Cellular reprogramming and bans on reproductive cloning
Posted by Jesse Reynolds January 19, 2010
Biopolitical Times
In a recent brief paper, a group of researchers and ethicists largely from the University of California, San Francisco argue that prohibitions against human reproductive cloning should be strengthened to cover any method. Their concerns, published in Cell: Stem Cell, are based in part on recent research showing that mice can essentially be cloned using the cellular reprogramming methods of induced pluripotency (iPS).
Led by Bernard Lo, who is also the chair of the research standard working group of the California stem cell research program, the authors provide a useful comparison of existing state, national, international, and nongovernmental laws and recommendations on cloning. These policies variously address cloning via somatic cell nuclear transfer, the creation of genetically identical humans, replication, the transfer of cloned cells in utero, and asexual reproduction. Because limited policies are unable to keep up with new techniques such as cellular reprogramming, they
Led by Bernard Lo, who is also the chair of the research standard working group of the California stem cell research program, the authors provide a useful comparison of existing state, national, international, and nongovernmental laws and recommendations on cloning. These policies variously address cloning via somatic cell nuclear transfer, the creation of genetically identical humans, replication, the transfer of cloned cells in utero, and asexual reproduction. Because limited policies are unable to keep up with new techniques such as cellular reprogramming, they
recommend prohibiting the implantation into a uterus of a totipotent entity that is nearly identical genetically to a currently existing or previously existing human being. This ban should cover transfer into both human and non-human uteri.Moreover, even though Lo et al remain explicitly agnostic on whether reproductive cloning should be permitted if it were shown to be safe, they recognize that society must agree that cloning is acceptable in order for a ban to be lifted.
We believe this ban should be in place indefinitely, until there is persuasive evidence of safety and also societal agreement that human reproductive cloning is acceptable as public policy.... Furthermore, because the issue is so sensitive, a policy decision to permit human reproductive cloning should result from extensive public and legislative debate and should not occur simply because a ban was not renewed.
Finally, they are confident that such a policy could be crafted in a way that doesn't interfere with legitimate research.
Unlike some five dozen other countries, the US still lacks a
federal ban on human reproductive cloning. Policy makers at all levels
should consider the points raised in this article before crafting
future legislation. It would be unfortunate if much-needed
policies were to become ineffective because they were narrowly written
to
address only existing techniques.
Previously on Biopolitical Times: