Redrawing the ethical boundaries of biomedical research, the House of Representatives passed a bill last week that outlaws all forms of human cloning.

Approved by a 241-155 margin, the bill’s fate will now be determined on the Senate floor. President Bush endorses the bill, and he is putting pressure on lawmakers to pass it.

If approved, this bill will criminalize radical groups, like the Realians, who have engaged in reproductive cloning, and other groups who might produce genetic replicas of adults. The bill would also affect researchers involved in therapeutic cloning, which involves producing stem cells to repair damaged tissue or conduct developmental research on degenerative diseases, such as Multiple Sclerosis and Parkinson’s Disease.

Any attempts to clone a human embryo could lead to imprisonment for up to 10 years and a $1 million fine. Research that involves human-cloning techniques is currently legal in the United States, but has been barred from receiving any federal funding.

These potential restrictions will extend far beyond the science itself. If the Senate approves the bill, all medications or cures derived from embryonic stem cell research would be prohibited from entering the country, preventing potential medical therapies from being sold legally in the U.S. and criminalizing patients who attempt to import medications. This last part of the bill has proven the most problematic for some lawmakers.

Washington University Law Professor of Ethics in Medicine Rebecca Dresser has examined the development of stem cell legislation.

“The bill that just passed the House is similar to the one that the House, but not the Senate, passed last session,” said Dresser. “Most observers doubt that the Senate will pass the bill this session.”

Lawmakers are being forced to make rigid decisions concerning increasingly controversial issues. Stem cell research involves experimenting with and manipulating the embryo, the source of human life. Proponents of this research believe that a ban would ignore the needs of patients whose lives may depend on stem cell research or tissue engineering.

WU has maintained a consistently firm position on the issue, which is stated in a public announcement the school published in 2002.

“WU supports somatic stem cell nuclear transfer-a separate and distinct procedure from human reproductive cloning-for the purpose of producing cells to repair damaged tissue or replace malfunctioning cells,” said the statement. “WU strongly opposes efforts to duplicate humans genetically through reproductive cloning and joins with other universities and scientific organizations in calling for a ban on human reproductive cloning.”

Somatic cell nuclear transfer involves removing the nucleus, or the DNA, from an unfertilized egg cell, and replacing it with a nucleus from a normal body cell. This creates an embryo, a single cell, while eliminating the fertilization process. The intention is never to produce a child, only stem cells, or young cells that have not yet transformed into organ-specific body cells.

This type of research does occur at WU. Josh Volgelstein, a graduate student and research assistant in a neurobiology lab at WU School of Medicine, feels it should continue.

“Given the promise of stem cell research for treating and perhaps curing a variety of debilitating diseases . . . research should not be limited, but include work on both human adult and embryonic stem cells,” said Vogelstein.

The majority of the science community agrees with him, as do 40 Nobel Laureates. The National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and several other organizations are also backing the research.

Opponents of stem cell research argue that it has shown minimal potential in medical studies, and that its continuation is not justified. Advocates claim that without federal funding, the benefits will not present themselves because, due to the massive amount of research that needs to be done, private institutions will remain reluctant to pursue ventures with such long term benefits.

Recent developments in tissue engineering sciences have opened the door for tissue construction methods that derive from adult stem cells, not embryonic stem cells, which could eventually alleviate this ethical crisis.

Embryonic stem cell research has been banned in Australia, while it continues in the United Kingdom, with the support of federal funding. A host of countries such as China and Sweden are rapidly moving forward with embryonic stem cell research, working under an international ethical agreement that the U.S refuses to sign.

Popularity: 1% [?]

 Print This Post

This entry was posted on Friday, March 14th, 2003 at 12:00 pm and is filed under News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.