 |
 |
Virtual New York Thursday, 28 June 2001 0:28 (ET) Cloning, stem cell foes worry biotech By HIL ANDERSON SAN DIEGO, June 28 (UPI) -- Most delegates at the Bio 2001 biotechnology conference appeared slightly amused by the antics of the environmental protestors demonstrating at the event, however they are not laughing at two other opposition camps that may have the power to derail promising research that depends on cloning and the use of key cells taken from human embryos. While members of the right-to-life movement didn't make its presence known in San Diego this week, their opposition to the use of embryo stem cells had the attention of the nearly 15,000 delegates to the convention that wrapped up Wednesday. At the same, there is growing concern in the biotech community that fears in Washington about the possible cloning of human will result in a Draconian complete halt to the use of the technique in research. A session on the topic was held during the final hours of the conference and still drew an overflow crowd of biotech executives, scientists and lawyers who might otherwise have been heading to the airport. "Biotech cannot stand by and see legislators introduce bills making researchers into criminals," said Michael J. Werner, director of federal government relations for the Biotechnology Industry Organization. The cloning of the sheep Dolly in 1995, Werner said, was followed by announcements by scientists "not in the mainstream" that they would take the next step and would clone a human child for parents who could not conceive or had lost their own genuine offspring. The possibility outraged some members of Congress and produced a bill known as the Human Cloning Prohibition Act, which would basically ban the cloning of humans and would expose scientists who violate the ban to possible criminal prosecution. The biotech industry wasn't planning to clone people, however they scientists use the same process - known as somatic cell nuclear transfer -- while doing research. "We are having a very difficult time explaining the difference between reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning, which we also call 'cloning for research,'" Werner said. One of the bill's authors, Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., indicated in the spring that he indeed could tell the difference between the two types of cloning and was unconvinced. "There is no need for this technology to ever be used with humans - whether for reproductive purposes or for destructive research purposes," Brownback said in a statement. "Our bill makes this clear, and imposes civil and criminal penalties on anyone who attempts to create a human clone through the process of human somatic cell nuclear transfer." Werner said that the recent change in leadership in the Senate could cause the Brownback bill to stall, however the sledding in the House was extremely difficult and the legislation has tacit White House backing. "The rhetoric has been very anti-biotech," he said. "The people behind this issue are very hostile to biotech." Although there are no bills in the capital to ban the use of embryonic stem cells in research, President Bush has made good on a campaign pledge to review the National Institute of Health's funding of such research. Right-to-life advocates see protecting embryonic stem cells as a necessary protection of unborn life, however the cells are also seen as key to so-called regenerative medicine that will repair damage caused by disease, stroke, injury and even the ravages of time. "The most likely cure for juvenile diabetes is islet cell transplantation," said Peter Van Etten, CEO of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. "The most likely source of those islet cells is from embryonic stem cells." While the NIH review does not prohibit private companies from conducting such research, Van Etten said it has apparently sent a chill through the medical associations and universities that are involved in such projects, and also could discourage young scientists from entering the field of stem cell research. Critics contend that adult stem cells can be used in place of embryonic cells, however biotech scientists said Wednesday that the answer wasn't that simple because embryonic cells must be fully understood before they can be fully replaced by adult cells. "The unfortunate part would be if the study of embryonic stem cells is blocked," said Dr. Doros Platika, president of Curis, Inc., "It's probably the surest way of making sure the advances in adult stem cells don't happen." While demonstrations in the streets by youths dressed as butterflies and ears of genetically altered corn might not do much to slow the march of biotech progress, the political clout of the right-to-life could throw a major wrench in the works. http://www.vny.com/cf/News/upidetail.cfm?QID=198124 * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn