British Section of the World Federation of Doctors Who Respect Human Life

Inter-species embryos (hybrids and chimeras) approved

The Government is proposing a clause which will introduce a new section 4A to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act. Without waiting for the matter to go though Parliament, the HFEA has now approved the work in principle, alleging that the public are “at ease” with the idea of inter-species embryos. The terms are explained in Appendix 9 to the Government Report as follows:

•  section 4A(5)(a) –– an embryo created by using human gametes and the gametes of an animal (ie ‘true hybrids’)

• section 4A(5)(b) –– an embryo created by replacing the nucleus of an animal egg or a cell derived from an animal embryo with a human cell or the nucleus of a human cell (ie ‘cybrids’)

• section 4A(5)(c) –– a human embryo that has been altered by the introduction of any sequence of nuclear or mitochondrial DNA of an animal (ie ‘human-animal transgenic embryos’)

• section 4A(5)(d) –– a human embryo that has been altered by the introduction of one or more animal cells (ie ‘human-animal chimeras’)

• section 4A(5)(e) –– any other embryo that contains both––

(ii) any haploid set of animal chromosomes or any other sequence of nuclear or mitochondrial DNA of an animal  (i.e. any other animal that is at least ‘half’ human).

4. As indicated in the introduction to the draft Bill command paper, the Government has taken account of the report and recommendations of the Commons Science and Technology Committee and has accepted the principle that legislation should provide for certain inter-species embryos to be created for research purposes. The approach we propose is for the Bill to provide that the creation and use of the types of inter-species embryos listed at the proposed new section 4A(5)(b) to (d) may be authorised by research licence. without the need for secondary legislation (regulations) to this effect.”

(Appendix 9 to the Report)

Australia’s Right to Life News reports on other proposals in the British Bill:

• A child can be created without a legal father, but two legal mothers. Children do not necessarily need a father in IVF procedures.

• Eggs or sperm can be removed from incompetent persons without their consent.

• Embryos can be screened for serious medical conditions.

• Eggs or sperm can be removed from incompetent persons without their consent.

•  Not-for-profit surrogacy agencies will be able to charge reasonable expenses for organising surrogate mothers.

Evidence to the Joint Committee (volume II)

Comment on Reproductive Ethics (CORE) noted in their memorandum that “Definitions are to be so plastic that even prohibitions can be by-passed by the simple mechanism of a quick fix from the Secretary of State. . . (p.338)

“CORE believes that science in the United Kingdom has become the new fundamentalism, and that politicians are increasingly reluctant to engage in genuine scrutiny of the claims made by scientists, particularly in the field of embryonic stem cells . . . A colossal amount of time has been wasted justifying the use of inter-species embryos without robust scientific counter-arguments . . . (p.339)

“The vital role of the female mitochondria inthe process of reproduction has been inadequately presented during evidence sessions” on inter-species embryos. . .” (p.340).

Kevin F. Egan in his memorandum (p.343) stated “The Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics maintains that due to the high propensity of mitochondrial problems human-animal research is likely to have limited scientific value and is most unlikely to provide any treatment for patients. . . ”

Later (p.347) he wrote:

“Even if the implantation of embryonic stem cells was to produce the intended effects, their propensity to be rejected by the body’s immune system would probably require a life long regimen of anti rejection drugs with the attendant side effects – which would be good news only for the pharmaceutical companies.

“In view of the yawning chasm between hopes and achievements that to date has characterized embryonic stem cell research, an article headed ‘California’s Stem Cell Follies’ in the Forbes-Investments Journal comments that only ‘dumb public money is going into embryonic stem cells’.

“Unfortunately for the UK taxpayer, the Department of Health has earmarked millions of pounds of such money between now and 2008 in grants for embryonic stem cell research.will lead to.

“Even if ethical reasons alone do not justify the Government calling a halt to embryo stem cell research, then utilitarian considerations ought to provide compelling reasons to do so. This becomes clear when the aforementioned abysmal track record of embryo stem cell work in alleviating human suffering is compared with the advance in adult stem cell research and treatment.

Adult stem cells

“Recent years have witnessed an explosion of information on adult stem cells (the term is often used to include stem cells from, for example, newborn babies). Using adult stem cells overcomes the ethical concerns surrounding embryo research discussed above and appears to have greater scientific potential than embryonic stem cells. In its submission to the House of Lords Select Committee on Stem Cell Research, the Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics explained that there are various ways in which adult cells can be used. They can be taken from the patient, or a donor, and used without being modified, as in the case of bone marrow transplants for patients with cancer. Alternatively, stem cells from the patient can be subject to gene therapy before being re-introduced, as in the case of children who were treated recently for Severe Combined Immune Deficiency. Stem cells can be induced to carry out a new role in the body, as when a patient with heart disease was given stem cells from muscle in his leg, which then formed a different kind of muscle in his heart. It is known that adult bone marrow cells are particularly versatile, and can produce bone, cartilage, tendon, muscle, fat, liver and neural cells. Neural stem cells can also form other cell types, such as blood and muscle cells. The Centre reported that successful treatments have been carried out on children with cartilage defects, patients with corneal scarring, and patients with lupus, systemic sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis. A number of cancers moreover, have been successfully treated using adult cells, including metastatic retinoblastoma, which has a poor prognosis with conventional treatments.”

“In the aforementioned article entitled ‘California’s Stem Cell Follies’ in the Forbes Investments Journal, the writer cites diabetes research as an area in which the supremacy of treatments based upon adult stem cells over embryonic stem cells has become apparent. Researchers in Canada for example, have shown that:

‘Transplanted adult stem cells from bone marrow can cause pancreatic tissue to repair itself, restoring normal insulin production and reversing symptoms of diabetes. The team has reversed diabetes in mice and hopes to move to human trials. And researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital have used adult stem cells from the spleen to regenerate insulin-producing cells and cure diabetes in mice. Essentially the spleen cells ‘retrain’ the body’s immune system to stop attacking its own insulin-producing pancreas cells, and new cells then naturally regenerate.’ ”