Chorus
of Criticism Greets Council's Position on Cloning
By Christine Hall
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
July 15, 2002
(CNSNews.com)
- The president's council on bioethics recently recommended a moratorium
on human cloning in their Human Cloning and Human Dignity report, a
move that seems to have satisfied no one.
Both cloning
proponents and foes expressed frustration with a recommendation that
urges Congress neither to ban human cloning nor give it a green light.
"Millions
of Americans suffering from debilitating and often fatal diseases cannot
tolerate a cruel and pointless four-year delay into research that holds
out the promise of life-saving cures," said Doug Wick, a co-founder
of CuresNow, an alliance of scientific, health, education, business
and entertainment industry interests that want to keep legal so-called
therapeutic cloning (also known as somatic cell nuclear transfer, or
SCNT).
"Putting
a four-year moratorium on therapeutic cloning is tantamount to stopping
it altogether," he said.
But things
could be worse, Wick suggested. "We are heartened that a substantial
minority, 7 out of 17 members, of the council believes this research
should go forward immediately," he said.
Currently,
President Bush has forbidden federal tax dollars to fund any type of
stem cell research that uses embryonic stem cells, whether derived from
clones or otherwise. What's more, the House of Representatives has passed
a total ban on cloning, for both reproductive or research purposes.
But Democratic
leaders in the Senate, many of whom support cloning for research purposes,
remain opposed to such a ban.
On July 12,
Dr. Maxine Singer, former chief of the National Cancer Institute's Laboratory
of Biochemistry and current president of the Carnegie Institution, presented
the council on bioethics with a petition against a moratorium and against
a ban on SCNT.
The petition
is signed by 2,000 teachers and scientists and Nobel laureates in medical
schools and university science departments across the country.
Calling the
proposed ban "a blow to millions of Americans fighting life-threatening
medical research," Singer said it's wrong to "criminalize"
therapeutic cloning.
"Unfortunately,
the council has chosen to join the opponents of therapeutic cloning,"
Singer said.
Richard Arvedon,
the father of a five-year-old daughter with Type 1 diabetes, said the
council should have included members of patient advocacy groups.
"If
the council had included even one single advocacy group representing
people with diabetes, spinal cord injury, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's,
or other incurable diseases, they might have realized that a moratorium
has the same impact as a ban," Arvedon said.
The American
Diabetes Association (ADA) also blasted the council's position, saying
the government should instead regulate cloning. In the late 1970s, the
ADA noted, Congress almost imposed a moratorium on research involving
recombinant DNA.
Instead,
the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration
now regulate such research that yields many life-saving products.
But the chief
cloning foe in the Senate, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), seemed scarcely
happier with the council's recommended ban.
"I am
heartened that the council has endorsed a temporary ban on all human
cloning," Brownback said. "If approved by Congress, I believe
a temporary ban would give the country an important opportunity to further
debate the issue of human cloning along with its ultimate impact upon
humanity.
"Unfortunately,"
he added, "I do have some areas of disagreement with the bioethics
council.
"In
particular, I do not believe that we can separate the issue of human
cloning into two different categories by making policy recommendations
based on the intentions of the researcher," Brownback said. "Ultimately,
all human cloning is reproductive."
"Cloned
embryos are 100 percent human," said Carrie Gordon Earll, bioethics
analyst for Focus on the Family, "just as Dolly the sheep is 100
sheep."
Cloned human
embryos are "fully human and worthy of protection," said Earll,
who labeled the council recommendation as merely "stopgap."
Pro-life
groups like the Family Research Council and the Culture of Life Foundation
point to other avenues of research that also hold potential for cures,
like using adult stem cells and animal experimentation.
Most recently,
for example, a Johns Hopkins University/Hamburg University study using
rat neurons produced good results in treating spinal cord injuries.
And a Scripps Research Institute study published in Science magazine
found a way to kill blood vessels around tumors in mice, thus starving
and killing the tumor.
|