DOCSLIB.ORG

Bioethics and Cloning, Part 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bioethics and Cloning, Part 1 Bioethics Research Library The Joseph and Rose Kennedy Institute of Ethics Box 571212, Georgetown University Washington, DC 20057-1212 202-687-3885; fax: 202-687-8089 [email protected] http://bioethics.georgetown.edu Bioethics and Cloning, S Part 1 Susan Cartier Poland C Laura Jane Bishop September, 2002 O This is Part 1 of a two-part Scope Note on Bioethics and Cloning. The two parts were published consecutively in the September and December 2002 issues of the P Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. Introduction “Clone” is a collective noun (I, Stewart 1997, p. 771). A collective noun names E a group and is composed of individual members, such as “herd” or “flock.” Derived from the Greek klôn for twig or slip, “clone” was first used in biology to describe the aggregate of asexually produced progeny of an individual, either naturally occurring or man-made; the definition later expanded to mean a group of genetically identical members who originate from a single ancestor. Thus, a N clone is a group that results from the process of asexual reproduction. In nature, cloning occurs either by parthenogenesis (reproduction without O fertilization) or by fission (embryo splitting). In a pioneering experiment in 1952, Robert Briggs and Thomas J. King (I, 1952), cancer researchers at the Institute for Cancer Research (today part of the Fox Chase Cancer Center) in Philadelphia, demonstrated on frogs another method of cloning by transplanting nuclei into T enucleated cells, a technique called “nuclear transplantation,” which John B. E Gurdon and colleagues (I, 1958, 1975) used to create clones of frogs. 41 1 Then, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, two back- to-back frauds in cloning occurred. First, the TABLE OF CONTENTS cloning of a human described by American science journalist David Rorvik in the 1978 book Introduction. 1 In His Image was called a hoax by a court in I. History of the Science.. 4 1982. Second, the cloning of three mice, II. Historical Commentary. 7 announced by German wunderkind Karl Illmensee III. Animal Welfare. 9 (I) to scientific circles in 1979 (and to the public IV. Laws and Legal Literature.. 11 in 1981), could not be proven to be true, A. United States. 11 according to convincing evidence by McGrath and B. International. 12 Solter (I) published in 1984. C. Other.. 14 D. Legal Literature. 14 With their pronouncement that mammalian cloning was impossible, McGrath and Solter essentially stopped cloning research and funding theology and philosophy. It fosters questions for such biological research. So by the mid-1980s, about the meaning and purpose of life, the limits instead of further investigating cloning, of human powers to intervene in research and developmental biologists studied embryology therapy, and what it means to be human and related to in vitro fertilization, while molecular animal. In addition, environmentalists and organic biologists studied recombinant DNA under the farmers raise concerns about the effect of novel newly relaxed NIH guidelines. These two strands animals and plants on the environment, while of scientific investigation came together in the nutritionists and the lay public wonder about the work of Ian Wilmut, (I) who created in vitro health implications of cloning and consuming embryos using nuclear transplantation to mass quantities of bioengineered plants. reproduce genetically engineered cattle. Wilmut was seeking a way to increase the successful birth Keeping in mind at least four distinctions may rate when, in the 1990s, he produced identical help in understanding media reports of scientific twin sheep, Megan and Morag, cloned from an developments in cloning technology, in evaluating embryonic cell, followed by another sheep, Dolly, claims about the promise of cloning technologies, cloned from an adult cell. The birth of a mammal and in being clear about ethical and theological from an embryo whose genetic material came arguments for and against cloning. First, one must from an adult cell firmly re-established the distinguish the purpose of the cloning: Is it being possibility of cloning from adults. Prior to Dolly’s done purely for research or for research to birth, scientists believed that adult cells lost the understand and develop treatments or cures for ability to dedifferentiate—i.e., to become diseases or disorders (optimistically called unspecialized—and so could not direct the therapeutic cloning) or for reproductive purposes? development of an embryo through to birth. An often discussed focus of “therapeutic cloning” is the creation of cells, tissues, or fully formed The 1997 announcement of Dolly’s birth initiated organs for transplantation into humans to the present widespread discussion of cloning. regenerate or replace damaged, diseased, Because of its potentially vast applications across deformed, or worn-out parts. These resources, human health, medicine, agriculture, and cloned from a person’s own cells, would have a business/economics, cloning raises a host of common genetic identity, helping to avoid issues including those concerning: genetics and rejection based on genetic incompatibility. In genetic engineering, patenting, animal rights addition, such cloned cells, tissues, or organs and/or animal welfare (especially for transgenic, would help to alleviate the present shortage of research, or cloned animals), organ organs and tissues available for transplant. The transplantation, reproduction, eugenics, goal of reproductive cloning would be to produce pharmacology (drug production using transgenic an entire organism—animal or human. The animals), research practices, informed consent, genetic makeup of such “offspring” would be stem cell research, women’s rights, children’s virtually identical to that of the individual from rights, parental rights and responsibilities, and whom the genetic material is obtained. Questions 2 might also arise about the purpose for which the whether more than one species is involved also cloned individual was produced—e.g., to replace must be discerned. For example, the cells to be a dead or dying individual; to serve as an organ, cloned can be embryonic or fetal or adult. They tissue, or blood resource for its already existing can be germ cells or somatic (body) cells. The genetic progenitor; or simply to create offspring. source of the somatic cells can vary—mammary tissue (as with Dolly) or cumulus cells, which Second, one should distinguish among multiple surround and nurture the oocyte during maturation cloning techniques: Does the cloning occur by of the egg in the female ovary (as with CC, a parthenogenesis (oocyte division without cloned cat) or skin cells, and so forth. Cloning fertilization), blastomere separation (embryo efforts may combine genetic material from a splitting or twinning), or somatic cell nuclear single species or from different species—the latter transfer (SCNT), in which the nucleus of a process results in a transgenic animal. somatic cell, from an adult, is transferred into an already enucleated egg? In addition, which of the Ethical Issues in Animal Cloning different procedures available is used to combine the nucleus with the enucleated egg The cloning of animals as part of an emergent (ooplasm)—e.g., microsurgical injection or technology for reproducing farm, companion, and electrofusion? In all cases, although the host egg research animals often is taken for granted. contributes its mitochondrial DNA (about 2 Despite this acceptance, animal cloning raises percent of the total DNA), the vast majority of the concerns about the pain and suffering that may be genetic material of the developing embryo comes caused them by purposely tinkering with their from the transplanted nucleus. It is possible that genetic makeup and the way in which they are the technique itself may influence the success and conceived. Potential physical concerns are low post-birth health of offspring. success rates, problems with gestation and delivery, concerns about fetal anomalies, and Third, cloning must be distinguished from stem worries over increased vulnerability of clones to cell research. The same technique, SCNT, may be aging, disease, or disability. Deeper philosophical used to create embryos either for the purpose of issues require consideration, such as the developing in vitro stem cell lines or for the acceptability and implications of altering the purpose of in vivo gestation. SCNT is, however, genetic makeup of animals, especially in a world only one method of producing stem cells. Stem dominated by humans, as do practical concerns cells also can be obtained from surplus embryos that efforts to create “ideal” animals will diminish from IVF treatments for infertility, from embryos genetic diversity (with implications for hardiness created by IVF specifically for research purposes, and disease resistance), more rapidly, than will the from embryonic germ cells from aborted fetuses, selective breeding practices already in use. from umbilical cord blood, and from some adult Concern encompasses not only the animals born tissues—e.g., bone marrow or skin or blood—that of the cloning procedure, but also the animals have been reprogrammed to be totipotent without whose oocytes and genetic material are used, the use of the nuclear transfer technique (Danish those who serve as in vivo incubators, and those Council of Ethics, Cloning: Statements from the who gestate the embryos. Animals providing the Danish Council of Ethics, Copenhagen: The eggs into which the DNA will be transplanted Council, 2002, Part 2, I).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Human Cloning, Genetic Engineering and Privacy
    Curriculum Units by Fellows of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute 2000 Volume III: Constitutional and Statutory Privacy Protections in the 21st Century Human Cloning, Genetic Engineering and Privacy Curriculum Unit 00.03.07 by Carolyn Williams When news of a genetically engineered mouse with Down Syndrome (who died some time later) and the cloned sheep, Dolly hit the media, many wondered how these things were possible. Many undoubtedly thought them hoaxes or scientific experiments gone wrong. How many of us, outside of the scientific community had a clue that the next quest would involve the idea of cloning a human being or genetically engineering a better human, once the technology became available? Much of the technology is now available and with it comes a host of moral and ethical concerns. Is man playing God? Will clones become a subculture? Are we risking genetic disasters? Will this technology benefit all of society or just a select few? Cloned humans and genetically engineered bodies are the stuff that yesterday’s science fiction was made of. Today, they are current event topics and promise to become our medical future. We may not be morally prepared for these events, but the technology is here. Do we ignore it, try to regulate it, hope and pray that it goes away or do we embrace this new technology? RATIONALE This is a preliminary look into the biology, technology, ethics and conscious thought involved in human cloning and genetic engineering coupled with a brief exploration of governmental policy designed to regulate its research and practice. This study reports some of the current data for and against this new bio- technology and argues an individual’s constitutional right to privacy in choosing this technology.
    [Show full text]
  • David Michael Rorvik (1944–) [1]
    Published on The Embryo Project Encyclopedia (https://embryo.asu.edu) David Michael Rorvik (1944–) [1] By: Blight, Alysse Keywords: David Rorvik [2] Conception methods [3] Shettles Method [4] Family planning in literature [5] science journalist [6] David Michael Rorvik is a science journalist who publicized advancements in the field of reproductive medicine during the late twentieth century. Rorvik wrote magazine articles and books in which he discussed emerging methods and technologies that contributed to the progression of reproductive health, including sex determination [7], in vitro [8] fertilization [9], and human cloning [10]. During that time, those topics were controversial and researchers often questioned Rorvik’s work for accuracy. Rorvik contributed to the field of reproductive medicine by communicating methods of reproductive intervention and contributing to the controversy around new developmental medicine technologies. Rorvik was born on 1 November 1944 in Circle, Montana, to Frances Rorvik and Alan Rorvik. In 1962, he enrolled at the University of Montana in Missoula, Montana, where he majored in journalism. During his undergraduate career, Rorvik worked as a reporter and editor of The College Daily, the University’s student-run newspaper. The topics of Rorvik’s articles included the University’s peace rallies during the Vietnam War and caused controversy, as they challenged what he described as the provincialism of the region. Rorvik's stories caught the attention of the college president, who often threatened to discontinue the publication of the newspaper under Rorvik’s leadership as editor. In 1966, Rorvik graduated at the top of his class with a Bachelor of Arts degree in journalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Motivations, Practice, and Conflict in the History of Nuclear Transplantation, 1925-1970
    A 'Fantastical' Experiment: Motivations, Practice, and Conflict in the History of Nuclear Transplantation, 1925-1970 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Nathan Paul Crowe IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Mark Borrello, Adviser December, 2011 © Nathan Paul Crowe 2011 All Rights Reserved Acknowledgements Though completing a dissertation is often seen as a solitary venture, the truth is rather different. Without the help of family, friends, colleagues, librarians, and archivists, I would never have been able to finish my first year in graduate school, let alone my thesis. During the course of my research I came in contact with many people who were invaluable to my eventual success. First and foremost are those librarians, archivists, and collections specialists who helped guide me through a sea of records. I am indebted to all of those who helped me in the process: in particular, I would like to thank Janice Goldblum and Daniel Barbiero at the National Academy of Sciences, Lee Hiltzik at the Rockefeller Archives Center, and National Cancer Institute Librarian Judy Grosberg. At the National Institutes of Health, librarian Barbara Harkins, information specialist Richard Mandel, and historian David Cantor were all extremely useful in helping me find what I needed. I also can't imagine anyone being more accommodating than librarian Beth Lewis and her staff at the Fox Chase Cancer Center Library. I was able to complete my research with the financial support of several institutions. My thanks go out to the Rockefeller Archive Center for their generous help.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States
    No. 19-1392 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States THOMAS E. DOBBS, STATE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, et al., Petitioners, v. JACKSON WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATION, et al., Respondents. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES CouRT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRcuIT BRIEF OF BIOLOGISTS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF NEITHER PARTY LYNN D. DOWD Counsel of Record LAW OFFICES OF LYNN D. DOWD 29 West Benton Avenue Naperville, IL 60540 (630) 665-7851 [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae 306214 A (800) 274-3321 • (800) 359-6859 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF CONTENTS..........................i TABLE OF CITED AUTHORITIES ..............iv STATEMENT OF INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE .....................................1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT .....................2 ARGUMENT....................................6 I. “WHEN DOES A HUMAN’S LIFE BEGIN?” IS WIDELY RECOGNIZED AS A BIOLOGICAL QUESTION................6 II. ANALYZING VIEWS ON WHEN A HUMAN’S LIFE BEGINS REVEALS THAT FERTILIZATION IS THE LEADING BIOLOGICAL VIEW ............8 A. Some biologists believe that a human’s life begins at some point during the human life cycle ........................8 1. Some support the view that a human’s life begins at birth or first breath ......................8 2. Some support the view that a human’s life begins at fetal viability ...........9 ii Table of Contents Page 3. Some support the view that a human’s life begins at the first heartbeat, brainwave, or moment of pain capability ..................11 B. Most biologists affirm that a human’s life begins at the start of the human life cycle .............................12 C. The fertilization view on when a human’s life begins is the leading biological view ........................15 III.
    [Show full text]
  • Communique, 1985-1986
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Communique, 1953-2020 Journalism 1985 Communique, 1985-1986 University of Montana (Missoula, Mont. : 1965-1994). School of Journalism Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/communique Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation University of Montana (Missoula, Mont. : 1965-1994). School of Journalism, "Communique, 1985-1986" (1985). Communique, 1953-2020. 9. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/communique/9 This Newsletter is brought to you for free and open access by the Journalism at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Communique, 1953-2020 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. K im WILLIAMS A woman of uncommon sense 1923-1986 Photo by Bob Cushman W C to QJ Q REPORT It is impossible to report honestly ment: about the University of Montana — During Homecoming week, we dedi­ School of Journalism without men­ cated the new $8.6 Performing Arts/Ra- tioning that the university is in deep dio-Television Building and its splendid financial trouble. Because anticipatedbroadcasting facilities in grand style, with I Van Gordon Sauter of CBS News on state revenues have not materialized, an already grim budget picture has grown hand to give his blessing. dramatically worse. UM sustained a five — The Montana Kaimin offices were percent budget cut for next year and remodeled for the first time since the more cuts are almost certainly coming. Journalism Building was built in 1936. Faculty salaries — already near the bot­ — The school’s first-floor photography tom on the national scale — have been lab is undergoing a $28,000 renovation frozen by the state legislature.
    [Show full text]
  • Beacon, Vol. XXVIII, 1999
    BEACON A PUBLICATION OF BELLVIEW CHURCH OF CHRIST 4850 Saufley Field Road; Pensacola, FL 32526 (850) 455-7595 Internet Web Page: http://www.bellviewcoc.com E-mail: [email protected] January April July October February May August November March June September December VOL. XXVIII JANUARY 4, 1999 NO. 1 A PUBLICATION OF BELLVIEW CHURCH OF CHRIST 4850 Saufley Road; Pensacola, FL 32526 (850) 455-7595; Fax (850) 455-9940 Internet Web Page: http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/dmowery MEETING TIMES BISHOPS: Paul Brantley, Bill Gallaher, Fred Stancliff MINISTER: Michael Hatcher SUNDAY: DEACONS: Henry Born, Elward Brantley, Jerry Caine, 9:00 A.M. BIBLE CLASSES Bill Crowe, Louis Herrington, James Loy, 10:00 A.M., 6:00 P.M. WORSHIP Harold Maxey, Richard Parker MISSIONARY: Ira Y. Rice, Jr. WEDNESDAY: 7:00 P.M. 18:19-20). One of the earliest descriptions of the PRACTICAL POINTS church has them “continued stedfastly...in prayers” (Acts 2:42). ON PRAYER Believing Prayer (“prayer of faith,” v. 15). Dub McClish Faithless prayer is wasted words, but believing The Lord wants us to be a people of prayer prayer God hears and answers, according to His (Luke 19:46), but too often we are like the apos- will (Mark 11:24; Jam. 1:6ff). tles in Gethsemane, sleeping when we should be Intercessory Prayer (“pray one for another,” v. 16). Jesus prayed for His apostles and for us praying (Mark 14:37-38). That the Lord intended (John 17:9-23). We need to pray for one another for His followers to use prayer as an essential strand in the fabric of life, rather than merely as and for all men (1 Tim.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Development of Cloning Technology and the Role of Regulation in Ensuring Responsible Applications
    The Historical Development of Cloning Technology and the Role of Regulation in Ensuring Responsible Applications The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation The Historical Development of Cloning Technology and the Role of Regulation in Ensuring Responsible Applications (2003 Third Year Paper) Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:8852108 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA The Historical Development of Cloning Technology and the Role of Regulation in Ensuring Responsible Applications Darcy A. Paul∗ I. Introduction On December 27, 2002 a company called Clonaid announced the birth of a cloned human.1 Clonaid an- nounced the birth of a second child on January 4, 2003.2 Clonaid was founded by the leader of a religious sect known as the Raelians. This individual, a French expatriate named Claude Vorilhon, also goes by the name Rael.3 He and his group are probably the most vociferous and well-known advocates of applying cloning technology to human beings. What motivates the desire to make human clones? Vorilhon, reportedly born out of wedlock, was abandoned by his parents at an early age.4 While cloning may be an attractive option for those in similar situations, aversion to the so-called traditional concept of parentage, where one is reared by biological parents, is not the only reason why people might be interested in cloning as a potential reproductive means.
    [Show full text]
  • GAZETTE Setsmeet Guantanamo the Honorable J.A.G
    Jamaican Minister GAZETTE setsmeet Guantanamo The honorable J.A.G. Smith, the Bay, Cuba Jamaican minister of labour, will be meeting with all Jamaican em- ployees at the elementary school amphitheatre on Thursday afternoon Volume 36 Number 9 Wednesday January 14, 1981 at 3:30. Buses will be departing from Bay Hill Barracks and the Tryzna Village area at 3:15 p.m. for those Jamaica lauds GTMO's helping hand needing transportation. Mr. Smith will be accompanied by Mrs. Barbara Hall of the Manpower When it became obvious that there marshall an d his assistant. at our government's request, to Services Division and Mr. Granville were insufficient chemical stores In a pre ss statement, the Prime get aid from Guantanamo Bay we Williams, the parlimentary and equipment in Jamaica to con- Minister th . anked the U.S. Govern- should never underrate the bond of secretary to the minister of trol the fire, Prime Minister Edward meant for it s speedy response, and friendship that exists between this labour. OSeaga, (through the ambassador), subsequent press coverage has liber- country and our neighbors to the . All Jamaicans are encouraged to officially requested United States ally mention ned the United States' north. Never have USA interests let attend. Government help during the morning assistance. us down in a time of distress and of January 10th. this recent disaster has seen vet Within hours, the commander,Toti end, the January 12th another example of their willing- Program change Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, dispatch- "Daily Glea ner" editorial stated: ness to assist us." ed to Montego Bay twenty 55 gallon "We owe a great debt of grati- President Carter will deliver his drums of light water (foam), 8,000 tude to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A Second Look at Cloning, Science Fiction and Law Christine Corcos Louisiana State University Law Center
    Louisiana Law Review Volume 59 | Number 4 Symposium on Harmless Error - Part I Summer 1999 Double-Take: A Second Look at Cloning, Science Fiction and Law Christine Corcos Louisiana State University Law Center Isabel Corcos Brian Stockhoff Repository Citation Christine Corcos, Isabel Corcos, and Brian Stockhoff, Double-Take: A Second Look at Cloning, Science Fiction and Law, 59 La. L. Rev. (1999) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol59/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Double-Take: A Second Look at Cloning, Science Fiction and Law Christine Corcos" Isabel Corcos" Brian Stockho)fY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ..................................... 1042 II. Copies' Rights and Copy Wrongs: The Fear of Clones in Popular Culture .................................. 1046 III. The Basic Biology of Cloning ......................... 1048 IV. Social Commentary and Science: The Reproduction of Human Life Through Cloning as Seen in the Media ............... 1050 A. Social Commentary in Science Fiction ................ 1055 B. The Fear of Aliens ............................. 1057 C. Images of the Mad Scientist and the Sorcerer's Apprentice: Uncontrolled Experimentation and Unintended Consequences in Science Fiction .............................. 1059 D. Truth and Consequences: Specific Images of Cloning, Genetic Manipulation, Mad Scientists, and Unintended Consequences in Science and Science Fiction ....................... 1066 V. Mirror, Mirror: Some Examples of Images of Cloning in Popular Culture and Science Fiction .......................... 1072 A. Aliens, American Society, and the "Invasion Narratives" of the 1950s .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Communique, 1989
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Communique, 1953-2020 Journalism 1989 Communique, 1989 University of Montana (Missoula, Mont. : 1965-1994). School of Journalism Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/communique Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation University of Montana (Missoula, Mont. : 1965-1994). School of Journalism, "Communique, 1989" (1989). Communique, 1953-2020. 10. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/communique/10 This Newsletter is brought to you for free and open access by the Journalism at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Communique, 1953-2020 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Communique University of Montana School of Journalism 75 Years / --------------------------- Detail o f Kirk Johtggn poster commemoratJfig : the Diamond Anniversary*;. of the Montana School 8CU? Journalism. See page 5 iv I Diamond Anniversary Sixth Pulitzer Students cover all-class reunion for J-alums Asia connection Page 5 Page 4 Page 12 Fall reunion to mark 75th anniversary jA he University of Montana ing Dorothy Rochon Powers on another day for newspaper I School of Journalism is 75 '43, who retired from the workshops conducted by the II years old and we're cele­ Spokesman-Review and Spokane UM journalism faculty. Chronicle after more than four If all that doesn't seem brating. Mark October 5-7 on enough, we also introduced an your calendar — that's Home­ decades. • Lee Enterprises, the honors reporting course in coming 1989, and we're plan­ which our best print and ning the biggest School of Jour­ Greater Montana Foundation, the Great Falls Tribune and Car- broadcast students docu­ nalism homecoming ever — an mented Montana's economic all-class reunion.
    [Show full text]
  • Probe Newsletter, January 1, 1994
    I Dramatic 'Cloning' Story Cloned More FearThan Fact- P.4-5 DavidZimmerman 's newsletteron science, media,policy and health Vol. III, No. 2 January 1, 1994, New York,NY $5 AIDS Researchers Shift Course Resistance Studied Rethinking Vaccines ------ -- washington, DC Washington,DC Some people - but not very many - appear to be naturally Results in human trialsof experimentalAIDS vaccinesthus far protected against HIV (human immunodeficiency virus),which have been disappointing. Few if any of the volunteers who causes AIDS. While often exposed to the virus, they do not have been injected appear to have developed a protective become infected. immunity against HIV that comes dire.ctly from other people Some other individuals - again, not many - who are (wild virus). infected (HIV positive) remain disease-free and well for a re­ This dilemma provoked much disc�ion at last month's markably long time. This suggests that they, too, may harbor Instituteof Medicine (IOM) meeting here (seeadjacent story). some innate protective factor(s). The attraction of a vaccine,besides being the only method Theseputative protective factors, whichresearch leaders are that may one day stop the AIDS epidemic, is that, despite tentatively calling ''correlates of protective immunity to HIV setbacks, there are tantalizing clues that this approach might infection," were brought to center stage at a Dec. 10 brain­ work. stonning meeting convened here by the Institute of Medicine One clue is that, as in other infectious diseases, once a (IOM), an arm of the National Academy of Sciences. person has been infected, he or she is protected, as it were, Three factors,participants said, spurred IOM: from a second HIV infection from another person or source.
    [Show full text]
  • Cloning Human Beings
    CLONING HUMAN BEINGS Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission Rockville, Maryland June 1997 CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal to the President Letter from the President NBAC Roster Staff Roster Acknowledgments Executive Summary -i- 1. Introduction 1 2. The Science and Application of Cloning 13 3. Religious Perspectives 39 4. Ethical Considerations 63 5. Legal and Policy Considerations 87 6. Recommendations of the Commission 107 Appendices A. Glossary 1 B. List of Speakers 4 C. List of Commissioned Papers 5 June 9, 1997 The President The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear Mr. President: On February 24, 1997, in the wake of the announcement that scientists in Scotland apparently had succeeded in cloning an adult sheep, you asked the National Bioethics Advisory Commission to review the legal and ethical issues associated with the use of this technology and to report back within ninety days with recommendations. A week later you instructed the heads of executive departments and agencies that "no federal funds shall be allocated for cloning of human beings" thereby ensuring that precipitous steps would not be taken while the Commission was studying the subject. In this short interval, we have made every effort to consult with ethicists, theologians, scientists, physicians, and other citizens with interests and concerns in this area. Moreover, we have invited inputs for the Commission's consideration from as broad a cross-section of the community as time allowed. Further, recognizing that science and medicine are international activities with outstanding investigators and facilities in many nations, we have attempted to review relevant policies and proposals with respect to human cloning in other countries.
    [Show full text]