Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:03:39.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An ethical evaluation of animal biotechnology: the case of using clones in dairy cattle breeding

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

I. J. M. de Boer ,
F. W. A. Brom  and
J. M. G. Vorstenbosch
I. J. M. de Boer
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, Wageningen Agricultural University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
F. W. A. Brom
Affiliation:
University Centre for Bioethicsand Health Law, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands
J. M. G. Vorstenbosch
Affiliation:
University Centre for Bioethicsand Health Law, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands
Get access

Abstract

This paper presents an approach for ethical evaluation of biotechnology, which is illustrated by cloning in dairy cattle breeding. The approach for ethical decision-making that was followed, the so-called network model, started with determining fundamental moral principles that together constitute a framework for the detection of ethical issues in a given situation. In terms of human ethics, four fundamental principles have been defined: beneficence, non-maleficence, justice and autonomy. In the context of animal biotechnology, the same four fundamental moral principles as in humans are considered, except that autonomy is replaced by respect for the integrity of the animal. Based on a Dutch advisory committee concerning animal biotechnology, two additional principles were considered: irreversibility and veriflability. For each individual case, moral decision-making means balancing of moral intuitions, moral principles and morally relevant facts. The final outcome on moral acceptability of an action, therefore, will differ among people. The latter is demonstrated using three types of people (the ruler, the steward and the partner/participant). For each type of person, the fundamental attitude toward animals and nature is defined and a possible decision on the application of cloning in dairy cattle breeding is given. The authors' opinion, however, is that the benefits of cloning are relatively small, especially in the long term, whereas the moral drawbacks of cloning are considerable. The authors conclude that other ways of furthering animal husbandry should have priority.

Keywords

biotechnologycloningdairy cattleethics
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 61 , Issue 3 , December 1995 , pp. 453 - 463
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Advisory Committee on Ethics and Biotechnology in Animals. 1990. Report. NRLO, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Beauchamp, T. L. and Childress, J. E. 1983. Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Benner, M. 1995. Report of the committee to consider the ethical implications of emerging technologies in the breeding of farm animals. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, London.Google Scholar
Brom, F. W. A. and Schroten, E. 1993. Ethical questions around animal biotechnology. The Dutch approach. Livestock Production Science 36: 99–107.Google Scholar
Boer, I. J. M. de. 1994. The use of clones in dairy cattle breeding. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Animal Breeding, Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Boer, I. J. M. de and Arendonk, J. A. M. van. 1991. Genetic and clonal responses in closed dairy cattle nucleus schemes. Animal Production 53: 1–9.Google Scholar
Boer, I. J. M. de and Arendonk, J. A. M. van. 1994. Market share for semen and cloned embryos in dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 3691–3703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boer, I. J. M. de, Meuwissen, T. H. E. and Arendonk, J. A. M. van. 1994. Combining the genetic and clonal responses in a closed dairy cattle nucleus scheme. Animal Production 59: 345–358.Google Scholar
Colleau, J. J. 1992. Combining use of embryo sexing and cloning in closed mixed MOETS for selection in dairy cattle. Genetics Selection and Evolution 24: 345–361.Google Scholar
Frankena, W. K. 1973. Ethics. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Groen, A. F., Groot, K. de, Ploeg, J. D. van der and Roep, D. 1993. Stijlvol fokken: een oriënterende studie naar de relatie tussen sociaal-economische verscheidenheid en bedrijfsspecifieke fokdoeldefinitie. Vakgroep Veefokkerij en Rurale Sociologie, Landbouwuniversiteit Wageningen, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Hamstra, A. M. and Feenstra, M. H. 1989. Consument en biotechnologie: kennis en meningsvorming van consumenten over biotechnologie. SWOKA, Nederland.Google Scholar
Heijs, W. J. M., Midden, C. J. H. and Drabbe, R. A. J. 1993. Biotechnologie: houdingen en achtergronden. Faculteit Wijsbegeerte en Maatschappijwetenschappen, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven.Google Scholar
Hoekstra, J., Lugt, A. W. van der, Werf, J. H. J. van der and Ouweltjes, W. 1994. Genetic and phenotypic parameters for milk production and fertility traits in upgraded dairy cattle. Livestock Production Science 40: 225–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kockelkoren, P. J. H. 1993. Ethical aspects of plant biotechnology. Department of Systematic Philosophy, University of Twente, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Kolberg, R. 1993. Human embryo cloning. Science, USA 262: 652–653.Google ScholarPubMed
Linskens, H. 1992. Projectplan: biotechnologie bij dieren. Nederlandse Vereniging tot Bescherming van Dieren, Den Haag.Google Scholar
Linskens, M., Verhoog, H. and Achterberg, W. 1990. Het maakbare dier, ethiek en transgene dieren. Publikatie V 14 van de Nederlandse organisatie voor technologisch Aspectenonderzoek (NOTA), Den Haag.Google Scholar
Nicholas, F. W. and Smith, C. 1983. Increased rates of genetic change in dairy cattle by embryo transfer and splitting. Animal Production 36: 341–353.Google Scholar
Pieterse, M. C., Vos, P. L. A. M., Kruip, Th. A. M., Wilmense, A. H. and Taverne, M. A. M. 1991. Characteristics of bovine oestrous cycles during repeated transvaginal, ultrasound-guided puncturing of follicles for ovum pick up. Theriogenology 35: 401–413.Google Scholar
Rath, D. 1993. Featured article: current status of ultrasound-guided retrieval of bovine oocytes. Embryo Transfer Newsletter 11: 10–15.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 1972. A theory of justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Rutgers, L. J. E. 1993. The weal and woe of animals. Ethics of veterinary practice. Ph.D. thesis, Veterinarian Faculty, Utrecht University, Utrecht.Google Scholar
Schans, A. van der, Westerlaken, L. A. J. van der, Wit, A. A. C. de, Eyestone, W. H. and Boer, H. A. de 1991. Ultrasound-guided transvaginal collection of oocytes in the cow. Theriogenology 35: 288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schroten, E. 1992. Embryo production and manipulation: ethical aspects. Animal Reproduction Science 28: 163–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidel, G. E. 1992. Overview of cloning mammals by nuclear transfer. Proceedings of symposium on cloning mammals by nuclear transplantation (ed. Seidel, G. E.), pp. 1–4. Fort Collins, Colorado.Google Scholar
Simon, L., Bungartz, L., Rath, D. and Niemann, H. 1993. Repeated bovine oocyte collection by means of a permanently rinsed ultrasound-guided aspiration unit. Theriogenology 39: 312.Google Scholar
Staatsblad, (Official organ of the Dutch government), 1992. p. 585.Google Scholar
Teepker, G. and Smith, C. 1989. Combining clonal response and genetic response in dairy cattle improvement. Animal Production 49: 163–169.Google Scholar
Van Vleck, L. D. 1981. Potential genetic impact of artificial insemination, sex selection, embryo transfer, cloning and selfing in dairy cattle. In New technologies in animal breeding (ed. Bracket, B. C., Seidel, G. E. and Seidel, S. M.), pp. 221–242. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Vorstenbosch, J. 1993. The concept of integrity. Its significance for the ethical discussion on biotechnology and animals. Livestock Production Science 36: 109–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiepkema, P. R. 1990. Grenzen in de biotechnologie. Tijdschrift voor Diergeneeskunde 115: 586–592.Google Scholar
Willigenburg, T. van and Heeger, F. R. 1989. Justification of moral judgements: a network model. In Societas EthicaJahresbericht 1989 (ed. Ott, M.), pp. 53–61. Societas Ethica, Hannover.Google Scholar
Willigenburg, T. van, Beld, A. van den, Heeger, F. R. and Verweij, M. F. 1993. Ethiek in praktijk. Centrum voor Bioethiek en gezondheidsrecht, Van Gorcum & Comp B. V., Assen.Google Scholar
Woolliams, J. A. 1989. The value of cloning in MOET nucleus breeding schemes for dairy cattle. Animal Production 48: 31–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar