Meaning of Life, Inc.

( First of two parts )

My sympathies go to newspaper editors everywhere who have to make the decision as to how to classify the recent claims of a group called "Raëlians" that they, on Dec 27, 2002, successfully cloned a human being. I am confused myself since in order to understand the claim, I found that I have to grapple with books ranging from molecular biology, on quests for mechanical life, a succinct and juicy chronicle of a science-writer’s meeting with the Raëlians and the group’s founder, Raël himself, as well as books on how and why cults form and some news articles here and there placed in different sections of various newspapers worldwide.

Margaret Talbot, in a New York Times Magazine article entitled "The Desire to Duplicate" (2001), describes to us her meeting with the Raëlians. The headquarters was in some part of rural Quebec and the Raëlian headquarters is shaped like a "giant swoosh" (which curiously coincides with the swoosh sign or "V" in the space uniforms of Star Trek guys and the like). The centerpiece within the structure is a giant model of the spaceship that Raël, a French-born former race-car driver who claims to have been invited to board in 1973 where he was, among other things, entertained by the "sensual attentions of six voluptuous and bewitching female robots." Raël was the name supposedly given by the aliens in the spaceship; before that he was Claude Vorilhon. He wears a tunic with a gold medallion. (Now, don’t ask since I, like Talbot’s hairdresser, have not figured out the reason behind the swoosh yet, nor the "V," much less, the score on the medallion; and not to mention the extra knot of hair pointing upwards, a favorite among the sci-fi denizens). To the group’s credit, Talbot took note of the accuracy of cellular models and the general correctness of models on how DNA is at the core of our bio-chemical make-up. This is the group that is now at the center of the cloning controversy.

In 1999, a couple, the Hunts, lost a 10-month-old baby in what they think was a medical procedural mistake for which they have filed a suit. But since the couple think that their baby’s death was to due to a "mistake," they wanted a genetically identical baby. The Raëlians, who are the "true-believers" of the redemptive power of science through their company, Clonaid, became the natural haven for the couple’s desire to "alter" their loss. They offered to clone the dead baby for which Mr. Hunt spent about $200,000 in lab equipment. At some point, according to a NY Times article a few days ago, the Food and Drug Administration stepped in to investigate the Raëlian lab for human cloning, a scientific undertaking for which one needs FDA approval. After finding the so-called lab wanting and containing only cursory notes on cow embryos and a graduate researcher who probably needed free bedspace more than an internship, the FDA shook hands with the Hunts not to have their baby cloned in the US without FDA permission. The Hunts also reportedly severed public relations with the Raëlians. But even as they did, that has not stopped the Raëlians from claiming that they are still at it and that in fact, lately, they have been successful. Never mind what is at the core of scientific rule that for any claim to be scientifically valid, it should be published and open to review and inquiry by peers. Well, okay, the Raëlians, as a group, do not exactly have many counterparts in the "mainstream sciences" but their chief executive does. Talbot met with her. Her name is Dr. Brigitte Boisselier, a chemist whom Talbot found out bears two Ph Ds, one from the University of Dijon, the other, from the University of Houston. She should, as a scientist, be open to inquiry and probe as far as the group she directs claims human cloning but all she can say is that her lab is "somewhere" and that "somehow" they have done it (cloning). This is where the newspaper editor’s problem begins. A fundamental tenet of science involving "understanding" as the prime motivation, is violated. This is no longer a desire to "understand" but beyond. It is now deciding for themselves what ought to be done given what science has shown them so far. It has become doctrinal. It has become religion. Where the reasonable scientist steps out, the newspaper editor begins to pull his hair and where cult lovers, on cue, don their spandex/lycra suits and snap on their medallions.

We have to note, however, the distinction the experts make between therapeutic cloning and sentimental cloning. Therapeutic cloning aims to create replacement cells for sick people while sentimental cloning wants to create entire duplicates of human beings. Both involve the same initial process of extracting human stem cells and growing human embryos. However with therapeutic cloning, the cloned embryo would be allowed to reach only until the "blastocystic stage," that stage where cells begin to differentiate, that is, form human organs, from which the cells will be taken out and used to replace sick cells. And from the world of science, sans the "swoosh uniforms and gold medallions," the New York Times has reported that two attempts known to have been made by Advanced Cell Technology and other scientists in China in its early stages, have failed which say a lot about how difficult it is to even begin to extract human stem cells in the first place.