Iranian Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine

Human cloning is one of the most controversial issues in ethics. This paper, with analytic-descriptive method, deals with Kant&aposs principle of ends and permission or prohibition of human cloning from its point of view. According to Kant&aposs principle of ends, any action in which humanity is taken as a means, not as an end, is prohibited. There are different interpretations of taking humanity as an end: to do without one&aposs awareness anything, to respect human&aposs freedom and autonomy, to help his happiness and to respect the humanity of others. According to the Kant&aposs principle of ends our review shows any human cloning in which human being is taken as a means to other ends, is prohibited. Thus human cloning in order to produce many groups of humans with the same genetics and using them in war or excruciating work, to reproduce geniuses, politicians, soldiers, scientists..., produce children with ideal genotype and to replace recently died family, is prohibited. But human cloning in which humanity of produced people is taken as an end is permissible, such as cloning at the purpose of human happiness without limiting their freedom and autonomy, therapeutic cloning for producing tissue and transplant organs, for helping infertile couples and for giving birth to healthy newborns without genetic disorders.

Animal cloning is one of the animal biotechnology branches. Although this method has been used since 1950, but many have paid attention to cloning by birth of Dally. Because the way of Dolly production was completely different from other existed methods in cloning.
This new-found and unprecedented method has been called "Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer" (SCNT), so scientists have eagerly paid attention to many profitable abilities such as, duplicating valued animals traits, preventing endangered animal species from extinction or even restoration of extinct animals, producing high quality food and drug by using cloning as a way for propagating transgenic animals.
Even though all these instances sound good and encourage use of SCNT, in fact, none of them has practically become feasible so far. The main reason for this claim is that in spite of whole attempts taken for producing cloned animals, the method still is under debate and the hit-rates of this method has been kept considerably low and disappointing.
Because of several reasons, we cannot ignore this recognized obstacle as low efficiency. Along with this issue, there are various sub-effects, which put human and animals life at risk. Not only the High rates of miscarriages or birth of genetically abnormal animals, causes many different health-oriented problems for human and animals, but also it can directly and indirectly endanger human and animals welfare. Nowadays hordes of legal and ethical criticism around SCNT in reaction to these portentous signs, invite scientists to be more scrupulous and patient in its broad enforcement.
Taken together, although at first glance SCNT seems to be promising, it's usefulness has been diminished because of difficulties in its application in broad spectrum. Therefore SCNT should be kept under surveillance and use of it must be just limited to very important and critical cases such as medical purposes, as long as all due observations and cautions take into account before implementing.

Recent advances in cloning have offered hopes for disease treatment and resolving some other difficulties related to health, but this technology comes with social, legal, ethical, religious and other questions, and has caused different reactions worldwide. While some countries have enacted legislations on cloning, other countries have no clear law. Many countries and organizations, for various reasons including ethical concerns, have taken strong stand against reproductive cloning, and some even against research cloning. Some refer to the positive results of cloning and are in favor. Overall, most are in favor of cell and tissue cloning for therapeutic reasons and against reproductive cloning. In general, cloning is an important development in genetics and biotechnology that can be both lifesaving and destructive. Therefore, decision makers should be aware of its positive aspects for human health and prevent potential social and ethical problems through appropriate legislation In this paper, we present the opinions of opposers and supporters, and an overview of the position of countries and organizations regarding human cloning.

Human cloning is among the newest and most advanced technologies in the field of medical sciences and genetics, and has been a popular topic of discussion throughout the 21^st century. The success of scientists in the use of this technology on animals has caused great concern for outstanding thinkers of various fields.

Some issues that necessitate research on this subject include: physical injuries caused by manipulation of ovaries, the cell nucleus, and the embryo the possibility of mental and emotional damage, and premature aging potential threats to human will and discretion a violation of human dignity and conflicts with religions and world-views.

A philosophical outlook on these issues can guide the researcher from the surface to the root of the problem and redirect such concerns, and at the same time shed light on the existing disputes between scholars of natural sciences and humanities regarding the cloning technology. This will be especially true if such an outlook is based on a tradition as rich as the Iranian Islamic philosophy. The present article uses analytical library research to investigate the anthropological teachings of Sadraian philosophy from the ontological and epistemological point of view. The article then proceeds to examine the outcomes and consequences of the cloning technology according to this doctrine.

It seems that the anthropological principles embedded in or hidden behind therapeutic or reproductive cloning technology are not in conflict with Sadraian anthropology.