• Health reform
• EMRs
• Medicare
• Liability
• AMA House
• » More

• Contract Language
• Ethics Forum
• In the Courts
• Practice Management
• Technically Speaking
• » More

• Issue dates
• Regions
• Health plans
• Sections
• News briefs
• Columns
• Editorials
• Letters
• Series
• Writers
• Other years

• Search tips
• Email alert
• RSS
• Mobile
• Subscribe
• Institutions
• Staff directory
• Advertising
• Permissions
• Reprints
• News media
• Site guide
• Useful links
• About
• Premium
• Contact

• AMA Wire
• CPT
• DMPHP
• JAMA
• JAMA&Archives
• news@JAMA
• Virtual Mentor
• Physician jobs

House strike against cloning boosts scientists' concern about research

Researchers say a ban on therapeutic cloning would hamper clinical advances. The push is on to educate senators about benefits before they debate the issue.

By Tanya Albert, amednews staff. Aug. 20, 2001.

• PRINT|
• E-MAIL|
• RESPOND|
• REPRINTS|
• SHARE
•  

While the Bush administration touts House approval of a bill that would completely ban human cloning as a moral victory for America, many scientists and researchers cringe.

If the bill passes the Senate and is signed into law, scientists fear the quest to find cures for Parkinson's, diabetes, Alzheimer's and other diseases will suffer a huge blow.

"This is a political issue and a highly charged issue," said geneticist Edward McCabe, MD, PhD, physician in chief at Mattel Children's Hospital at the University of California, Los Angeles. "But it's important to look at the scientific issues."

Some researchers don't believe that scientific review happened before the House approved the all-out ban by a 265-162 vote just before its August recess. The bill would prohibit pregnancies from cloned cells and prohibit cloning cells for therapeutic research.

It's that last part that worries scientists most. The potential ban comes at a time when they hold out great hope that stem cells could eventually provide cures for diseases.

Embryonic and adult stem cells have shown promise for molding themselves into new cells that a diseased body could use to cure itself. But, as in organ transplants, scientists are concerned that a patient's immune system could reject foreign stem cells.

That's where therapeutic cloning would come into play.

If scientists were to clone a person's own cells to harvest the stem cells, the rejection problem could theoretically be eliminated because the cells would be genetically identical.

But the House defeated an amendment to the bill that would have allowed researchers to clone human embryos for such purposes.

"Banning all cloning is too conservative, too narrow," said Michael Soules, MD, president of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. "It could have unintended consequences."

A setback for research

A ban on therapeutic research also would slow the pace of advances and put the United States at a competitive disadvantage, some scientists say.

"In the long run, it will slow things down," said Philip I. Marcus, PhD, a molecular and cell biology professor at the University of Connecticut, Storrs, and the co-discoverer of the biological process used to clone animal cells. "But it won't stop them."

Private researchers would still be able to advance therapeutic cloning. And scientists working in countries without restrictions would leapfrog ahead of U.S. researchers, Dr. Marcus said.

"We move from leadership in science to looking on to what the rest of the world is doing," he said.

Medical ethicist Greg Pence, PhD, said he is astonished that people don't realize there is a difference between bringing a baby to term through cloning and therapeutic cloning.

The atmosphere is reminiscent of people's hesitance to accept test-tube babies in the early 1970s, he said. That attitude didn't change until the first successes were seen, and he believes something similar would have to occur to gain acceptance for therapeutic embryo cloning.

"To change people's opinions, Michael J. Fox would have to be cured," said Dr. Pence, a professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. The actor has Parkinson's disease.

A victory for morality

But House bill supporters say their stance is about taking the moral high road.

David Stevens, MD, Christian Medical Assn. executive director, said scientists should find a way other than therapeutic cloning to tackle the potential rejection problems that could occur if stem-cell research does result in cures.

Dr. Stevens said the bottom line is that it's not ethical for researchers to clone a cell and allow it to grow into a five- to seven-day-old embryo that will be harvested for stem cells that can be transplanted back into the patient.

"The young human clone created is the exact genetic match of the patient," Dr. Stevens said. "It's like killing your twin to help yourself.

"[This bill] takes a moral stance. American ingenuity will find the cures for diseases."

The Bush administration also was pleased that the House opted to ban all forms of cloning.

"Supporting medical research to combat human disease and infirmity is immensely important to this administration," Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson said in a statement. "However, science does not and cannot proceed in a moral vacuum. The ethical issues posed by human cloning and the implications for the child created are particularly troubling."

He said the administration will work with Congress to ban human cloning, while allowing ethical research to flourish.

Eye on the Senate

At press time, the Senate had not set a date for its debate of the human cloning issue.

Two leaders, though, had expressed their concerns about cloning.

Sen. Sam Brownback (R, Kan.) introduced legislation, similar to the House-passed bill, that would ban all cloning. And Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D, S.D.) said he is "very uncomfortable" with cloning, even if it is for research purposes. He holds that view even though he has said he would support government funding for embryonic stem-cell research.

If the cloning bill doesn't come before the Senate soon, Brownback has said that he would force a debate on the issue when the body takes up stem-cell research.

Meanwhile, scientists are working against the clock to try to inform lawmakers about the science behind therapeutic cloning.

A joint panel of the National Academies' Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy and the Board on Life Sciences met in Washington, D.C., in early August to gather information on human cloning from top researchers.

"I hope the Senate allows therapeutic cloning," Dr. Soules said. "My professional society has no problem banning reproductive cloning. But therapeutic cloning is one step of stem-cell research."

Back to top

 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 

Physician votes

House physicians were almost evenly split in their votes on the cloning bill.

                             Yes   No
                             ---   --
John Cooksey, MD (R, La.)     X      
Ernest Fletcher, MD (R, Ky.)  X      
Greg Ganske, MD (R, Iowa)     X      
Jim McDermott, MD (D, Wash.)        X
Ron Paul, MD (R, Texas)             X
Vic Snyder, MD (D, Ark.)            X
Dave Weldon, MD (R, Fla.)     X      

Back to top