Welcome to
GENETIC CROSSROADS #19
August 18, 2001
Supporting responsible uses of human genetic technologies
Opposing the new techno-eugenics
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
For subscription and submission information, see end of message.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
I. EDITORS' NOTE
II. NEWS
1. Women's Health, Reproductive Rights Leaders Call for Cloning
Ban
2. Cloning Advocates at the National Academy of Sciences
3. France and Germany Call for UN Debate on Human Cloning
III. EMBRYO CLONING AND STEM CELL RESEARCH
IV. EVENTS AND RESOURCES
1. Beyond Cloning Conference, Boston, September 21-22
2. New Human Genetic Engineering Listserv
V. ABOUT GENETIC CROSSROADS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. EDITORS' NOTE
Human cloning has captured the attention of the country. In
the past
few weeks it has been the subject of a Congressional vote (see
Genetic
Crossroads Bulletin #3, August 2), a conference held by the most
prestigious scientific body in the US (see below), and intense
media
scrutiny. George Bush talked about cloning in his speech on stem
cell
research, and the ethics board he appointed will deliberate on
it. The
researchers who say they are working to produce a cloned child
grabbed
headlines, as did the announcement by a biotechnology company
that it
intends to clone human embryos in its privately funded laboratory.
Some of the news is encouraging. The House of Representatives
voted
in favor of a tough cloning ban. Pro-choice and progressive voices
condemning human cloning and inheritable genetic modification
are
beginning to organize and be heard. A few prominent scientists
have
spoken out about the social and political threats posed by cloning,
as well as about its serious health risks. France, Germany and
other
countries are asking the UN General Assembly to consider working
towards a global ban on human cloning. An influential group of
social
conservatives that oppose human cloning is working to untangle
it from
abortion politics. In poll after poll, huge majorities reject
the
production of cloned or genetically "redesigned" children.
Other developments are disturbing. Many scientists and others
say that
they believe cloning will be acceptable once it can be done safely.
Too few progressives are aware of what's at stake in the push
for human
cloning and inheritable genetic modification. Commercial interest
in
these dangerous technologies is quickly increasing. Confusion
about the
relationship between stem cell research and cloning is widespread.
This issue of Genetic Crossroads addresses many of these topics
and
gives pointers to information about others. But the most important
message is this: We now face, with much heightened urgency, the
job
of building a broad groundswell to stop the technologies of eugenic
engineering.
At this moment, the two constituencies visible in US debates
about new
human genetic technologies are the biotechnology lobby and opponents
of
abortion rights. Thus media coverage typically pits overblown
promises
of regenerative medicine against the claims of abortion foes about
the
moral status of embryos, and downplays or ignores the enormous
social
and political consequences of human cloning and inheritable genetic
modification. No wonder, then, that many people are unaware that
the
techniques used in cloning would open the door for inheritable
genetic
modification and the takeoff of a new market-driven eugenics.
Our job is to alert and activate the broad constituencies who
have not
yet fully understood or engaged the dangers of eugenic engineering.
In
the next few weeks we will be launching a web site and planning
a number
of public events. Genetic Crossroads will keep you informed both
about
organizing developments and about events related to the new human
genetic technologies as they unfold.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. NEWS
1. Women's Health and Reproductive Rights Leaders Call for Cloning Ban
In anticipation of the US Congressional vote on human cloning,
Judy
Norsigian of the Boston Women's Health Book Collective and other
feminists circulated a letter calling for a ban on cloning among
women's
health and reproductive rights leaders. The letter and its more
than
100 signatories are posted at <www.ourbodiesourselves.org/clone3.htm>.
From the letter: "To allow the creation of human clones
would open the
door to treating humans like interchangeable manufactured objects
and
commodities. It would violate deeply and widely held values concerning
human individuality and dignity. It would pave the way for unprecedented
new forms of eugenics. And it serves no justifiable purpose.
"Supporters of women's health and reproductive rights
have particular
reasons to oppose human cloning. There is no way that human cloning
could be developed without unethical mass experimentation on women
and
children. Further, cloning advocates are seeking to appropriate
the
language of reproductive rights and freedom of choice to support
their
case. This is a travesty, and needs to be challenged. There is
an
immense difference between ending an unwanted pregnancy and creating
a duplicate human...
"We also call for a moratorium of five years on the use
of cloning to
create human embryos for research purposes....The creation of
clonal
human embryos, which would increase the difficulty of enforcing
a ban
on the production of genetic duplicate humans, is unnecessary
for [stem
cell] investigations. This moratorium is prudent and reasonable
policy
when faced with a technology of such profound consequence."
To add your name and/or organization to the letter, or to discuss
it,
please contact Judy Norsigian at <judy@bwhbc.org> or Marcy
Darnovsky
at <teel@adax.com>.
The fact that human cloning is opposed by women's health advocates
and
other pro-choice constituencies is just beginning to be noticed
by the
media. One of the first stories on this broad opposition appeared
in
the San Francisco Chronicle on August 9. See <www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/
article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/09/MN24275.DTL>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Cloning Advocates at the National Academy of Sciences
On August 7, three scientists who say they intend to begin
cloning human
children appeared at a widely covered session of a National Academy
of
Sciences (NAS) conference. Fertility researchers Panos Zavos and
Severino
Antinori shared a podium with Brigitte Boisellier, the Raelian
scientist
who claims to be working on cloning the dead child of a wealthy
couple.
Most, though disturbingly far from all, of the biomedical scientists
and
bioethicists on the NAS panel said they oppose the production
of cloned
children. But many of them indicated that they believe human cloning
is
unethical only because it is too physically dangerous at this
time. Much
of the discussion thus focused on whether the technical difficulties
that now accompany the cloning of animals can be overcome, so
that
attempts at human cloning could be considered safe.
The NAS is preparing policy recommendations on human cloning
for a
report scheduled for release by the end of September.
The presence of the "cowboy cloners" at the NAS conference,
coupled
with the failure of others in attendance to clearly condemn human
cloning, serves to normalize the idea of cloning as a technique
of
assisted reproduction.
French Health Minister Bernard Kouchner, who co-founded the
Nobel
Prize-winning group Doctors Without Borders and who is calling
on
the United Nations to draft an international treaty banning human
cloning (see below), said of the NAS event, "I simply fail
to fathom
how distinguished scientists of the kind present in Washington
found
nothing better to do than talk of the complexities or risks of
such
an enterprise."
<http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010808/sc/health_cloning_dc_11.html>
<http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010809/hl/cloning_5.html>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. France and Germany Call for UN To Draft Global Cloning Treaty
France and Germany have launched a campaign for a global treaty
to ban
human cloning. On August 8 the two countries proposed that the
United
Nations General Assembly set up a committee to draft a legally
binding
international convention, and that human cloning be included on
the
agenda of the new General Assembly session, which begins next
month.
Senior officials of both countries have spoken strongly in
support
of a global ban. "Action has to be taken to prevent the dangers
and
unpredictable consequences this poses to humankind...[W]e are
trying
to...mobilize the entire international community," said French
Foreign
Ministry spokesperson Bernard Valero. Reuters reported that French
Health Minister and Doctors Without Borders co-founder Bernard
Kouchner
"stepped up pressure for a worldwide ban on human cloning...with
a
blistering attack on Italian doctor Severino Antinori" and
called on
Italy to remove Antinori's medical license.
<http://news.excite.com/news/ap/010808/20/germany-france-cloning>
<http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010809/hl/cloning_5.html>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. EMBRYO CLONING AND STEM CELL RESEARCH
The relationship between embryo cloning and embryonic stem
cell research
is technically and politically complicated, and many media accounts
of
it have been misleading. The two procedures do overlap, but they
are
technically distinct and very different politically.
Most opponents of abortion rights object to embryo cloning
and to any
research on embryos that involves their destruction. The growing
number
of people who support both reproductive rights and research on
embryonic
stem cells are wary of embryo cloning for completely different
reasons.
These pro-choice supporters of medical research are calling
for a
moratorium on embryo cloning, because the production of cloned
embryos
in labs around the country would greatly increase the likelihood
that
pregnancies would be initiated with some of them. The absence
in the US
of a ban on reproductive cloning, and of meaningful regulatory
oversight
of research and assisted reproduction facilities, heightens the
concern.
Embryo cloning would also make germline engineering practical,
by
providing the "raw materials" for genetic manipulation
of embryos--a
point that has so far gone almost unnoticed in media coverage
of the
cloning debate.
A moratorium on embryo cloning need not hinder research on
embryonic
stem (ES) cells, which can and should continue using embryos produced
in IVF procedures. Researchers can use these embryos to determine
whether ES cells can in fact be used for therapeutic purposes.
In these
early days of stem cell research, no one yet knows whether ES
cells can
reliably be turned into needed tissue types, or whether they are
as
good as or better than adult stem cells for medical applications.
The other potential use of cloned embryos in stem cell therapies
would
be to create immune-compatible tissues. Many other avenues of
existing
and projected research also address that problem. But if it turns
out
that embryo cloning is needed to solve it, and if bans on reproductive
cloning and inheritable genetic modification are in place, then
the
moratorium on embryo cloning should be revisited.
See "Can They Rebuild Us?," Peter Aldhous, Nature,
April 5, 2001;
"Hype over stem cells beginning to worry scientific community:
Researchers warn cures may not come overnight," Keay Davidson,
San
Francisco Chronicle, August 5, 2001 <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/
article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/05/MN32966.DTL>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. EVENTS AND RESOURCES
1. Beyond Cloning Conference, Boston, September 21-22
"Beyond Cloning: Protecting Humanity from Species-Altering
Experiments"
will focus on the sorts of policies, legislation, international
accords,
and political work that will be needed, domestically and internationally,
to prevent the new human genetic technologies from being used
in ways
that would alter the human species.
The conference is co-sponsored by the Health Law Department,
Boston
University School of Public Health, the Exploratory Initiative
on the
New Human Genetic Technologies, and the Chicago-Kent School of
Law.
For further information on program, schedule, registration
and lodging,
see <http:www.bumc.bu.edu/www/sph/lw/website/index.htm>.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. New Human Genetic Engineering Listserv
A new listserv on human genetic engineering is dedicated to
news and
some commentary on cloning, germline modification, stem cell research,
and other aspects of human genetic engineering. To subscribe,
type:
subscribe human-ge
in the body of a message addressed to <listserv@iatp.org>.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. ABOUT GENETIC CROSSROADS (formerly Techno-Eugenics Email Newsletter)
This newsletter originated in 1999 out of the concerns of academics,
activists, and others in the San Francisco Bay Area about the
direction
of the new human genetic and reproductive technologies. It is
published
by the Exploratory Initiative on the New Human Genetic Technologies,
a
public interest organization working to alert the public and leaders
of civil society about the urgent need for societal oversight
of these
technologies and the dangers of the techno-eugenic vision.
We support genetic and reproductive technologies that serve
the public
interest. We oppose those--such as human germline engineering
and human
reproductive cloning--that would be likely to exacerbate inequality,
the commercialization of reproduction, and the commodification
of human
genes and tissues.
GENETIC CROSSROADS is published approximately once a month.
Feedback,
submissions, and suggestions are welcome. Marcy Darnovsky will
moderate.
Please forward GENETIC CROSSROADS to others who may be interested.
Exploratory Initiative staff
Marcy Darnovsky, Ph.D. <teel@adax.com>
Richard Hayes, M.A. <rhayes@publicmediacenter.org>
Tania Simoncelli, M.S. <tania@publicmediacenter.org>
Jesse Reynolds, M.S. <reynolds@nature.berkeley.edu>
To subscribe and for all other communications: <teel@adax.com>