Cloning Advances Outrace Regulators
NewsMax.com Wires
January 29, 2001
WASHINGTON  -- Rapid advances in the fields of embryology,
genomics, and in-vitro fertilization and genetic screening have increased
chances that a human clone will be born in the coming months. Will
Washington take regulatory aim?
On Friday, American and Italian fertility specialists announced from
Kentucky that they and several other scientists are actively seeking to
clone a human being in the next 12 to 24 months. The procedure will
most likely take place in the Mediterranean region. On Feb. 4, the New
York Times Magazine will run a cover story about a Canadian-based
cult, the Raelians, seeking to do the same. As United Press International
reported on Oct. 12, 2000, the group claims to have a lab and experts in
the United States, and expected success within 18 months.
"All this ramps up pressure on lawmakers to address these kinds of
issues," says David Rejeski, a Woodrow Wilson Center scholar and
former staff member in the Office of Science and Technology Policy at
the White House. "The pressure is increasing, but how will they
respond? Do they have enough knowledge to make sound decisions?"
Human cloning can refer to either reproductive or therapeutic cloning.
Reproductive cloning creates a "later-born" genetic twin from a single
cell of an adult by transplanting that cell into a human egg whose
nucleus has been removed. The process is known as nuclear transfer.
The resulting embryo may be implanted in a woman and carried to birth.
Proponents say the process is a logical extension of infertility
treatments. Critics say it is an unproven and potentially unsafe
procedure that could place the first cloned children at serious risk of
birth defects.
Therapeutic cloning produces human embryos for purposes of extracting stem cells, primordial cells capable of becoming any type of tissue in the body such as blood or nerve tissue. Stem cell research holds the potential c
ure for many diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease. The embryos are eventually discarded, a fact that pits many pro-life groups against the procedure.
Randolfe H. Wicker, the founder of the Clone Rights United Front, a pro-human-cloning group based in New York, says that lawmakers who try to prohibit human cloning by nuclear transfer run the risk of interfering with non
-reproductive medical research. Currently, there is no federal law prohibiting privately funded human cloning. The National Bioethics Advisory Committee has deemed reproductive cloning to be "morally unacceptable." Congre
ss in 1998 tried and failed to pass an anti-cloning law. Pro-life lawmakers targeted somatic cloning because the embryo it creates, which they consider a viable human life, is used for scientific purposes and then discard
ed. They supported a measure banning all human cloning and any research on cloned embryos.
Opponents protested that the bill would place undue harm on revolutionary stem cell research. congressional failure to pass legislation prompted the Food and Drug Administration to claim jurisdiction over "clinical resear
ch using cloning technology to create a human being," a claim discounted by many legal experts.
"There is nothing in the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act or any other piece of relevant legislation that gives the FDA jurisdiction over cloning or anything that could even arguably include cloning," says Mark Eibert, a freq
uently cited cloning advocate and attorney in San Mateo, Calif. "Furthermore, to talk about outlawing it is ridiculous given fact that there are no laws in about 150 countries." Eibert said he receives requests on a daily
 basis from people asking where they can participate in clinical trials of reproductive cloning. Of those he estimates 90 percent are infertile, one percent is gay or lesbian and the rest are worried about genetic disease
s. Only Rhode Island, California, Louisiana and Michigan have anti-cloning laws. Michigan's law, the harshest, imposes up to 10 years in prison and fines of $250,000 and $1 million for individuals or organizations who cre
ate an embryo for research or birth.
Some countries, including Japan and the European Union, have placed bans or moratoriums on human cloning but many including Russia, Brazil and India have not. On Jan. 21 the British government legalized the use of therape
utic cloning to make human embryos for stem cell research. The Bush administration has yet to state its full position on cloning.
"Bush is probably anti-cloning judging from his abortion stance," says said Glenn McGee, an assistant professor in the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, Pa. Cloning supporters, howeve
r, draw hope from the fact that Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson, also a staunch abortion foe, has supported stem cell research in the past.
"This all has to do with self-identity and preciousness of human life, " says George Annas, a professor of health law at Boston University. "What does it mean to be human? Can we treat children like commodities? Those iss
ues haven't been well discussed. It's going to be tough to explain it to
Congress."
Some congress watchers worry that America's democratic institutions
are ill prepared to deliberate the moral and ethical impact of new, rapidly
advancing technologies. "When you shrink the time of scientific
discovery, the time we need to morally deliberate disappears," said
Rejeski.
An HHS spokesman said it is too early to tell what the new
Administration's stance on cloning will be and speculated that many
members of Congress are probably studying up on the issues. Several
members of Congress declined interviews for this article.
(C) 2001 UPI All Rights Reserved

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/1/28/212120.shtml

********************