On March 19, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing to discuss human cloning. In his opening remarks, Committee Chair Orrin Hatch (R-UT) stated that the committee “will explore whether and how it might be possible to draw a line between promoting ethical stem cell research and prohibiting immoral human reproductive cloning.” He noted that his bill (S. 303) would ban reproductive cloning but still allow for therapeutic cloning.
There are two types of cloning—reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning. Reproductive cloning involves the development of a complete individual from a single body cell, such as the creation of the sheep Dolly. Therapeutic cloning creates embryonic stem cells that are genetic matches to the patient for the purpose of repairing damaged and diseased tissue.
In his testimony, Dr. Thomas Murray of The Hastings Center explained that in the six years since the birth of the sheep Dolly, “the ethical case against reproductive cloning has grown stronger.” Dr. Murray stated that creating “a child by cloning would be grossly unethical human experimentation.” However, he added that the ethics of therapeutic cloning “presents a very different picture” and “may contribute in time to the relief of suffering and the postponement of untimely death.”
Gregg Wasson testified that as a person living with Parkinson’s disease, he knows “how urgently a cure is needed.” He added that it is “imperative that we protect therapeutic cloning” because “responsibly regulated regenerative medical research may one day provide better treatments and cures for a number of debilitating and presently incurable conditions.”
Recently, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduced legislation (S. 245) to ban all forms of cloning. S. 245 would create criminal and civil penalties for any individual or entity that performs or attempts to perform human cloning and would prohibit individuals or entities from shipping or receiving the product of human cloning. Additionally, the bill would prohibit cloning for medical research purposes. Last month, the House approved a similar measure (H.R. 534) (see The Source, 2/28/03).
Dr. Harold Varmus of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center argued that S. 245 would send “a signal that could undermine the confidence of the remarkable scientific enterprise we have built in this country.” He added, “The NIH and other government agencies have shown repeatedly that they are well-equipped to oversee the ethical conduct of research in a manner that is openly and swiftly responsive to new findings.”
Speaking in support of the Brownback bill, Dr. James Kelly, a patient advocate, said that “even if cloning’s very real practical concerns could be overcome, including its need for female eggs and its expected exorbitant costs, and even if its rejection issues and genetic flaws could be addressed, it still would do nothing more than provide cells known to be genetically unstable, grow uncontrollably, and cause cancer.”
