--------------------------------------------------------------------
Welcome to the
Techno-Eugenics Email List Newsletter
Number 5
February 4, 2000
Supporting genetic science in the public interest
Opposing the new techno-eugenics
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This is Issue Number 5 of the Techno-Eugenics Email List
newsletter, as far as we know the only on-line newsletter
focused on the politics of the new human genetic and
reproductive technologies. If you're receiving this news-
letter for the first time, please see the instructions for
subscribing and submitting items at the end of this message.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"We should be on our guard not to overestimate
science and scientific methods when it is a
question of human problems; and we should not
assume that experts are the only ones who have
a right to express themselves on questions
affecting the organization of society."
-- Albert Einstein (Time Magazine's "Person
of the Century"), May 1949.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
I. RECENT EVENTS
1. Report on California Advisory Committee on Human
Cloning,
Oakland, CA, 1/27/00
II. UPCOMING EVENTS
1. "Asilomar 2000" meeting to assess development
and regulation
of genetic engineering, Pacific Grove, CA, 2/15 - 2/17/00
2. AAAS symposium, "Changing the Human Future Through
Germline
Engineering," Washington, DC, 2/21/00
3. "The New Human Genetic Technologies and Social
Justice,"
Santa Cruz, CA, March 1
III. NEWS AND POINTERS SUPPORTING TECHNO-EUGENICS
1. New Scientist: "The Last Taboo"
2. Lord Robert Winston: "Genetically Modified Babies
Inevitable"
3. Charles Murray: "Deeper into the Brain"
IV. NEWS AND POINTERS OPPOSING TECHNO-EUGENICS
1. Richard Hayes: "In the Pipeline: Genetically
Modified Humans?"
2. International Network on Bioethics and Disability
V. ABOUT THE TECHNO-EUGENICS EMAIL LIST NEWSLETTER
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I. RECENT EVENTS
The third meeting of the California Advisory Committee on Human
Cloning was held on January 27 in Oakland. About ten people who
had been alerted about the Cloning Committee meeting by this
newsletter attended. The committee heard from four invited speakers:
Patricia Baird, MD, Medical Genetics Department, University
of
British Columbia
John Robertson, JD, School of Law, University of Texas
Alta Charo, JD, University of Wisconsin School of Law
James Warner, Professor of Ethical Studies, Loma Linda University
Of the four, only Dr. Baird spoke in clear opposition to reproductive
human cloning. She described the work of the Canadian Royal Commission
on New Reproductive Technologies, which she chaired and which
met from
1989-1993. The Commission solicited the views of over 40,000
Canadian
citizens in conferences, public panels, focus groups, opinion
surveys,
and by other means. IT concluded that "there is no compelling
case to
cross the boundary and to make people by asexual means; human
reproductive cloning is without clear potential benefits to almost
all
citizens and other options are available in most situations."
Here are a few excerpts from Dr. Baird's testimony:
"Most of the debate on human cloning [has] focused on
a weighing of
harms and benefits to individuals. This is a dangerously incomplete
framing....We need to shift...to a framing that reveals how permitting
cloning affects future generations and our society as a whole....
Cloning raises profound issues about the future of our species.
We
haven't yet found the wisdom to deal with hunger, poverty, and
environmental degradation--we are unlikely to have the wisdom
to
direct our own evolution.
"Reproduction by nuclear transfer cloning makes it possible
for the
first time to think seriously about genetically enhancing humans....
All members of the public have a stake in whether cloning is permitted
or not, because if cloned people exist, it changes things for
everyone....The decisions should not be taken pre-emptively by
a
particular clinical facility or a particular group of scientists
who
ignore the wishes of the rest of the community....How we choose
to
use or not use this technological capacity will help shape our
society
for our children, for their children and after. How it is used
is
likely to further entrench existing inequalities, and create new
ones....
"Once we breach this barrier, it leaves us with no clear
place to
stop....We are at a clear and appropriate stopping place on a
very
slippery slope."
For copies of Dr. Baird's full presentation, contact Richard
Hayes
at Public Media Center in San Francisco, CA: 415-434-1403 or
<rhayes@publicmediacenter.org>.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
II. UPCOMING EVENTS
1. The Asilomar 25th anniversary symposium, the "Symposium
on Science,
Ethics and Society," will be held February 15-17 in Pacific
Grove, CA.
According to the program, "The presence at the symposium
of a number
of those who led and participated in the 1975 Asilomar conference
will
help to ground the discussion in a rich substrate of reality,
even as
the involvement of historians and other social scientists, lawyers,
and philosophers will bring outsiders' perspectives. Furthermore,
the
active participation of present and past government officials,
regulators, and critics of the scientific enterprise should supply
an
element that was largely absent twenty-five years ago."
The symposium is being organized by Professor Alexander Capron
of the Pacific Center for Health Policy and Ethics, University
of
Southern California Law School, <acapron@law.usc.edu>.
A preliminary schedule includes these workshops and speakers:
TUESDAY, 15 FEBRUARY 2000
OPENING SESSION
Welcome: Alexander Capron, University of Southern California*
Keynote: Scientific Responsibility, Public Accountability
Donald Fredrickson, Former Director, NIH*
Commentary: What Did the Asilomar Exercise Accomplish, and
What Did
it Leave Undone?
Paul Berg, Stanford University*
Jonathan King, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Philippe Kourilsky, Institut Pasteur, Paris
Sheldon Krimsky, Tufts*
Robert Sinsheimer, UC Santa Barbara
Maxine Singer, Carnegie Institution, Washington*
Stephen Stitch, Rutgers University*
Susan Wright, University of Michigan*
SESSION II: The Public: Alerted, Educated, Unduly Alarmed?
Reporting Recombinant DNA: Asilomar and the Press
Nicholas Wade, N.Y. Times*
Commentators:
Jerry E. Bishop, Wall Street Journal
Donald D. Brown, Carnegie Institution, Baltimore
R. Pierre DuMaine, former Bishop of San Jose*
Richard Horton, editor, The Lancet
Daniel E. Koshland Jr., UC Berkeley & former editor, Science
Dorothy Nelkin, New York University*
Michael Rogers, Newsweek Interactive
Charles Weiner, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
WEDNESDAY, 16 FEBRUARY 2000
SESSION III: Contending with Contemporary Issues in Light of
the
Accomplishments and Shortcomings of Asilomar
A. Genetically Modified Organisms
Presenter: Christopher R. Somerville, Carnegie Institution of
Washington & Stanford
Commentators:
Willy de Greef, Novartis*
Rebecca Goldburg, Environmental Defense Fund
Calestous Juma, Harvard University
Julian Kinderler, University of Sheffield*
James Maryanski, Food and Drug Administration
Peter Starlinger, University of Cologne
Ulrich Trohler, University of Freiburg
B. Genomics: Human Diversity, Genetic Patents and Ownership
Presenter: Eric Lander, MIT/Whitehead
Commentators:
Troy Duster, New York University*
Rebecca Eisenberg, University of Michigan
Henry Greely, Stanford University
Eric Juengst, Case-Western Reserve University*
Mary-Claire King, University of Washington
Margaret Lock, McGill University*
Benno Muller-Hill, University of Cologne
Henk ten Have, Catholic University, Nijmegen
Nancy Wexler, Columbia University
C. Somatic and Germline Gene Therapy
Presenter: Inder Verma, Salk Institute*
Commentators:
W. French Anderson, University of Southern California
Paul Billings, GeneSage*
Allen Buchanan, University of Arizona
Theodore Friedmann, UC San Diego
David Magnus, University of Pennsylvania
Oliver Smithies, University of North Carolina
THURSDAY, 17 FEBRUARY 2000
CLOSING SESSION: Asilomar, Then and Now: What Roles for Scientists,
the Press, Policymakers, and the Public-at-Large?
Chair: David Baltimore, California Institute of Technology*
Commentators:
Ken-ichi Arai, University of Tokyo
Deborah Blum, University of Wisconsin
Sydney Brenner, Cambridge University
John Harris, University of Manchester*
Donald Kennedy, Stanford University & Editor-designate, Science
Daniel Kevles, California Institute of Technology*
Kenichi Matsubara, Kyushu University
Lennart Philipson, Uppsala University
Harold Shapiro, Princeton University & Chair, National Bioethics
Advisory Commission*
Philip Sharp, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Daniel Singer, former General Counsel, Federation of American
Scientists*
*Confirmed
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
2. AAAS Symposium: "Changing Our Genetic Future Through
Germline
Intervention," Washington DC, Monday, February 21
The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
is
preparing a set of "recommendations" concerning human
germline
engineering, and will report on them at a symposium at the AAAS
annual meeting in Washington, DC. For more information,
<www.aaas.org/spp/dspp/sfrl/projects/germline.htm>.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
3. "The New Human Genetic Technologies and Social Justice,"
Santa Cruz, CA, Wednesday March 1
Two presentations by Dr. Marcy Darnovsky and Richard Hayes
of the
Exploratory Initiative on the New Human Genetic Technologies:
12:15 - 2:00 pm at University of California, Santa Cruz
Natural Sciences 2 Bldg., Room 221 (behind Science Library)
7:00 - 9:00 pm at Veterans Memorial Bldg., 846 Front St., Santa
Cruz, downtown next to main Post Office
For more information: Alexander Gaguine at 831-429-5507 or
Kathy
McAfee at 831-459-4991.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
III. NEWS AND POINTERS SUPPORTING TECHNO-EUGENICS
1. New Scientist: "The Last Taboo"
An editorial in the October 23, 1999 New Scientist is titled,
"The
Last Taboo: If genetic engineering could be made safe, would you
let your baby have it?"
The editorial comes out strongly in opposition to a hypothetical
ban on research using artificial chromosomes in human tissues.
If artificial chromosomes "fulfill their promise," the
editors
write, "they could revolutionize scientists' ability to genetically
engineer embryos. They may never make the outcome totally
predictable, but they could make it safe enough to ease the worst
fears about genetic accidents. And that could change perceptions."
The editorial concludes: "As for designer babies, nobody
is going
to approve of them in the abstract. But if you ask would-be parents
if they'd like to give their children a head-start at school or
on
the athletics track, don't be surprised to find that the opposition
is less than absolute....[I]t would be a mistake to expect the
taboo
on human genetic engineering to last forever. Some day someone
will
want to try it. The invention of artificial chromosomes doesn't
make
that desirable--only people can make that judgment. But it does
add
to the forces that are now beginning to make it seem inevitable."
The complete editorial is online at
<www.newscientist.com/ns/19991023/editorial.html>.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Lord Robert Winston: "Genetically Modified Babies Inevitable"
>From an article by Ann Ashburner, OTC (COMTEX Newswire):
Grahamstown (East Cape News, February 3, 2000) - Genetically
modified babies were inevitable, said renowned fertility pioneer
Lord Robert Winston recently. "In my view, we will certainly
be
able to make transgenic humans." Lord Winston was speaking
to
the Royal Society last week to mark his Michael Faraday Award
in
recognition of his contribution to the public understanding of
science. During the lecture, he also discussed the inevitable
use so-called germ-line gene therapy which effects eggs, sperm
and thus future generations. The British government blocked
moves in June last year to clone early embryos for the production
of tissue for medical treatments.
Winston expressed his frustration at this debate: "I find
it very
distressing that we should be going backwards. To be hysterical
about the use of embryos for tissue engineering does not make
any
sense if you are likely to be able to save a life." Winston's
TV
series, "Your Life In Their Hands," reached an audience
of 8 million
viewers and was one of the most successful BBC2 series ever made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Charles Murray: "Deeper into the Brain"
Murray, co-author of The Bell Curve, is the Bradley Fellow
at the
American Enterprise Institute. Here's an excerpt from an article
he wrote in the January 24, 2000 issue of National Review, titled
"Deeper into the Brain."
"[W]hen we know the complete genetic story, it will turn
out that
the population below the poverty line in the United States has
a
configuration of the relevant genetic makeup that is significantly
different from the configuration of the population above the poverty
line....As the biological basis for personal qualities statistically
associated with social problems--low IQ, impulsiveness, short
time-
horizons, sociopathy, indolence--is understood, the old arguments
about causality (e.g., `It's poverty and disadvantage that create
the low IQ, not the other way around') will be resolved....
"I have no idea how the new eugenicism will play out,
only a general
expectation that eugenics, anathema today, will be a spinoff of
the
neurogenetic revolution tomorrow....[S]hould we expect that Homo
sapiens will take it into its collective head to redesign itself?
"I confess to a certain optimism. I suppose that sex
selection will
be common, and that some parents will, if they can, opt to make
their
babies more compassionate, or more competitive, or "more"
of some
other personality trait that they favor. Some parents may want
to
grow seven-foot-tall basketball players....[But t]he popular voluntary
uses of gene manipulation are likely to be ones that avoid birth
defects and ones that lead to improved overall physical and mental
abilities. I find it hard to get upset about that prospect."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
III. NEWS AND POINTERS OPPOSING TECHNO-EUGENICS
1. Richard Hayes: "In the Pipeline: Genetically Modified
Humans?"
>From Multinational Monitor, Jan/Feb 2000 <www.essential.org/monitor>
"Scientists have long speculated that parents would someday
be able
to genetically engineer their children for appearance, physical
and
mental abilities, or other traits of choice. For most people
these
predictions have seemed so far in the future, or so patently
repugnant, that they didn't need to be taken very seriously.
Such
complacency is no longer possible. Well below the radar screen
of
both the general public and policy makers, a concerted campaign
is
underway to perfect and justify the technologies that would allow
the engineering of `designer babies.'
"Supporters of the techno-eugenic future are working diligently
on
a number of fronts to advance their cause. The broad strategy
includes the continued development of genetic manipulation
technologies, mobilization of a credible and vocal minority of
the
public to actively embrace and call for a techno-eugenic future,
and persuading the majority of the public that attempts to restrict
the use of human genetic technologies would be an infringement
of
individual rights."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
2. International Network on Bioethics and Disability
This discussion group addresses many important topics regarding
the new human genetic technologies, from the perspective of
disabled people, and in general.
"Aim: Our aim is to form a worldwide network for the following
goals: 1) To increase the knowledge among disabled people of
bioethical issues. 2) To increase the dialog between disabled
people and members of other marginalized groups on bioethical
issues. 3) To increase the dialog between the marginalized and
`non marginalized' groups on bioethical issues. 4) To increase
the visibility of disabled people and other marginalized groups
in the field of bioethics and science in general with the hope
of promoting greater participation in decision-making processes
and decision-making bodies related to bioethical issues and
science in general. The coordinators are Christopher Newell
(Australia) and Gregor Wolbring (Canada)."
To subscribe, email <Bioethics-subscribe@onelist.com>.
For more info contact: Dr. Gregor Wolbring, Department of
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Calgary.
Phone 1-403-220-5448; email <gwolbrin@ucalgary.ca>;
website <www.thalidomide.ca/gwolbring>.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
V. ABOUT THE TECHNO-EUGENICS EMAIL LIST NEWSLETTER
This newsletter stems from the work of academics, activists,
and
others in the San Francisco Bay Area who are concerned about the
direction of the new human genetic technologies.
We support technologies that serve the public interest. We
oppose
those--including human germline engineering and human cloning--that
foster inequality, discrimination, objectification, and the
commodification of human genes and tissues.
This newsletter is intended to alert and inform concerned individuals
about the new technologies and the techno-eugenic vision. For
at
least the next several months, the newsletter will be irregular
(a couple times a month), informal, and non-automated. We'd welcome
feedback, and suggestions about focus and format. A web site
will
be coming soon.
Marcy Darnovsky will moderate. Send submissions to her via
the email
address below.
Unless we hear from you, we'll keep you on this list. Please
let us
know if you don't want to receive the newsletter---we won't feel
rejected! On the other hand, feel free to forward it to others
who
may be interested, and encourage them to subscribe by reply to
Marcy.
If you're a new subscriber, let us know if you'd like to receive
back issues.
Marcy Darnovsky, Ph.D. Richard Hayes, M.A.
teel@adax.com rhayes@publicmediacenter.org