Human Cloning Conference Report

(by R. Moorgate - August 2001)

Newsletter Front Page - Cloning Conference Report - News Summaries - Cloning Article - Cloning Interview

Human Cloning Proponents

Dr. Antinori, Dr. Boisselier and Dr. Zavos respectively.

On the 7th of August 2001, scientists gathered in the National Academy of Sciences in Washington to debate the safety of reproductive human cloning. The three scientists advocating the use of this novel technology (to treat infertility) consisted of Dr. Severino Antinori (Italian fertility specialist), Dr. Brigitte Boisselier (director of Clonaid - a company offering human cloning) and Dr. Panos Zavos (director of the Andrology Institute of America). The rest of the panel were in opposition, and included Dr. Ian Wilmut (who cloned Dolly the sheep), Dr. Alan Colman (director of PPL therapeutics - a company that clones transgenic pigs) and Dr. Rudolf Jaenisch (who clones mice at MIT), as well as several others. The pro-human cloning scientists proposed using this novel technology to allow infertile couples to conceive a biologically related child "We want to make this available only to people who have exhausted all other possibilities for reproduction," said Dr. Zavos. Dr. Boisselier went a step further, arguing that cloning is a basic human right. "It is a fundamental right to reproduce in any way you want. If you want to mix genes with others, then that's your choice". But the anti-human cloning scientists contended that it was unsafe to implement this technology in humans due to the problems observed in animal cloning.

The researchers traded conflicting and sometimes combative testimonies, making for unusually contentious exchanges in the staid auditorium of the National Academy of Sciences. The main argument of the opposition was that human cloning technology was too risky in its present form. Dolly's birth was announced in 1997. In the years since, scientists have succeeded in cloning five species of mammals: sheep, goats, pigs, mice and cows. Wilmut said 18 percent of cloned mice die after birth from developmental problems; among goats, the figure is 38 percent. In natural reproduction only 2-3% of newborns have congenital developmental problems, so it is clear that there is a significant increase in risk when using cloning technology in humans. "The patients ... are willing to accept these risks," said Dr. Zavos, who with Dr. Antinori wants to use the technique so that infertile men can conceive a genetically related child. In addition to obtaining informed consent, the researchers said that they would also try to reduce the risk of producing children with developmental problems by screening embryos pre and post implantation to identify those with abnormal epigenetic patterns. Dr. Jaenisch pointed out (during heated debate) that it was impossible to screen the entire epigenetic state of the genome, so the detection efficiency would be limited, and he said he would be very uncomfortable if they only screened 2 or 3 genes. Dr. Wilmut also doubted the effectiveness of screening as the one cell obtained from a biopsy would not provide sufficient material to test for all the genes, although this statement ignores the fact that large amounts of tissue are available from amniocentesis post implantation. Dr. Antinori dismissed these statements saying they would screen for the epigenetic state of the IGF2R gene, much as Dr. Young (from Wilmut's lab) had done recently in sheep. How much this screening will reduce the risks of human cloning remains a debatable issue. The pro-human cloning scientists also pointed out that reproductive science was more advanced in humans than in other mammals, and that many of the developmental problems observed in non-human mammals were due to none ideal culture conditions and other related problems (Young 1998). Their assertion was that these (and other) factors would reduce the risk to reasonable levels, and that research should continue. Panos Zavos conceded there are hurdles to be overcome but said, "We are determined to get there". "This will be done," said Dr. Boisselier. Dr. Antinori, who attracted criticism when his clinic in Rome enabled a 62-year-old woman to become pregnant seven years ago, already has a team of 20, including a British molecular biologist, preparing for the trials. Earlier this year he announced that he has the support of an un-named Mediterranean country where he could carry out experiments. Those taking part would be treated free of charge. The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children stated baby cloning was now likely to happen in the UK one day. Paul Tully, SPUC general secretary, said: "The parallel procedures used in therapeutic cloning are paving the way for reproductive cloning, however vociferous the protestations from the government and British scientists that it is not their intention."

Outside the conference hall Randolfe H. Wicker (spokesperson for the Reproductive Cloning Network) argued under the glare of television lights with a religious Christian fundamentalist. The fundamentalist argued that human cloning was unethical, against his religion, and playing god. Randolfe Wicker argued that it was a reproductive right for infertile couples to conceive a biologically related child (if this is what they choose), not against his (Randolfe's) religion, and no more playing god that any other technological advance including antibiotics and IVF. Randolfe also argued that state control of reproduction would bring us closer to Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" than cloning ever could. Randolfe was probably wasting his breath, the Vatican does not accept IVF, abortion or even contraception as ethical, they are unlikely to change their stance on reproductive cloning any time soon, even if there was no risk whatsoever.

In summary, the conference did succeed in promoting discussion about human cloning around the world, but the anti-human cloning scientists remained anti-human cloning and the pro-human cloning scientists remained pro-human cloning; so very little was achieved in this respect. In all probability this technology will one day be accepted as just another reproductive option for infertile couples unable to reproduce via any other method, and our children's children will look back through the historical archives, and wonder what all the fuss was about.

(Report by Roger Moorgate - Primary Administrator, The Reproductive Cloning Network)

NEXT PAGE - AUGUST CLONING NEWS SUMMARIES

Newsletter Front Page - Cloning Conference Report - News Summaries - Cloning Article - Cloning Interview