Pacific Rim Bureau (CNSNews.com) - Australia's federal government is actively considering recommendations to ban destructive experimentation on human embryos left over from fertility treatment.

The news has stunned medical researchers and campaigners in the country who hope the stem cells obtainable from embryos could hold future cures for debilitating diseases.

Australian scientists have been world leaders in some areas of reproductive technology. A decision in Britain this week giving scientists the go-ahead to clone embryos for research is now expected to push that country into the forefront of advances in the often-controversial field.

The U.S., meanwhile, has urged the United Nations to adopt a treaty banning human cloning for both reproductive and stem-cell research purposes - so-called "therapeutic" cloning - worldwide. A decision on whether to begin treaty negotiations will be made by the General Assembly in August.

The Australian government denied a decision had been reached, saying consultation was continuing on the merits of allowing stem cell research on "spare" embryos from in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment.

During IVF treatment, more embryos than are needed are invariably created. The excess embryos are either stored for future use or destroyed.

An all-party parliamentary committee inquiring into the issue last year was divided over whether these excess embryos should be made available for stem cell research. It eventually decided 6-4 in favor of recommending their use.

But Australian media have now reported that the federal cabinet is favoring a proposal - made by the committee's chairman, one of the four dissenting members - that ministers overturn the recommendation.

The chairman is Kevin Andrews, a pro-life Catholic who was instrumental several years ago in overturning short-lived voluntary euthanasia legislation in Australia's Northern Territory.

A spokesman for Andrews would only confirm the lawmaker had made a submission to the cabinet, but said he could not comment on any decision.

The panel chaired by Andrews also recommended a moratorium on human cloning for "therapeutic" stem cell research purposes, for at least three years.

Supporters of embryonic stem cell research had been gearing up to campaign to ensure that moratorium did not become a total ban, but they now face the prospect that even the considerably less controversial option of using existing embryos - rather than cloning them - may be denied them.

But for most pro-lifers, human embryos from whatever source are sacred and should not be used for experimentation which results in their destruction.

Reaction from supporters of embryonic stem cell experimentation was swift in coming.

A leading research body, the Monash Institute of Reproduction and Development in Melbourne, said a ban would be a huge setback and was "absolutely unsupportable."

Bob Carr, the premier of Australia's most populous state, New South Wales, also responded with concern, saying he would urge other state governments and the federal government not to support a ban on research he said "could ease human suffering and save lives."
'Misconception and confusion'

An organization researching diabetes in children said a government ban would be disappointing for the millions of people suffering from diseases which scientists believe could be treated using stem cells.

"Is the quality of life of those people less than the quality of life of a group of cells?" asked Sheila Royles, chief executive of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF) in Australia.

In the U.S., the JDRF has spearheaded a campaign by like-minded organizations, the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research (CAMR), lobbying for President Bush to okay stem cell research there.

The chief scientific officer for the JDRF internationally, Dr. Robert Goldstein, is visiting Sydney this week to help the Australia branch launch a campaign in favor of stem cell research and "therapeutic" cloning.

Royles called for Australian supporters of embryonic stem cell research to form a group similar to the CAMR to educate the public on a subject she said was surrounded by "a great deal of misconception and confusion."

"JDRF strongly opposes reproductive cloning but does not believe a permanent ban on embryonic stem cell research or therapeutic cloning is appropriate," she said. "Instead we propose that all research adheres to appropriate scientific and ethical guidelines."

The "therapeutic" label is used by researchers when describing the process of cloning an embryo, which will be harvested for stem cells - offering "therapeutic" benefits - and subsequently be destroyed.

The term is intended to distinguish the procedure from cloning an embryo which will then be allowed to develop into a fetus and eventually be born - "reproductive" cloning.

But many pro-lifers reject the language.

"To produce an embryo is always 'reproductive'; to destroy an embryo is never 'therapeutic'," a group of Australian pro-life Christian and Jewish leaders wrote in an open letter to the government late last year.

"So-called 'therapeutic cloning' involves the manufacture of a new race of laboratory humans with the intention, right from the beginning, to exploit and destroy them as if they were laboratory animals," they argued.

At the U.N. Tuesday, U.S. delegate Carolyn L. Willson told a committee considering the issue that all cloning should be banned.

"A ban that prohibits only 'reproductive' cloning but ignores 'therapeutic' or 'experimental' cloning would essentially authorize the creation and destruction of human embryos explicitly and solely for research and experimentation," she said, according to a U.N. transcript of the discussion.

"It would turn nascent life into a natural resource to be mined and exploited."