The Times  March 07, 2006


The crazy coalition holding back science
Matthew Syed

It's time to tackle the backward-looking legislators and political extremists
who are allied against progress
  PRO-CHOICE feminists and pro-life fundamentalists will tomorrow unite in
outraged solidarity against what they see as the unethical exploitation of
female reproductive tissue. They have chosen International Women's Day to
raise placards that say: "Hands Off Our Ovaries".
One's suspicions are aroused when extremists from opposite ends of the
political spectrum find common cause - and for good reason. The immediate
issue that has fermented this unlikely alliance is the prospect that the
Government's fertility watchdog will clear women to donate eggs solely for
the purposes of medical research. The "ovarian coalition" opposes the move.
All right-minded people should back it to the hilt.
*Click here to find out more!  We are not talking here about women being
coerced to provide eggs or offered financial inducements to do so. On the
contrary, the proposal is simply that women should be allowed to donate eggs
voluntarily if they are satisfied that the specific risk to their health from
the invasive procedure (which involves the artificial stimulation of ovaries)
is justified by the medical advances that could result.
Such altruism is surely to be praised, not prohibited, particularly when one
considers that the chronic shortage of eggs has seriously impeded attempts to
produce cloned embryonic stem cells. These remarkable little things hold out
the prospect of cures for a range of illnesses including cancer, Parkinson's
disease, diabetes and multiple sclerosis.
It may seem strange that pro-choice feminists have decided to campaign against
freedom of choice - until, that is, you hear their paranoid mutterings about
"male doctors instrumentalising women's reproductive capacities". Choice, it
seems, is only legitimate if it is exercised in a way that is approved of by
the Sisterhood. The principal concern of the pro-life brigade is, of course,
quite different. They are against testing on human embryos in all
circumstances.
Given the divergent moral principles of the two sides, it has been difficult
for them to find a common language in which to express their disapproval of
egg donation. They have settled upon the dubious expedient of questioning the
scientific basis of stem cell research. Undermining public confidence in
science for ideological reasons is abhorrent, if familiar. It is reminiscent
of the animal rights extremists who pretend that medical advances derived
from animal experimentation are inapplicable to humans.
The good news is that the Human Embryology and Fertilisation Authority is
likely to ignore the advice of the anti-donation campaigners and will soon
liberalise the rules on donation. Those with loved ones suffering from
Parkinson's should not, however, celebrate just yet. The disturbing reality
is that the ethical conservatives may yet thwart the success of therapeutic
cloning by virtue of the damaging influence they wield beyond these shores.
Outside the United Kingdom and like-minded countries is a wider world in which
scientists are being held in check by backward-thinking legislators. Medical
innovation that might elicit an honour for a British scientist would lead to
a jail sentence in the United States, Germany, Austria and Norway. The
problem is that you can give British researchers as much freedom as you like
but their progress will be at snail's pace without the international
collaboration that is crucial to scientific progress.
This issue is of such importance that an influential group of intellectuals
gathered in London last week to come up with general principles that might
provide some much-needed regulatory consistency. Their intention was noble,
their optimism naive. How can we hope for international uniformity when the
world's decisionmakers apply incompatible (and often incoherent) principles
to the field of medical ethics? In the midst of this global chaos is it any
wonder that we see the coming together of wacky coalitions?
Things will rapidly get worse. The confusion surrounding the legitimacy of
embryonic stem cell research is compounded when we delve into areas such as
pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (in which embryos can be selected for
particular genetic traits), gene therapy (which alters the genetic make-up of
selected cells in the body), cybernetics (the alteration of mental or bodily
function by embedding electronic systems within the body) and
psychopharmacology (the chemical alteration of brain state or mood).
Some of the ethical issues raised by these emerging technologies are already
upon us. Ritalin and other stimulants are prescribed to more than four
million schoolchildren in the United States while others are buying the
tablets from them to help to boost concentration for exams. Anabolic steroids
and growth hormone are routinely (if illegally) taken by top athletes.
Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis is already available for several dozen
diseases. Nanodevices to destroy tumours could be available within a decade.
Meanwhile, legislators fumble around in the dark.
It is not as if we lack a principle that can be used to tease out the moral
implications of the new sciences. The proposition that public policy should
be used to maximise aggregate welfare has been around for centuries and is
central to the writings of Hume, Mill and other thinkers who helped to
civilise the world. These pioneers would have had as little truck with those
who resist embryonic stem cell research as they would with the feminists
battling against voluntary egg donation.
It is often said that morality is failing to keep up with the pace of
technological change. The truth is quite the reverse. "Public morality" -
often dressed in the language of religious fundamentalism - is holding back
scientific progress, something that will impose lasting damage on humanity.

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