Virtual New York
Tuesday, 19 June 2001 19:11 (ET)
Researchers wary about bill to ban cloning
By KURT SAMSON, UP Medical Writer

 WASHINGTON, June 19 (UPI) -- Although there is near
unanimous support for a federal prohibition on humans,
one proposal has biomedical researchers worried that its
reach could ban far more than a brave new world of
designer kids.

Two cloning bills have been introduced in the House of
Representatives.

H.R. 1644, sponsored by Florida Rpublican Dave Weldon,
would prohibit not just the cloning of humans but any
research using cloning technology,

including tissue and stem cell experiments. The other
measure, H.R. 2172, offered by Pennsylvania Republican
Jim Greenwood, would amend the Food, Drug and Cosmetic
Act to ban human cloning but would allow any other use of
somatic cell transfer technology for research.

 Speaking before the House Judiciary Committee's crime
subcommittee Tuesday, Dr. Thomas Okarma, president and CEO
of Geron Corp., in Menlo Park, Calif., said allowing human cloning
would be irresponsible and could lead to a "backlash" against
other forms of therapeutic cloning technology that could lead
to cures for many diseases. Nonetheless, he said the broad
biomedical ban in the Weldon proposal would accomplish
the same backlash.

 Okarma spoke on behalf of BIO, the Biotechnology Industry
Association based in Washington, D.C.

 He said Geron is engaged in research to re-program cells;
taking cells from an individual and teasing them back to the
embryonic stem cell state where they can then be
differentiated into other types of cells for therapeutic purposes.

"This is precisely the research that would be banned by
the Weldon bill," Okarma said. "Because the Weldon bill
does not differentiate between reproductive cloning and
cloning for research purposes, it will cut off this work and
prevent its therapeutic applications from reaching patients.

 "In contrast," he continued, "the bipartisan bill introduced by
Rep. Greenwood ... bans reproductive cloning but allows the
continuation of research."

The measure "strikes the appropriate balance" between
prohibiting acts that are unsafe and unethical while
promoting vital medical research, Okarma told the panel.

Addressing the legal aspects of the bills, Gerard Bradley,
a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, said the
Weldon bill "is a proper exercise of Congress's power
over interstate commerce," and that it therefore it is
both constitutional and enforceable. Because cloning
technology will require interstate traffic for much of the
raw materials and laboratory supplies, Congress would
have constitutional enforcement authority, he explained.

The Greenwood bill also would be a legitimate exercise of
Congress's power, but it "raises serious constitutional issues"
and the prohibition would be "unenforceable," he said.

"My judgment is that the only effective way to prohibit human
reproductive cloning is to prohibit all human cloning,
as H.R. 1644 does," Bradley said.

 Alexander Capron, commissioner of the National Bioethics
Advisory Commission and professor of law at the University
of Southern California Law Center in Los Angeles, told the
subcommittee that a moratorium on human cloning would work
better than an outright ban until more issues are resolved.

"It seems to me that the idea of a moratorium -- that is,
a time-limited ban -- can be usefully applied to the second
activity addressed by H.R. 1644, namely, the creation of
cloned embryos for research purposes," he said.

 "Producing normal human embryos through cloning is
probably going to be a challenge, but once such embryos
are on hand, I believe it will be impossible to prevent efforts
to implant them and achieve a pregnancy behind the privacy
veil of the physician-patient relationship," Capron told
lawmakers.

http://www.vny.com/cf/News/upidetail.cfm?QID=195573

******

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn