulations by COMB Chiquita banana has no real competition from European banana growers, European countries are not optimal for banana growth. Chiquita banana can bring larger quantities at competing prices. THREATS: †¢Some of the threats come from competing companies like: Dole, Del Monte and Fyffes. †¢The analysis of this figure shows Chiquita’s market share shrinking from 1966 to 1995 and then remaining constant at 25% market share. †¢We can also observe that for the year 2007 Dole Company had a bigger market share than Chiquita. †¢Chiquita has to be attentive of the existing competing brands but also the new incoming brands that are stealing market share from the company. Internationalization Strategy and Viability As already stated before, the European Market is the biggest consumer and importer of bananas. Which is why we are interested in creating an internationalization strategy in order to visualize which cities in the European market target more specifically. There is a map in appendix A portraying the European Countries and an estimate of banana consumption, we can see that the northern countries together with Portugal enjoy eating bananas the most. Then we can see a ranking list with the countries that consume the most bananas in Europe, with Sweden being on top of the list. Chiquita banana Co. gets their product from the countries with a yellow dot. Since these are countries that have hot and humid temperature, adequate for banana growth. This map shows us that that in order for the bananas to be shipped from this countries to the EU they have to be shipped in a boat that has to travel the Atlantic for about 6,000 miles. These bananas are stored and refrigerated. This crossing of the A tlantic takes an average of 5 days and the bananas are refrigerated to a temperature between 13.5 and 15 C stalling ripening. Even though flavor and consistency remain virtually intact, this voyage shortens the shelf life to be 7-10 days. Portugal would be a strategic point for the company’s internationalization strategy. A logistics platform could be set up in Porto, a northern city in Portugal, this way we can kill two birds with one rock. We re-fuel the ships and get them ready for their journey to Sweden (our top priority in terms of distribution) and unload some containers to distribute Portugal’s banana demand. Aside from Portugal the countries with the highest consumption of bananas per capita is in Northern Europe, so another logistic platform would be convenient as a final stop before the final destination in each country. Le Havre, France would be a convenient location since it is south of the UK and it is cheaper to have a distribution center there because the euro is not as strong as the sterling pound. Once we have our logistics platform set up in Le Havre we can make accommodatio ns and agreements with companies and retailers that handle fruits and vegetables belonging to the countries that have the highest banana consumption. We would deliver to the following  terminal or ports: †¢Gothenburg, Sweden †¢Brighton, UK †¢Skagen, Denmark †¢Finland is a little more inaccessible through the Baltic Sea, so we would ship Finland’s required bananas to Gothenburg, Sweden as well. From Sweden we could work another logistic route to get to Finland by truck. †¢Porto, Portugal †¢Le Havre, France CHANCE: Iceland is Europe’s top producer of bananas with their world of the art greenhouse installations, even though they rely on their technology they have to constantly monitor their products and create the proper environment for the bananas. This is where Chiquita banana has an opportunity since they don’t have to worry about creating the right conditions for banana growth, the company looks for a convenient location for banana growth and plants the fruit. This enables the company to worry solely on cropping and shipping. Another advantage that the company has over the biggest European banana producer is that, Chiquita banana can acquire bananas in massive quantities while Iceland’s producers have to create the environment to grow more bananas. This is unless the COMB sets a tighter quota. Incoterm An incoterm is a made up word composed of three words. ‘in’ means international, ‘co’ commerce and ‘term’ means term. Incoterms are used to describe the type of relationship between buyer and supplier and they type of contract they use to deliver and receive a product. POSSIBLE INCOTERMS FOR THE COMPANY As a seller the most optimal incoterm for the company would be to agree with the buyer of working with ‘Ex Works’ since the buyer would have to assume the transportation costs and the risks of brining the goods to their stores. I believe this to be very one sided and not efficient, since in order to maximize profits a business deal has to be long-term. Sooner or later one of  the competing brands could offer our buyers a better agreement and we would be out of business, so I would call this a ‘lose-lose situation’. Another option would be the exact opposite from ‘Ex works’ where the seller mantains most of the obligations and expenses while there is minimum for the buyere. This would be a DDP, here the â€Å"seller is responsible for delivering the goods to the named place in the country of the buyer, and pas all costs in bringing the goods to the destination including import duties and taxes. Seller is not responsible for unloading.† t his is also very one sided. My belief is that if we are going to have a long lasting relationship with our business partner we have to compromise, and here we would be taking all most of the bourden of the business deal. Solution As already stated before, in order to create a long lasting relationship with our business partners and maximize profits we have to compromize. Chiquita Banana is trying to gain marketshare in Europe, so the best thing we can do with our business partners is to share the transportation burden and costs. Deliverd at Terminal (DAT) incoterm would be the best viable solution for Chiquita and our buyers. We can promise to deliver the product fresh, safe and sound to the following city ports: Gothenburg, Brighton, Skagen, Porto and Le Havre. We can accept all costs and risks (except for import clearance costs) and from each terminal they can send the bananas to their respective distribution centers or directly to the retailers. That is up to our business partners to decide. It is safe to say that we are taking most of the costs, since it is expensive to cross the atlantic with ships and maintain the fruit at a certain temperature to keep it fresh. But in order to have our buyers support, we have to go the extra mile. This strategy at the same time will speed up the process of internationalization and market share gain for Chiquita Banana. Works Cited European Union. Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 20 Oct. 2013. Web. 20 Oct. 2013 Economy of the European Union. Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 18 Oct. 2013. Web. 20 Oct. 2013 Economy of the European Union. Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 18 Oct. 2013. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. Intelligent Approaches to Achieving Pesticide-free Produce. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. CHAPTER 3 BANANA IMPORTING COUNTRIES AND TRADE POLICIES. The World Banana Economy, 1985-2002. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. Water: Charging Full Cost Can Encourage More Efficient Use. —. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. Chiquita.com Chiquita Organic Bananas: Organic Food. Chiquita.com Chiquita Organic Bananas: Organic Food. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. Europe Largest Banana Importer Worldwide. Europe Largest Banana Importer Worldwide. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. Chiquita.com Social Responsibility Is How We Conduct Business. Chiquita.com Social Responsibility Is How We Conduct Business. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. Chiquita Banana Sales Remain Weak in Europe. Chiquita Banana Sales Remain Weak in Europe. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2013 Chiquita Brands International. Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 20 Oct. 2013. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. Banana. Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 20 Oct. 2013. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. Martin Stott. Iceland: Europe’s Biggest Producer of Bananas. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. Economy of the European Union. Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 18 Oct. 2013. Web. 20 Oct. 2013.

Jonathan Larsons Influence On Musical Theatre Theatre Essay

Jonathan Larsons Influence On Musical Theatre Theatre Essay To demonstrate how a practitioner influenced the development of Musical Theatre, there will be an in depth analysis of Jonathan Larsons works Rent and Tick, TickBoom, which will show how his style influenced other modern practitioners that got some of their ideas based on his works and how his works were influenced by other practitioners in the beginning. Jonathan Larson was indeed a remarkable writer and composer who had his own stories to tell. Although his death came too early, his success can still be seen in his greatest work, the musical Rent and it may be said that As an artist, Jonathan Larsons discovered his passion for music following Elton John and Billy Joel, but it was musical theatre that caught his eye while his parents introduced him to the musical Fiddler on the Roof. As he later on said by himself, he always wanted to write music that could incorporate all of these influences. The path lead him to a four year drama major, but it was the composing that was his main interest and soon enough he started writing music for school productions. During his college years Jonathan Larson got in contract with the composer Stephen Sondheim, who was also his strongest musical theatre influence and later on his mentor. Sondheim told him later that Never the less he didnt go on as an actor and took a step into the composing world,he was still a struggling artist who spend years living his life working as a waiter just to pay his bills, while writing numerous theatrical pieces with a poor success story. With the musical Tick, TickBoom, which was an autobiographical work of Larsons life and was reflecting his alter ego, he finally got recognized, but still not the way he wanted to. As Siegel describes the show in New York times The songs and stories were half-funny and half-bitter tales of bad readings and waiting tables. He addressed his disappointment with putting the sho w of in 1994. But there was still no reason for him to give up, especially when he got into collaboration with Billy Aronson, a playwrighter who played around with the idea of updating Puccinis opera La Boheme. The project didnt get started until 1991, when Larson felt the need to tell the story about his friends who were diagnosed with AIDS. Larson stated himself while he was still alive and that truly represent the path that Rent went since the beginning of the show till this day. Many links between the big success of the show and Larsons death have been made during the time, but it is not said for sure that his death is the cause for such a big success of the musical Rent. The only thing that can be said for sure is, that the show is popular as the numerous amounts of awards that the show won present. , said by Wilson Jermaine Heredi, an actor of the original cast from Rent, shows that Rent really was a new era in theatre. Never before was there a musical telling a story about HI V infected people, drugs and homosexuals. The reviews for the show were well received, as reported in New York times. But it was the audience who gave Jonathan Larson a chance and made Rent to what it is today, an award winning musicals. A musical that is different to others, because it represents Even though Rent is a parallel to Puccinis 1896 opera La Boheme, Jonathan Larson took the idea and collaborated with Billy Areson and transformed it into a contemporary story that was never told before. The audience can get the chance to watch two pieces back-to back in a one repertoire and see the show not only as a good composers work but as an artistic creation. Artistic creation which illuminates Jonathan Larsons brilliance, never the less Rent owes a lot to Stephen Sondheims work. Not that he was reproducing his ideas in his style, There are many similarities to Stephen Sondheims work Company, but they show the extreme contrast. The setting was changed from Upper West side to the Lowe r East side, as well as the characters which are presented as a poverty line of multicultural young people that are homosexual, drug addicts or over the top minded. It can be said that the shows are similar in the way how Stephen Sondheim and Jonathan Larson presented New York and their ideas. Not only did Sondheims influence reflect in Jonathan Larsons Rent in the comparison to Company, but also his musical Sunday in the Park with George. Theres a common theme in both shows which demonstrate a central character that has went away from finishing something that is important forbidden personal relationship. Both shows describe that Never the less, nothing can take Larsons accomplishment away. He was a great composer and writer who was able to take Sondheims ideas and recreate them with his own style. This indicates how big of an impact Stephen Sondheim made on Larson. In an interview for New York Times, Stephen Sondheim later spoke about Jonathan Larson and said that a great musical t heatre composer . Stephen Sondheim as his mentor encouraged him while he was still alive to get involved with the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers. Jonathan Larson described it as , but he appreciated the experience later, because it gave him a chance to meet new composers and that gave him more confidence in his work. At the point when he has later written more material he said Rent is classified as a rock musical, because of its rock influence. Examples of such musicals are Hair and Spring Awakening, which are both linked to Rent. It can be said that Hair was a big influence on Rent, because of the impact it made in that era, when people werent talking about drugs and hippies. Hair made a big statement at that time as did Rent. Both musicals told a story of confusion in each generation. Both works may be seen as generational anthems. Not because of the protest, but of its finally, youthful enthusiasm, even when the youth in question is at risk. Hair can be seen as a mile stone for Rent, which later impacted on Spring Awakening. Although Spring Awakening was already written in 1891 as a play, it s shocking story of acknowledgement of adolescent sexuality broke ground aesthetically, going beyond naturalism to presage expressionism. Since times have changed and today society is more open minded to the ethnological, sexual, and all other controversial aspects of human life, the effects of Spring Awakening as well as Rent have changed. In Spring Awakening the characters are still experiencing their awakening spring of sexuality and a couple of scenes might still surprise the audience, but in general todays community is more used to that on stage now. As Rent made theatrical history with transporting Puccinis La Boheme to New York, Spring Awakening made its own kind of history by putting a modern spin on a controversial play. It can be said that Rent had its influences and went on passing that to other musicals. Although Jonathan Larson didnt get the chance to witness the success of his lifes work, he left behind two remarkable musicals, which are both in subject matter unmistakable. Similaritys in Tick, tickBoom, especially in the characters, for which may seem they are sometimes show that Jonathan Larsons work had a deeper meaning and a thought of memories of his lost friends. As a composer his answer to the acknowledgement that he has just lost people that he loves was to write something in response. He later on said,Despite the fact that he never got the chance to see how his words and music inspired people, the musical Rent still goes on filling theatres with his story and the affect that he left behind may be seen in new works appearing on the stage. Jonathan Larson wanted to give all a lesson about how to go on in the time of great loss and not anything for granted.

Smoking Cigarettes Essay -- Argumentative Persuasive Example Essays

Thank you for your warm welcome. Good afternoon. David, thank you for your introduction. To David, Dr. Cynthia Callard and all the others in the organization known as Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada, thank you for having invited me to be part of this day. Also, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak with you about our common commitment against smoking. And let me also say how much I admire the work that has been done by the members of the Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada. As David mentioned, because of the nature of your profession, you see up close and first hand the effects of tobacco use. You have seen its toll and you have decided to move beyond treating its symptoms to confronting its causes and by bringing your insight and your efforts from your practices to the public domain. You have made a real difference and I want to express today, on behalf of the government of Canada, our gratitude and admiration for the efforts that you have made in this important area. I know there are other groups present here today, health groups committed to reducing the level of smoking in Canada, people who have spent their time and their energy speaking out and acting. By doing so, you have earned the respect of Canadians by helping us better understand the impact of tobacco use. The example that you have set, whether through individual action or membership in groups, by speaking out, organizing, acting, and raising public awareness of these issues, you have demonstrated once again that in order to effect positive change it is not necessary to run for Parliament or to hold a senior public position. Someone once said that the highest office in a democracy is the office of citizen and by your commitment and by your actions you have fully discharged the responsibilities of that office and you have made Canada a better place. What brings us all here together is National Non-Smoking Week. This week also draws attention to the many people and groups that are active in anti-smoking initiatives. The commitment that each of you brings to non-smoking is shared by my provincial and territorial colleagues, family doctors and specialists, medical and health associations, and by municipalities, voluntary groups and individuals across Canada. As that range of participants shows, National Non-Smoking Week is very much rooted in our communities. Across Canada,... ...adversary. Smoking is addictive. Its influence sometimes seems pervasive. It is part of the daily ritual of almost seven million Canadians and it is going to take a sustained and a long term effort by all partners to achieve our public health goals. But those challenges give us every reason to get down to work and I am here today to tell you as Canada's Minister of Health that I am fully committed to our common cause. Over the years, the partnership between health ministers and health groups has produced some very substantial gains on the subject of tobacco use. Smoking bans that were thought of as radical 20 years ago are now commonplace. Public awareness of smoking risks has never been higher. And our new Tobacco Act sets a world standard for anti-tobacco legislation. It is now up to us, those of us in this room, those whom we represent, and me, as Minister of Health, to sustain that effort and to make further progress, step by step, to use all available tools as shrewdly as we can, and above all, to speak with one voice in serving notice on those who have a different interest that we shall continue until we prevail. Thank you very much for having invited me here today.

Amerigo Vespucci :: essays research papers

AMERIGO VESPUCCI (or VESPUCIO) (ves-puteh'-ee), Italian navigator, born in Florence, Italy, 9 March, 1451; died in Seville, Spain, 22 Feb., 1512. He was of a wealthy family of merchants, and received his education from his uncle, Giorgi Antonio Vespucci, a Dominican friar, a friend and colleague of Savonarola. He engaged in business, first in Florence and afterward in Seville, where he met Columbus, perhaps as early as 1493, and where in 1497 he equipped the fleet with which that navigator sailed on his third voyage. He had previously, in 1496, had charge of fitting out a fleet for the Spanish government. Amerigo sailed from Spain in 1499 in an expedition that visited the neighborhood of Cape Paria and several hundred miles of coast, and returned in June, 1500. In May, 1501, he entered the service of Emanuel, of Portugal, and participated in an expedition that visited the coast of. Brazil. hi May, 1503, he commanded a caravel in a squadron that sailed for the discovery of Malacca, but parted company from the rest, and finally made his way to the coast of Brazil, where he discovered the bay of All Saints, remained there two months, then ran 260 leagues farther south, where he built a fort, somewhere near Cape Frio, and, leaving a colony there, returned to Lisbon in June, 1504. Early in 1505 he obtained from King Ferdinand of Spain letters of naturalization, and on 22 March, 1508, was appointed pilot-major of the kingdom, an office that he held until his death, taking charge of the preparation of a general description of coasts and accounts of new discoveries, and also superintending the construction of charts and the examination of pilots. The controversy as to whether Vespucci took precedence both of the (Jabots and of Columbus in the discovery of the mainland of America has been for centuries a matter of dispute. None of the original letters of Amerigo bearing on the subject are extant, except in translations, and these differ greatly among themselves and contain inconsistencies of fact and date. It is not even known in what language the letters were written. An account by Amerigo of his voyage of 1499, said to have been written 18 July, 1500, was published by Bandini in 1745. A letter of his to Lorenzo Piero de Medici, a cousin of Lorenzo the Magnificent, describing the voyage of 1501, was published in various editions, some in Latin, others in German, and in 1789 a new text, in Italian, was discovered by Bartolozzi.

Superstitious :: Free Essay Writer

Superstitious R.L. Stine who is one of America’s best-selling authors and the devilish creator of the Fear Street and Goosebumps series of horror stories for kids. Stine is who wrote the book I read, but he came back with a book for the older generation. All of Stines ideas in his books are suggested from real life. Most of his ideas came from his imagination and his memory. He now lives in New York City with his wife Jane, and teenage son, Matthew. The story took place on a small Pennsylvania College campus. Numerous of murders had taken place. Every murder was much more gruesome than the first. The detectives didn't know what had happened. The victims looked like an out of control animal rather than a human killed them. One of the main characters in this was Sara Morgan. She had just moved to Pennsylvania or school. Everything was going just fine until she met a professor named Liam O'Connor; he was another main character. Liam had a dashing romantic figure with a Irish accent, good looks, sweet charm, and a host of Old World superstitious-all of which dazzled Sara. Plunging headlong into a sudden love affair, Sara barely had time to notice the horrible events taking place on the campus. Liam was extremely close to his sister Margaret. A little too close that is. Sara and Liam soon got married after a couple of dates. Everyone said it was strange, yet, too soon for him or her. But she claimed she was in love with him. She started receiving crank phone calls, warning her to stay away from Liam. Then she received two bloody rabbit feet in the mail saying " If you’re going to marry Liam, you’re gonna need all the luck you can get." That scared her to death. When she told Liam about it, he acted like he didn’t care. Instead he blew all up in her face because she left out the front door and came in through the back door. Lately his superstitions had been getting out of hand. And he had been getting real mad at Sara. On their wedding night they made love by the light of sixteen candles, which was one of his superstitions. They were going on, non-stop. Then he whispered in her ear that he wanted to impregnate her. She accepted the offer without really thinking.

Buddhism’s Impact on Classical China Essay

The popularity of Buddhism in China c. 220 CE was due to its positive reception in the large peasant class. However; emperors and aristocrats found themselves threatened by the relaxed Buddhist teachings that undermined the authority of the pro-Confucian government and weakened peasant work ethic. Although the anti-Buddhist opinions of high-ranking officials in the 3rd-6th centuries of China should be taken into consideration, a peasant-written document highlighting the benefits of Buddhism in contrast to the defensive viewpoints taken by emperors and aristocrats would be helpful in analyzing the true extent of Buddhism’s popularity in China. Around 350 CE, a time of instability in China, peasants found comfort in the teachings of Buddhism, which unlike Confucianism offered an afterlife the threatened peasants could look forward to. This led to many conversions from Confucianism to Buddhism, which worried rulers; a loss of popular belief in the state-backed religion could potentially undermine the government and result in a loss of power for many bureaucrats. Han Yu, a court official in 819 CE, refers to the spread of this wicked â€Å"cult† from India and repeatedly presses that Buddhism be eradicated in China (Doc 4). The Tang emperor Wu, writing during roughly the same period, (845 CE), mirrors the opinion of Han Yu. He speaks of Buddhism negatively, citing the lax work ethic of Buddhists, and like Han Yu, he calls for the uprooting of Buddhism from China (Doc 6). However; behind both these officials’ vehement words is a fear that the popularization of Buddhism would alter the government structure, which would cause loss of their status. They wrote their edicts to change the minds of peasants who were considering converting to this â€Å"cult† because perhaps if they convinced enough to remain Confucian, they would keep their high-ranking positions. Buddhism gained much of its popularity during the tumultuous era from 350-570 CE. This is when pro-Buddhist scholars began appearing in greater numbers. One such scholar, Zhi Dun, identified Buddhism as a means of getting through trying times. Around 350 CE, the beginning of the unstable  period, Zhi wrote a letter describing the wonder of the afterlife promised by Buddha. He wrote this to comfort the thousands of fearful and spiritually deprived Confucian Chinese, who lacked belief in an afterlife. Their death was a growing possibility, because they were being slaughtered by invading Mongols. Zhi wished to inform them of the alternative afterlife promised through Buddhism; â€Å"Nirvana† (Doc 2). The same teachings Zhi was addressing to the Chinese peasantry had already been spoke by the Buddha himself to the Indian people many centuries before c. 563 BCE. The first sermon Buddha gave spoke of Noble Truths, which could stop sorrow and craving (Doc 1). One can see why these ideas, embodied by Buddhism would be popular among a poor Chinese peasantry, just as they had been in India. Although the general impression from Chinese officials and scholars towards Buddhism is negative, there were a few discrepancies; Chinese scholars who favored Buddha’s teachings. A Chinese scholar wrote positively in 500 CE of the Buddha in comparison to Confucius, stating â€Å"To compare the sages to the Buddha would be like comparing a white deer to a unicorn†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Doc 3). Moreover, around 800 CE, after the period of instability, a scholar favored by the Tang imperial household wrote an essay on the nature of man, stating boldly that â€Å"Confucius, Laozi, and the Buddha were all perfect sages,† (Doc 5). This document highlights that once the era of instability had passed and Confucianism was again the dominant religion, rulers and their court scholars could evaluate Buddhism as a religion without fearful prejudice. In conclusion, historically, the spread of Buddhism into China was regarded negatively by the ruling, high-ranking, and aristocratic class. China was inundated with anti-Buddhist propaganda (shown by the documents) in response to the popularity among the majority of the peasantry, which made up the bulk of the Chinese population. This propaganda was typically anti-Buddhist because it was the upper/literate class who was writing it; consequently it was slanted towards their own negative views on Buddhism. A document written by a very poor or peasant scholar regarding their view of Buddhism would create a more complete picture of how it was really received in China.

Human Cloning Essay

Introduction: The possibility of human cloning, raised when Scottish scientists at Roslin Institute created the much-celebrated sheep â€Å"Dolly†, aroused worldwide interest and concern because of its scientific and ethical implications. The feat, cited by Science magazine as the breakthrough of 1997, also generated uncertainty over the meaning of â€Å"cloning† –an umbrella term traditionally used by scientists to describe different processes for duplicating biological material. Given this information, you may ask, or maybe right now, you are wondering what actually â€Å"cloning† is. Biology defines cloning as the process of producing similar populations of genetically identical individuals that occurs in nature when organisms such as bacteria, insects or plants reproduce asexually. However, in Biotechnology, cloning is all about copying DNA fragments to produce a perfect â€Å"clone† of the specimen. Derived from the ancient greek word klon, meaning twig, it refers to the process whereby a new plant can be created from a twig. In this research paper, my main goal is to make you understand and answer our questions on what cloning really is all about, and how it will affect our lives once it is successfully done. Yes, I have my questions as well regarding the process, and the main reason this is the topic I chose is because the idea seems to be both simple and complex at the same time. As to why, I will be answering that as we dig deeper into the topic. Lastly, before we move to the next part of this very interesting research, you may want to know that â€Å"cloning† does not refer only to a single process. It has it’s own complexities, and there are several processes and methods in which cloning is divided and categorized. And now, into the topic we go. Historical Background: As a scientific and technical possibility, human cloning has emerged as an outgrowth of discoveries or innovations in developmental biology, genetics, assisted reproductive technologies, animal breeding, and, most recently, research on embryonic stem cells. Assisted reproductive techniques in humans accomplished the in vitro fertilization of a human egg, yielding a zygote and developing embryo that could be successfully implanted into a woman’s uterus to give rise to a live-born child. Animal breeders developed and refined these techniques with a view to perpetuating particularly valuable animals and maintaining laboriously identified genomes. Most recently, the isolation of embryonic stem cells and their subsequent in vitro differentiation into many different cell types have opened up possibilities for repairing and replacing diseased or nonfunctioning tissue, and thus possible research uses for cloned human embryos. The German embryologist Hans Spemann conducted what many co nsider to be the earliest â€Å"cloning† experiments on animals. Spemann was interested in answering a fundamental question of biological development: does each differentiated cell retain the full complement of genetic information present initially in the zygote? In the late 1920s, he tied off part of a cell containing the nucleus from a salamander embryo at the sixteen-cell stage and allowed the single cell to divide, showing that the nucleus of that early embryo could, in effect, â€Å"start over.† In a 1938 book, Embryonic Development and Induction, Spemann wondered whether more completely differentiated cells had the same capacity and speculated about the possibility of transferring the nucleus from a differentiated cell – taken from either a later-stage embryo or an adult organism – into an enucleated egg. As he explained it: â€Å"Decisive information about this question may perhaps be afforded by an experiment which appears, at first sight, to be somewhat fantastical. This experiment might possibly show that even nucle i of differentiated cells can initiate normal development in the egg protoplasms.† But Spemann did not know how to conduct such an experiment. Research with frogs fourteen years later encouraged progress toward the â€Å"fantastical experiment.† In 1952, the American embryologists Robert Briggs and Thomas J. King first successfully transferred nuclei from early embryonic cells of leopard frogs to enucleated leopard frog eggs. The â€Å"activated egg† began to divide and develop, became a multicellular embryo, and then became a tadpole. Embryologists in other  laboratories successfully repeated these initial experiments on different species of frogs. But additional experience also showed that the older and more differentiated a donor cell becomes, the less likely it is that its nucleus would be able to direct development. In 1962, the British developmental biologist John Gurdon reported that he had produced sexually mature frogs by transferring nuclei from intestinal cells of tadpoles into enucleated frog eggs. The experiments had a low success rate and remained controversial. Gurdon continued this work in the 1970s, and he was able to produce tadpoles by transferring the nucleus of adult frog skin cells into enucleated frog eggs. Later experiments established that many factors in addition to the intact nucleus are crucial to success. In retrospect, it is surprising that any of these earlier exper iments produced positive results. But despite their low success rates, these experiments demonstrated that the nucleus retained its full complement of genetic information and encouraged later investigators to explore mammalian cloning. The birth of Louise Brown in 1978, the first baby conceived through in vitro fertilization (IVF), was also an important milestone, because it demonstrated that human birth was possible from eggs that were fertilized outside the body and then implanted into the womb. As for the possibility of cloning animals from adult cells – especially mammals – the work in the intervening years focused largely on the reprogramming of gene expression in somatic cells, the transfer of nuclei taken from embryos in mammals (beginning with mice in the 1980s), and finally the work of Ian Wilmut and his colleagues at the Roslin Institute with adult nuclei, which led to the birth of Dolly on July 5, 1996. Since then, similar success has been achieved in cloning other mammalian species, including cattle, goats, pigs, mice, cats, and rabbits. The animal cloners did not set out to develop techniques for cloning humans. Wilmut’s goal was to replicate or perpetuate animals carrying a valuab le genome (for example, sheep that had been genetically modified to produce medically valuable proteins in their milk). Others, such as the cloners of the kitten CC, were interested in commercial ventures for the cloning of pets.6 Yet the techniques developed in animals have encouraged a small number of infertility therapists to contemplate and explore efforts to clone human children. And, following the announcement in 1998 by James Thomson and his associates of their isolation of human  embryonic stem cells, there emerged an interest in cloned human embryos, not for reproductive uses but as a powerful tool for research into the nature and treatment of human disease. So what does this mean? Having successfully cloning â€Å"Dolly† the sheep? I will be discussing that as we go further with the research. Let me present to you now some historical data regarding the actually topic â€Å"human cloning†. Here is an actually timeline of cloning processes that has been recorded throughout the past century: Cloning Timeline| 1885| August Weismann, professor of zoology and comparative anatomy at the University of Freiberg, theorized that the genetic information of a cell would diminish as the cell went through differentiation.| 1888| Wilhelm Roux tested the germ plasm theory for the first time. One cell of a 2-cell frog embryo was destroyed with a hot needle; the result was a half-embryo, supporting Weismann’s theory.| 1894| Hans Dreisch isolated blastomeres from 2- and 4-cell sea urchin embryos and observed their development into small larvae. These experiments were regarded as refutations of the Weismann-Roux theory.| 1901| Hans Spemann split a 2-cell newt embryo into two parts, resulting in the development of two complete larvae.| 1902| Walter Sutton published â€Å"On the Morphology of the Chromosome Group in Brachyotola magna†, hypothesizing that chromosomes carry the inheritance and that they occur in distinct pairs within a cell’s nucleus. Sutton also argued that how chromosome s act when sex cells divide was the basis for the Mendelian Law of Heredity.| 1902| German embryologist Hans Spemann split a 2-celled salamander embryo and each cell grew to adulthood, providing proof that early embryo cells carry necessary genetic information. This finally disproved Weismann’s 1885 theory that the amount of genetic information in cells decreases with each division.| 1914| Hans Spermann conducted and early nuclear transfer experiment.| 1928| Hans Spemann performed further, successful nuclear transfer experiments.| 1938| Hans Spemann published the results of his 1928 primitive nuclear transfer experiments involving salamander embryos in the book â€Å"Embryonic Development and Induction.† Spemann argued the next step for research should be the cloning organisms by extracting the nucleus of a differentiated cell and putting it into an enucleated egg.| 1944| Oswald Avery found that a  cell’s genetic information was carried in DNA.| 1950| First successful freezing of bull semen at -79 °C for later insemination of cows was accomplished.| 1952| First animal cloning: Robert Briggs and Thomas J. King cloned northern leopard frogs.| 1953| Francis Crick and James Watson ,working at Cambridge’s Cavendis h Laboratory, discovered the structure of DNA.| 1962| Biologist John Gurdon announced that he had cloned South African frogs using the nucleus of fully differentiated adult intestinal cells. This demonstrated that cells’ genetic potential do not diminish as the cell became specialized.| 1962 – 65| Robert G. McKinnell, Thomas J. King, and Marie A. Di Berardino produced swimming larvae from enucleated oocytes that had been injected with adult frog kidney carcinoma cell nuclei.| 1963| Biologist J.B.S. Haldane coined the term â€Å"clone† in a speech entitled â€Å"Biological Possibilities for the Human Species of the Next Ten-Thousand Years.†| 1964| F.C. Steward grew a complete carrot plant from a fully differentiated carrot root cell.| 1966| Marshall Niremberg, Heinrich Mathaei, and Severo Ochoa broke the genetic code, discovering what codon sequences specified each of the twenty amino acids.| 1966| John B. Gurdon and V. Uehlinger grew adult frogs after injecting tadpole intestinal cell nuclei into enucleated oocytes.| 1967| DNA ligase, the enzyme responsible for binding together strands of DNA, was isolated. 1969| James Shapiero and Johnathan Beckwith announced that they had isolated the first gene.| 1970| Howard Temin and David Baltimore each independently isolated the first restriction enzyme.| 1972| Paul Berg combined the DNA of two different organisms, thus creating the first recombinant DNA molecules.| 1973| Stanley Cohen and Herbert Boyer created the first recombinant DNA organism using recombinant DNA techniques pioneered by Paul Berg. Also known as gene splicing, this technique that allows scientists to manipulate the DNA of an organism – the basis of genetic engineering.| 1977| Karl Illmensee and Peter Hoppe created mice with only a single parent.| 1978| David Rorvik published the novel In His Image: The Cloning of a Man.| 1978| Baby Louise, the first child conceived throughin vitro fertilization, was born.| 1979| Karl Illmensee claimed to have cloned three mice.| 1980| In the case Diamond v. Chakrabarty, the United States Supreme Court  ruled that a â€Å"live, human made microorganism is patentable material.†| 1983| Kary B. Mullis developed the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in 1983. This process allows for the rapid synthesis of designated fragments of DNA.| 1983| Davor Solter and David McGrath tried to clone mice using their own version of the nuclear transfer method.| 1983| The first human mother-to-mother embryo transfer was completed.| 1983 – 86| Marie A. Di Berardino, Nancy H. Orr, and Robert McKinnell transplanted nuclei of adult frog erythrocytes, thus obtained pre-feeding and feeding tadpoles.| 1984| Steen Willadsen cloned a sheep from embryo cells, the first verified example of mammal cloning using the process of nuclear transfer.| 1985| Steen Willadsen used his cloning technique to duplicate prize cattle embryos. | 1985| Ralph Brinster created the first transgenic livestock: pigs that produced human growth hormone.| 1986| Using differentiated, one week old embryo cells, Steen Willadsen cloned a cow.| 1986| Artificially inseminated surrogate mother Mary Beth Whitehead gave birth to Baby M. She tried and failed to retain custody.| 1986| Neal First, Randal Prather, and Willard Eyestone used early embryo cells to clone a cow.| October 1990| The National Institutes of Health officially launched the Human Genome Project to locate the 50,000 to 100,000 genes and sequence the estimated 3 billion nucleotides of the human genome.| 1993| M. Sims and N.L. First reported the creation of calves by transfer of nuclei from cultured embryonic cells.| 1993| Human embryos were first cloned.| July 1995| Ian Wilmut and Keith Campbell used differentiated embryo cells to clone two sheep, named Megan and Morag.| July 5, 1996| Dolly, the first organism ever to be cloned from adult cells, was born.| February 23, 1997| Scientists at the Roslin Institute in Scotland officially announced the birth of â€Å"Dolly†| March 4, 1997| President Clinton proposed a five year moratorium on federal and privately funded human cloning research.| July 1997| Ian Wilmut and Keith Campbell, the scientists who created Dolly, also created Polly, a Poll Dorset lamb cloned from skin cells grown in a lab and genetically altered to contain a human gene.| August 1997| President Clinton proposed legislation to ban the cloning of humans for at least 5 years.| September 1997| Thousands of biologists and physicians signed a voluntary five-year moratorium on human cloning in the United States.| December 5, 1997| Richard Seed announced that he intended to clone a human before federal laws could effectively prohibit the process.| early January 1998| Nineteen European nations signed a ban on human cloning.| January 20, 1998| The Food and Drug Administration announced that it had authority over human cloning.| July 1998| Ryuzo Yanagimachi, Toni Perry, and Teruhiko Wakayama announced that they had cloned 50 mice from adult cells since October, 1997.| January 1998| Botechnology firm Perkin-Elmer Corporation announced that it wold work with gene sequencing expert J. Craig Venture to privately map the human genome.| Should be interesting enough, right? So in 1998 there was actually a major advancement in the field of genealogy which took us a step closer towards human cloning. â€Å"The Human Genome†. The genome of homosapiens stored in 23 chromosome pairs, was launched – 30 years after the successful deciphering of the DNA code which was done in 1968. It came as a major boost for the much-aspired practice of human cloning. Even though animal cloning was still in it’s infancy stage, several scientists attempted to clone the human cells. In 2002, Clonaid – a human cloning company founded in 1997, revealed that it had sucessfully cloned humans, and made public a picture of a baby which was allegedly the first clone human, named Eve. The company followed up with more of such revelations, but it was difficult to assess the credibility of these claimsas they refused to undergo a DNA test of the mother and child. More of such claims also surfaced, though none were credible enough. Human Cloning Prohibition Act Just when things were falling in place and we were close to the development of a human clone, a major setback came in the form of the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2009, which deemed cloning unlawful, unethical and an immoral activity. The opposition to cloning of humans came from scientific community, which was not satisfied with the results of animal cloning, and the religious communities, which believe that the cloning of humans is an activity which interferes with human life and procreation. Due to the much-debated ethical issues of cloning, both reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning are opposed, and even banned in some countries, today. The fraternity of pro-cloning scientists and researchers though, are hoping that human cloning will be legalized some time soon – after which they can get back to their labs, and continue experiments related to the same. Though the death of various cloned animals has questioned the practice of cloning time and again, each of these experiments has put humans one step towards the seemingly impossible goal of successfully cloning its own kind. Techniques/Methods of Cloning: * Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer The term somatic cell nuclear transfer refers to the transfer of the nucleus from a somatic cell to an egg cell. A somatic cell is any cell of the body other than a germ (sex) cell. An example of a somatic cell would be a blood cell, heart cell, skin cell, etc. In this process, the nucleus of a somatic cell is removed and inserted into an unfertilized egg that has had its nucleus removed. The egg with its donated nucleus is then nurtured and divides until it becomes an embryo. The embryo is then placed inside a surrogate mother and develops inside the surrogate. * The Roslin Technique The Roslin Technique is a variation of somatic cell nuclear transfer that was developed by researchers at the Roslin Institute. The researchers used this method to create Dolly. In this process, somatic cells (with nuclei in tact) are allowed to grow and divide and are then deprived of nutrients to induce the cells into a suspended or dormant stage. An egg cell that has had its nucleus removed is then placed in close proximity to a somatic cell and both cells are shocked with an electrical pulse. The cells fuse and the egg is allow to develop into an embryo. The embryo is then implanted into a surrogate. * The Honolulu Technique The Honolulu Technique was developed by Dr. Teruhiko Wakayama at the University of Hawaii. In this method, the nucleus from a somatic cell is removed and injected into an egg that has had its nucleus removed. The egg is bathed in a chemical solution and cultured. The developing embryo is then implanted into a surrogate and allowed to develop. We’re done discussing the historical background of human cloning. And â€Å"cloning† also in the general sense was also, at the very least, has been thoroughly defined. I hope this has been informative enough to shed some light as to how cloning was little by little, brought into the mainstream of scientific breakthroughs. Moving on to the next part, I will now discussed the problems associated with human cloning. Statement of the Problem: The main problem on human cloning is that there has been no advancement to the process since the â€Å"genome†. And even though it was a major advancement, the process remains very inconsistent and very risky in many of it’s aspects, and there had been many issues regarding it. Conflicts about it’s ethical and moral implications are popped out the moment human cloning has been brought into the frontlines of scientific studies. We, as people have different cultures and traditions and these factors greatly influence the advancement of cloning in a far deeper sense. The question is, what exactly are the risks of cloning? Reproductive cloning is expensive and highly inefficient. More than 90% of cloning attempts fail to produce viable offspring. More than 100 nuclear transfer procedures could be required to produce one viable clone. In addition to low success rates, cloned animals tend to have more compromised immune function and higher rates of infection, tumor growth, and other disorders. Japanese studies have shown that cloned mice live in poor health and die early. About a third of the cloned calves born alive have died young, and many of them were abnormally large. Many cloned animals have not lived long enough to generate good data about how clones age. Appearing healthy at a young age unfortunately is not a good indicator of long-term survival. Clones have been known to die mysteriously. For example, Australia’s first cloned sheep appeared healthy and energetic on the day she died, and the results from her autopsy failed to determine a cause of death. In 2002, researchers at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts, reported that the genomes of cloned mice are compromised. In analyzing more than 10,000 liver and placenta cells of cloned mice, they discovered that about 4% of genes function abnormally. The abnormalities do not arise from mutations in the genes but from changes in the normal activation or expression of certain genes. Problems also may result from programming errors in the genetic material from a donor cell. When an embryo is created from the union of a sperm and an egg, the embryo receives copies of most genes from both parents. A process called â€Å"imprinting† chemically marks the DNA from the mother and father so that only one copy of a gene (either the maternal or paternal gene) is turned on. Defects in the genetic imprint of DNA from a single donor cell may lead to some of the developmental abnormalities of cloned embryos. From these information, it gives us the impression that cloning is too risky and many people believe that it is quite impossible to clone a human being when the results of the trial conducted are not very compelling and satisfactory. In fact, in some cases, the thought of cloning a human instills fear on most religious people because of their belief of the Divine and the laws in conjunction with their beliefs. Another question arises, thus creating more conflict and even bigger arguments about the process. Should humans be cloned? Physicians from the American Medical Association and scientists with the American Association for the Advancement of Science have issued formal public statements advising against human reproductive cloning. The U.S. Congress has considered the passage of legislation that could ban human cloning. Due to the inefficiency of animal cloning (only about 1 or 2 viable offspring for every 100 experiments) and the lack of understanding about reproductive cloning, many scientists and physicians strongly believe that it would be unethical to attempt to clone humans. Not only do most attempts to clone mammals fail, about 30% of clones born alive are affected with â€Å"large-offspring syndrome† and other debilitating conditions. Several cloned animals have died prematurely from infections and other complications. The same problems would be expected in human cloning. In addition, scientists do not know how cloning could impact mental development. While factors such as intellect and mood m ay not be as important for a cow or a mouse, they are crucial for the development of healthy humans. With so many unknowns concerning reproductive cloning, the attempt to clone humans at this time is considered potentially dangerous and ethically irresponsible. The problems are quite disturbing and it require lots of critical thinking, analysis, arguments, debates, etc. to point out the quintessence of the cloning problems. I would like to add a personal touch into the next part,  the causes and effects. Causes and Effects: Now, let’s view the concept in a much bigger perspective. At first, I had problems analyzing what may be the real cause(s) of the problems about the cloning process, and what are the implications of human cloning failures. So by gathering more significant information and resources, I was able to cite several causes as well as the effects of the problems I stated in a broad concept. All the talk in recent years about the possibility of cloning human beings has everyone a little unsettled. Even those most enthusiastic about the project speak in cautious, albeit hopeful and optimistic, terms. Most folks aren’t quite sure what to make of the prospect of â€Å"engineering† human beings, although they are a little troubled by the thought, while not a few are very concerned, and some even outraged, over the very idea. It’s good that there is a certain amount of tension in the air over the subject of human cloning, for in many ways it seems we may be about to rush in to something without giving adequate consideration of the ethical, moral, and even spiritual aspects of the proposal. It’s one thing to clone a sheep, or a pig. We’re accustomed to the idea of manipulating the genes and jeopardizing the well being of beasts for the sake of possibly improving the lot of human beings. It’s another thing to be talking about creating new people out of select gene pools for what can often sound like rather elitist purposes. Alarming terms such as â€Å"eugenics† and â€Å"master race† spring to mind. From a Biblical and Christian point of view there are at least three problems associated with the human cloning project. The prospect of engineering new human beings out of existing gene banks raises serious red flags in three important areas. * The hubris of science First is the area of scientific hubris. Following the flood the Lord, surveying the arrogant attempt of fallen men to build a city and tower to celebrate their own technological genius and ability, lamented that, having begun on such a hubristic path, humans would not be restrained to do whatever their fertile—albeit fallen—imaginations might concoct (Gen. 11:6). Modern science has often proceeded on the idea â€Å"if we can do it, we may,  and probably even should.† That kind of thinking has produced many of the marvels and wonders of modern science and technology; it has also contributed to the pollution of the environment, growing stockpiles of hazardous waste, and the threat to the continuation of civilization itself posed by the existence, and growing proliferation of, weapons of mass destruction. It borders on the realm of presumed omniscience, the kind of attitude that says, â€Å"We’re scientists, and we know what we’re doing; we don†™t have to listen to anybody other than ourselves.† Yet such a prerogative surely belongs to God alone. At present a lively discussion is underway over the ethical, moral, and spiritual implications of human cloning. Just because the technology is available—or, at least, nearly available—does not mean scientists should rush to do something the ramifications of which we have not carefully considered through thoughtful, patient discussions in the public square. President Bush was wise, in the summer of 2001, to set the brakes of the engine of the human cloning industry before it accelerated to runaway speed on a downhill curve with disaster as a very real possible outcome. But the pressure on scientists and labs to be â€Å"the first† in scientific discovery has led many technicians to take their research and experimentation to other venues, beyond the reach of Uncle Sam (or Uncle George). Our American culture has, in the past, rewarded the pride-driven efforts of scientists to be the first on their block with some new discovery or other. We award lavish prizes, put people’s faces on the cover of newsmagazines, celebrate them in the schools of the land, and otherwise make every effort to make them household names. What informed American does not know the names of people like Einstein, Pauling, Crick and Watson, and Hawking? Perhaps we should consider coming up with a prize for scientific restraint, awarding those scientists with the Mantle of Wisdom, let’s say, who, after hearing the opinions of sociologists, ethicists, and theologians (among others) determine that their current research project is better off left incomplete. * Human reductionism The second problem area, from a Biblical and Christian perspective, relates to the view of human beings that pervades and drives the human cloning project. Years of animal experimentation in the development of drugs and  treatments have solidified in the minds of many people that humans are just like animals, only a little more complex (all those feelings and stuff). We’ve been conditioned to believe that if we can make this thing work with animals then it’s probably safe, if not outright good, for humans. That’s why we sent monkeys up in space capsules before humans, and why we study lab rats to figure out how to produce happier and more obedient children. I’m not endorsing this practice across the board, mind you, just commenting on its ubiquity and general acceptance as a pathway forapplying the knowledge and technologies of science to questions of human well being. In the minds of many of our contemporaries cloning humans should be no problem once scientists have proven that we can clone animals safely and with beneficial results. But for Christians this is a serious problem, for we understand the Scriptures to teach that human beings are not simply advanced animals; they are the image-bearers of God, and whatever else that means, it is a designation unique to human beings, one that animals do not share (Gen. 1:26-28). As the image-bearers of God certainly we would expect some kinds of deference, some deeper considerations to be given before we apply the fruit of anim al research directly to human beings and communities. The reductionist approach of modern evolutionary science to the question of the nature of human beings has, as recently as the last century, led to human disaster on a massive scale. Tyrants of many stripes, having reduced certain humans to a sub-human level—if only because of ethnic, philosophical, or religious differences—felt no qualms about systematically eradicating those people who had been reduced to sub-human status by their particular worldview. It is not hard to imagine that cloned human beings—for example, some that might â€Å"go wrong† —could be easily disposed of, like lab rats, or that certain types of human beings, because of â€Å"deficient gene pools† (or whatever), might be disqualified from cloning. And, hey, if they aren’t worth cloning for the betterment of humankind, then what good are they? I recall Francis Schaeffer’s chilling observation regarding the straight line from abortion to euthanasia of the eld erly to culling the population for whatever reason: â€Å"If the fetus gets in the way, ditch it. If the old person gets in the way, ditch it. If you get in the way†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Human degradation and devaluation Finally, the problem of human reductionism leads to the degradation and devaluation of human life. If the human being  amounts to little more than a shopping mall of genes, available on demand for the future betterment of the race, then the genes are more important than any individual carrier thereof. There are scientists today who insist that everything about us, everything we think, do, are, aspire to, or become, is determined by our genes. Find the right genes, the best genes, and learn to control and combine them, and you can make life better for someone†¦or for their gene pool. It would be easy to lose sight of the forest (the human person) for the sake of the trees (the genes) in such a situation, and we would be back to classifying people by recognizable gene traits—like color of skin or eyes, shape of skull, ability to reason, or whatever anybody in authority determined to be the desirable traits. People would no longer matter, just traits—just as the young people Hitler rounded up for his breeding camps did not matter as individuals, only as possible conveyors of better genes for the future realization of the â€Å"master race.† Further, the fixation on genes can lead us to believe that things like affections, minds, and consciences—the very stuff of the soul (1 Tim. 1:5)—do not exist, and, thus, need not be taken seriously in seeking to solve problems relevant to the human situation. When everything can be reduced to genes, we don’t need such archaic and useless notions as compassion, self-control, aesthetic delight, forgiveness, love, and the like. All we need are better genes. We’ll figure out how to make those genes available—perhaps in gel caps or chewable tablets—and you’ll be better in no time! And if such â€Å"gene therapies† don’t seem to take hold in you, well then, it’s apparent yo u are beyond help. Your gene pool can’t be improved. We’ll therefore have to rethink your status, what â€Å"class† of human—or subhuman—you might be. And then If human beings are not the image-bearers of God, if they are only animals, to be manipulated, improved, refined, and, yes, cloned, then there is no reason to think that any of those notions of â€Å"humanity,† â€Å"humaneness,† or â€Å"human-kindness,† ideas that had their origins in the days when we thought otherwise about the kind of beings people are, should have any more utility in the brave new world we are creating. Which makes it extremely important that Christians not sit out the current debate about cloning. The hubris of science and the momentum of an evolutionary age are stoking the boilers of the cloning industry, and the engine is building steam for a full-speed-ahead-noholds-barred plunge  over the cliff and into the abyss of postmodern anthropology. For now, the brakes are set. But the present engineer won’t always be in the cabin. The time for Christians to be speaking and working for a change in the consensus of thinking abou t cloning is now, and, as a former president once asked of his cabinet, â€Å"If not us, who; if not now, when?† Let’s now move to the next part. How was I able to gather the information I have provided aside from my personal statements and analysis? How broad is my resource in collecting the data? Furthermore, what are the boundaries and how large, really, is the topic of human cloning is? These questions will be answered shortly as we go into the next part. Scope and Limitations: By now, you should have been enlightened to the significance of this research and a far more interesting idea is that, there are still more to be discussed about the topic. If you thought that the research was still lacking sense, let me share to you more details and let us explore the dark areas covered in this research. Thus, in this part, you should be able to understand the scope of my research, before I wrap this with the limitations naturally set by the topic and also before we form a conclusion to this research. * Arguments for: Some people argue that cloning is the logical next step in reproductive technology. Identical twins are natural clones, so reproductive cloning can be regarded as a technological version of a natural process. If a couple are infertile, why shouldn’t they be able to produce clones of themselves? If a couple have lost a child, why shouldn’t they be able to replace that loved individual with a clone if that is possible? Equally if someone has made a great contribution to science, music, the arts or literature, it seems like a good idea to produce more of them in the hope that we might benefit even more from what would effectively be a much longer working life. What is more, cloning a child could produce a tissue match for treatment of a life-threatening disease. * and against: Others feel equally strongly that human cloning is completely wrong. With the state of the science as it is at the moment it would involve hundreds of damaged pregnancies to achieve one single live cloned baby. What is more, all the evidence suggests that clones are unhealthy and often have a number of built-in genetic defects which lead to premature ageing and death. It would be completely wrong to bring a child into the world knowing that it was extremely likely to be affected by problems like these. The dignity of human life and the genetic uniqueness we all have would be attacked if cloning became common place. People might be cloned unwillingly – we all leave thousands if not millions of cells around everyday as we go about our normal lives shedding skin! Who will control who gets cloned? Companies are already making money storing tissue from dead children and partners until the time that human cloning becomes available. How much scope will there be for unscrupulous deali ngs if human cloning becomes a reality? * The Politics of Human Biotechnology Human genetic and reproductive technologies pose immense challenges for the human future. If used responsibly they offer new ways to treat disease and otherwise improve the human condition. If misused, they could exacerbate existing disparities, create new forms of discrimination and inequality, and open the door to high-tech eugenic practices. In short, biotech tools and practices have the power to promote or undermine individual well-being and public health, to create private fortunes or advance the public interest, and to foster or threaten a just and fair society. New human biotechnologies are being developed very rapidly. Neither the general public nor policy makers are fully aware of the nature and magnitude of the challenges they present. Regulatory oversight is inadequate at both national and international levels. Few civil society organizations have identified the issues these technologies raise as priority concerns. The result is an accelerating stream of technological, soc ial and commercial â€Å"facts on the ground† – new products and industries, cultural icons and images, and concentrations of wealth and influence – that undermines the prospect of democratic governance of human biotechnologies. Contrary to many accounts, however, the genie is not out of the bottle. The most dangerously consequential biotechnologies have yet to be fully developed and marketed. Influential individuals and institutions are beginning to focus on the risks at hand. Responsible scientists acknowledge the need for strong societal oversight. Many countries have adopted comprehensive policies that can serve as models for others. There is no reason that people of different nations, cultures, religions and philosophies cannot work together in support of policies needed to protect our common human future. Appropriate social oversight and regulation need not impede potentially beneficial medical research and applications. The next decade is a window of opportunity during which we can forge understandings and reach agreements on national and international policies that will allow us to reap the benefits and avoid the risks of these powerful biotechnologies. * Human Cloning Animal cloning has produced some remarkable results within the last few years, which has suggested to some that there should be a way to produce a human clone within the next year. Many news articles have appeared recently highlighting the potential to clone a human baby in order to replace a loved one who died as a newborn. Many social, moral, and ethical arguments have been raised in opposition to copying a person. For more details see AMA’s 1999 CEJA Report: The Ethics of Cloning (PDF, 41KB). But perhaps more important is the concern that we do not fully understand the science behind the successes from animal cloning experiments. Animal cloning success (and failure) Dolly, the sheep, was the first successfully cloned mammal (I. Wilmut et al., Nature 1997;385:810). Since 1997, gradual improvements in cloning technology have enabled researchers to generate mouse, cattle, goat, pig, deer, rabbit, cat, mule, and horse clones. While there have been no substantiated evidence for the cloning of humans, recent successes by South Korean researchers in generating stem cells from cloned human embryos (WS Hwang et al., Science 2005) have heightened concerns that this scenario is not beyond the realm of possibility. In spite of recent technological advances, animal cloning remains extremely inefficient. For every 100 experiments only one, two, or if lucky, perhaps three appear to produce a viable offspring in surrogate mothers. While scientific explanations for these failures remain to be defined, many researchers feel they represent nothing more than technical  hurdles that will one day be solved. Even then it’s survival beyond the perinatal period is unlikely. These is no reason to believe that any different outcomes will occur if and when human cloning begins. A quick lesson in cloning technology Before going into the details of why these abnormalities are thought to occur, it is important to have a basic understanding of what in essence happens in order to clone an animal. First, a donor cell is found, which has its original DNA extracted and discarded. Next is the addition of a nucleus from the desired animal that is to be cloned. The third step involves implanting the combined cell into the animal that the donor cell was appropriated from. Understanding the abnormalities This part of the puzzle is as yet unsolved, but theories do point us in some tangible directions. Scientists believe that the resultant cloning abnormalities are not traceable to the donor nuclei, but more likely explanations involve failures in genomic reprogramming. Genomic reprogramming in the natural way prior to embryogenesis (i.e., without cloning technology) involves a stage of development of the sperm and the egg known as gametogenesis, which can take months to years to develop a mature gamete. This process is sped up during cloning, and takes only minutes to hours. The process of configuring the exact state of the inner workings of the cell including such complex processes as methylation of the DNA may not be correct for the development of the embryo. Methylation of DNA and other complex functions are now known to be essential to the correct functioning of each human cell, since they ultimately control gene expression. And thus successful cloning may be dependent upon the donated DNA being correctly altered to the state of an early embryo. It is thought by some cloning experts that failure of the nuclear clones to produce viable offspring is due to inappropriate reprogramming of cells, which leads to unregulated gene expression. Screening tools, do they exist? Because of experience with animal clones, it is reasonable to conclude that future human cloning experiments will have the same high failure rates. The public has heard reassurance that the possibility of performing prenatal  genetic screening exists as a way to control quality. If these groups plan on using current routine prenatal diagnosis for the detection of chromosomal and/or other genetic abnormalities, they will not detect the types of epigenetic disturbances that may occur with cloning. There are no extra tools in the developmental pipeline to help improve detection. Possible reaction to human cloning failures Besides the public outrage that would accompany human cloning failures would in turn hinder science and genetics, research in areas such as embryonic stem cells for the repair of organs and tissues could be negatively impacted. Research is ongoing to develop reprogramming of certain cells to turn into specific tissues types, which could regenerate nerve, muscle, and other cell types, alleviating Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and heart disease among other chronic illnesses. The potential benefits of therapeutic cell cloning are enormous, and this research should not be jeopardized with human cloning activities. Legislation Since early 1997 the United States National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) has been looking at the complex issues that surround this controversial subject. NBAC reached a conclusion in 1997, when it reported back to (Former) President Clinton, that a moratorium on human cloning would be advisable. The moratorium, which is supported by the AMA, suggests that no Federal funds be allocated for human cloning. Senator Ben Campbell (R-Co) offered a bill (April, 2001) in the Senate to bar human cloning, which will ban any attempts to clone humans, regardless of whether government or private funds are used to finance the research. If this law is violated, the penalty would be up to ten years in jail and a fine of up to $10 million. An accompanying House bill has been introduced (H.R. 1260) by Rep. Brian Kerns (R-In). White House officials have indicated that President Bush would support legislation outlawing human cloning. Bills Introduced to Congress * H.R.2560 – Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2007 * H.R.2564 – Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2007 * S. 812 – Human Cloning Ban and Stem Cell Research Protection Act of 2007 The International Perspective: There is as little consensus among nations as there is among Congress members when it comes to the issue of cloning. In fact, nations are so divided that the United Nations abandoned efforts to create a worldwide treaty on human cloning. Instead, in 2005 the U.N. adopted a resolution aiming to provide guidance to countries attempting to arrive at a position on cloning and stem cell research. Many nations, including the UK, China, and South Africa, have explicitly prohibited reproductive cloning while allowing research cloning. Fewer nations have explicitly prohibited research cloning, which (as of 2006) is allowed in 10 countries. Human Cloning Theories & Further Analysis: (Answering questions why cloning should not be prohibited.) Medical breakthroughs – Human cloning technology is expected to result in several miraculous medical breakthroughs. We may be able to cure cancer if cloning leads to a better understanding of cell differentiation. Theories exist about how cloning may lead to a cure for heart attacks, a revolution in cosmetic surgery, organs for organ transplantation, and predictions abound about how cloning technology will save thousands of lives. You can read about many of the expected medical benefits in the essay â€Å"The Benefits of Human Cloning.† Medical tragedies – Many people have suffered accidental medical tragedies during their lifetimes. Read about a girl who needs a kidney, a burn victim, a girl born with cosmetic deformities, a man who needs a liver, a woman who is infertile because of cancer, and a father who lost his only son. All these people favor cloning and want the science to proceed. To cure infertility – Infertile people are discriminated against. Men are made to feel like they are not â€Å"real men.† Women are made to feel as if they are useless barren vessels. Worse, being infertile is often not considered a â€Å"real medical problem† and insurance companies and governments are not sympathetic. The current options for infertile couples are painful, expensive, and heart-breaking. Cloning has the potential to change the world for infertile couples almost overnight. To fund research – People whose lives have been destroyed or have not been able to reproduce in this lifetime due to tragedy could arrange to have their DNA continued and fund research at the same time. For example: A boy graduates from high school at age 18. He goes to a pool party to celebrate. He confuses the deep end and  shallow end and dives head first into the pool, breaking his neck and becoming a quadriplegic. At age 19 he has his first urinary tract infection because of an indwelling urinary catheter and continues to suffer from them the rest of his life. At age 20 he comes down with herpes zoster of the trigeminal nerve. He suffers chronic unbearable pain. At age 21 he inherits a 10 million dollar trust fund. He never marries or has children. At age 40 after hearing about Dolly being a clone, he changes his will and has his DNA stored for future human cloning. His future mother will be awarded one million dollars to have him and raise him. His DNA clone will inherit a trust fund. He leaves five million to spinal cord research. He dies feeling that although he was robbed of normal life, his twin/clone will lead a better life. Bad parents – Did your parents destroy your life? Were they alcoholic, child-beating molesters? Did you never have a chance? Interest ingly, human cloning allows you the opportunity to participate in choosing the parents for your clone. A Child’s right to be better than its parents – It’s been suggested that parents have a duty to see that their children have better lives than they do. This may mean making our children live longer, helping them to be resistant to cancer, heart disease, any familial diseases, and all the other problems that can be cured using what we learn from human cloning technology. To take a step towards immortality – Human cloning essentially means taking a human being’s DNA and reversing its age back to zero. Dr. Richard Seed, one of cloning’s leading proponents, hopes that cloning will help us understand how to reverse DNA back to age 20 or whatever age we want to be. Cloning would be a step towards a fountain of youth. To make a future couple financially secure – With human cloning you could give a couple in the future both a child from your DNA and the financial assets from your lifetime to start out financially secure instead of struggling as most couples do now. Because you believe in freedom – Freedom sometimes means having tolerance for others and their beliefs. In America, some people believe gun control and some don’t. Some people believe in one religion and others in another. In a free society we know that we must tolerate some views that we don’t agree with so that we all may be free. For this reason human cloning should be allowed. To be a better parent – Human cloning can improve the parent-child relationship. Raising a clone would be like having a child with an instruction manual. You would have a head start on the needs and talents of your child. We are not saying that a clone would be a carbon copy with no individuality. Our talents and desires are genetic, developmental, and environmental. We would have a head start on understanding the genetic component of a cloned child. Endangered species could be saved – Through the research leading up to human cloning we will perfect the technology to clone animals, and thus we could forever preserve endangered species, including human beings. Animals and plants could be cloned for medical purpo  ses – Through the research leading up to human cloning, we should discover how to clone animals and plants to produce life-saving medications. You want your clone to lead the life that was meant to be yours – The Human Cloning Foundation has been surprised by the number of people that write to say that they would like to have a clone so that it may lead the life that was meant to be theirs. Typically, these are people who have suffered some terrible physical or mental handicap and feel robbed of the opportunities they should have had in life. Some see this life as a sacrifice so that the life of their clone may be enriched. To have a better sense of identity – If we had some information about ourselves, perhaps we could sooner or better discovery who we are. A clone would have access to a tremendous amount of information about his or her parent that could greatly help in understanding one’s psyche and physical attributes. All of this information could provide a better sense of identity. Because so many people want cloning – Please read the dozens of essays by people from all over the world in support of human cloning and published by the Human Cloning Foundation. Religious Freedom – At least two religions, the Raelian Religion and the Summum Religion, believe in cloning as one of their tenets. Because of the special relationship that twins ha ve – Twins often have very special relationships. While many people go through their lives never having a special relationship with another person, there are stories of twins in which they are so close they are perhaps psychically connected. More than one person has written the Human Cloning Foundation (including a twin that feels close to her identical twin) that since a clone is virtually the equivalent of an identical twin, they suspect a very special relationship would exist between a clone and its DNA parent. Some twins describe their twin relationship as more wonderful and meaningful any other relationship in  their lives. Economics – Countries that fail to research human cloning will suffer economically. The industrial revolution and Internet revolutions enriched the United States of America. Biotechnology will lead the next economic revolution. Those countries that jump in first will reap the rewards. Those who fail to begin research right away will fall behind. As an example: Japan failed to jump on the Internet bandwagon and is now playing catch-up. Japan has banned human cloning and will probably suffer by falling behind during the biotech revolution. One day in the not too far distant future, Japan may realize its mistake. Gay couples – From one of our readers: â€Å"gay couples go through so much†¦not to mention all the controversy†¦when they decide that they are ready for a baby. People question their right to bring a child that technically isn’t related to them into a lifestyle that falls below societies views of normal†¦..human cloning could allow two gay men to take 23 chromosomes from each male and put them into a single egg to truly have a baby of their own. also two gay women could use this technology to conceive a child of their own using their individual 23 chromosomes.† (To our knowledge the type of reproduction described here has not yet been done, but someday it will probably be possible.) A cure for baldness – From one of our readers: â€Å"But how about the possibility of using cloning technology to get more hair on a balding scalp. For example cloning can be used to get more hair from a few sample hair follicles or grafts from the patient’s head and then grow them†¦.later transplant the grafts where it is needed. This will eliminate the need to do an incision in back of the scalp for donor hair and will literally give the patient MORE hair.† Because the sick will demand it – Those resisting human cloning research will probably find themselves shouted down by the sick and the maimed who desperately need such research. Human cloning technology promises to cure many or all incurable diseases and the moral weight of the dying and infirm will undoubtedly sway the politicians more than the arguments of the healthy, who often remain ignorant of the potential of human cloning, because they have never been motivated by suffering to look desperately for a cure. Hope – On the Charlie Rose television show on February 14th, 2001, three anti-cloners debated against one reporter. The anti-cloners made the case for stem cell research while alleging that cloning itself would not result in any major scientific breakthroughs. It is  likely that the anti-cloners are quite wrong. Learning the process of reprogramming, differentiation, and dedifferentiation is likely to result in just as many medical miracles as stem cell research. The two lines of research go hand in hand and should complement each other. The three anti-cloners came across as people who would destroy hope. The kept alleging that things were impossible. They reminded me of the same types of people who proclaimed that cloning was impossible years ago. Furthermore, they seemed happy and willing to take away the hope of infertile couples and others with severe diseases that human cloning technology might one day lessen their suffering or save their lives. The anti-cloners also seemed to feel that they had the ability to predict the timing and course of science advancement, which history has shown to be folly. Living on through a later-born twin – Some childless people feel that by being cloned by their later-born twin would help them o r their DNA to live on in the same sense that people who have children live on. Alright! So I think I am able to gather credible information/data regarding this research. To wrap things up, human cloning may or may not be limited to the information contained in this research. The best thing to do if you are still skeptical about this research is to conduct your own and compare it with this one, or make this your guide to better understand the human cloning topic. Such a broad topic cannot be summarize in a few pages such as this, if I’m contradicting myself there, you might as well think of it deeply and you may have the answer too, that in it’s own way, really, human cloning may be explained as simply as process of creating copies of actual human beings or as complex as the information presented. Recommendation/Conclusion: This is where I get to share to you my own views, opinions, analysis, criticisms, and other things required to form an excellent conclusion to this brilliant topic. â€Å"Human Cloning† had really piqued my interest and in some way, I cannot have enough of it for myself. My recommendation is that, if you’re not satisfied with this, please do make yourself comfortable by conducting your own research, and making your own research paper about the topic. To make this brief, I really am a skeptic so I am not easily sucked into the gravity or concreteness of the information/data I have acquired. I mean, I do not easily decide whether something should be approved or not. Being a student of course, is both advantageous and disadvantageous in understanding the concept of this topic. But I’m not saying that my understanding is limited only in a short extent. What I mean, is that I cannot give a definite answer to the question I am about to leave. Instead, I can only share to you my ideas about the topic, which, I already did by discussing to you this research in both narrative and informative sort of way. Therefore, I have reached the conclusion that the understanding of the topic is still unequivocally relative to whoever reads this. I choose to let the sense of â€Å"conclusion† flow through the minds of the readers, thus making this conclusion, â€Å"conclusive† based on the understanding of each people who read this research paper of mind. Let me leave to you my final question – â€Å"to clone? Or not to clone?†