 |
 |
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 ********************