Copyright 2001 eMediaMillWorks, Inc.
(f/k/a Federal
Document Clearing House, Inc.)
Federal Document Clearing House
Congressional Testimony
June 20, 2001, Wednesday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 1338 words
COMMITTEE:
HOUSE ENERGY AND COMMERCE
SUBCOMMITTEE: HEALTH
HEADLINE:
PROHIBITON ON
HUMAN CLONING
TESTIMONY-BY: DAN PERRY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALLIANCE
FOR
AFFILIATION: AGING RESEARCH
BODY: June 20, 2001
Prepared Witness
Testimony The Committee on Energy and Commerce W.J. "Billy Tauzin" Chairman
H.R. 1644,
Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001, and
H.R.____, Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001 Subcommittee on Health
Mr. Dan
Perry Executive Director Alliance for Aging Research
Chairman Bilirakis,
and Members of the Committee:
Thank you for the opportunity to come
before this committee today to address the promise and perils surrounding
cloning technologies.
As the head of a not-for-profit group eager to
find cures, preventions and overall better health and vitality for the elderly,
my views on research reflect the medical needs of the growing population of
older Americans.
The Alliance for Aging Research works to stimulate
academic, governmental and private sector research into the chronic diseases of
human aging. Our organization takes up the cause of the vast majority of
Americans who fervently wish to benefit from scientific discoveries that improve
the human experience with aging. Our survey research tells us that most
Americans believe the federal government has a critical role to play to prepare
the way for new medical breakthroughs and to hurry applications of science in
health care in order to relieve human suffering and improve the quality of life
for their family members and for themselves. On behalf of a growing American
constituency for healthy aging - powered by the aging of the Baby Boom
generation - I am here to express a concern to the committee. The Alliance for
Aging Research believes that broadly drafted legislation, intended to prevent
the cloning of a human being, could have the effect of derailing promising lines
of health research which could ultimately benefit older Americans, their
families and the nation as a whole.
Every day in America another 6,000
people celebrate a 65th birthday. Just behind them, the Baby Boomers are
cruising into their 50s in even greater numbers. In just 10 years the post World
War babies will begin swelling the Medicare roles.
In less than 30
years, the whole of our largest generation will be old enough to receive health
care paid by Medicare. If, during these years just ahead, we fail to reduce the
threat of age- related diseases, the U.S. will encounter staggeringly high
economic costs, as well as we will face a toll on human lives due to mounting
deaths and disabilities from cancer, stroke, macular degeneration, joint and
bone diseases, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases.
If we stifle future
medical breakthroughs, and must manage the aging of 75 million Baby Boomers with
today's halfway health technologies, we risk economic and social catastrophe
within a generation.
Fortunately, we can choose a wiser, more humane,
and ultimately less costly alternative. That alternative is to encourage rapid
advances and applications from medical and behavioral research to prevent much
of the declining health status we now associate with old age.
There is
good reason to hope that scientific understanding of the mechanisms of aging
within our own cells, genes and proteins may ultimately permit a significant
delay in disabilities caused by diseases of aging.
Regenerative medicine
is the concept of harnessing powers of growth and healing within our own bodies
at a fundamental level of human biology. We can look forward to future health
technologies that use stem cells, engineered tissues, growth factors and other
tools of regenerative medicine. It's a growing possibility that physicians one
day will be able to replace damaged tissues, using a person's own cells to treat
blindness, spinal cord injury, coronary artery damage, diabetes and other
diseases that result from injured, malfunctioning or aged cells.
Scientists involved in this research say that human somatic cell nuclear
transfer is an enabling technology that can be used to generate healthy cells
and tissues for repair or replacement in a vast array of medical applications.
To deny our aging population the opportunity to benefit from this research would
be a tragic reversal of recent biomedical progress toward permanent cure of
diseases that compromise quality of life, and which account for so much of our
nation's health care expenditures.
A prominent member of the Alliance's
Science Advisory Board is Dr. George M. Martin of the University of Washington
in Seattle. Dr. Martin has written: "those of us in the Alzheimer's Disease
Research Center are using cell cultures in attempts to discover the fundamental
molecular mechanisms that lead to differing rates of neuronal damage in
dementias of the Alzheimer type and related disorders. For obvious reasons, we
cannot work with samples of brain tissue from living subjects. We are forced to
utilize surrogate cells, typically fibroblasts that can be grown from tiny skin
biopsies. The ability to reprogram such cells so that they can exhibit the
properties of the donor 's neural cells would represent an enormous advance."
I want to make it abundantly clear that the Alliance for Aging Research
is strongly opposed to the cloning of a human being. To my knowledge that
position is supported by virtually every responsible scientific and health
advocacy organization in the U.S. The Alliance does support responsible and
sound biomedical research, including emerging cellular therapies, which could
lead to the development of treatments or cures for scores of age- related
diseases and disabilities.
We urge this committee to lead the way by
drawing a clear distinction between cloning for human reproductive purposes -
which we oppose - and cloning cells for human therapeutic purposes. Millions of
patients and families, organizations and advocates for health and scientific
research across the land would applaud that kind of leadership.
Some
measures before this committee propose to avoid the cloning of a human being by
bringing into the laboratory the full police powers of the federal government.
These intended anti-cloning proposals would criminalize laboratory techniques
that otherwise might help us find cures for diseases such as cancer and
Alzheimer's.
To threaten university scientists with massive fines and
prison sentences would constitute a massive and unprecedented assault on
research. It would cast a pall over the conduct of academic science. And it
would diminish and contradict the accomplishments of a U.S. Congress that even
now is working nobly to double research funding through the National Institutes
of Health.
At this very moment, tens of millions of older Americans are
suffering from Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, cancer, diabetes and chronic health
problems of aging. Not only are they suffering, but their families and
caregivers are suffering too, and they are hoping that scientists will find
cures for these devastating diseases and conditions while there is still time.
They are in a hurry for answers, and they look to leaders like you to be their
advocates and protectors.
Mr. Chairman, it is likely that we will
continue to be confronted with scientific advances that pose difficult social
and ethical questions. The present momentum in the life sciences, and the
profound implications of what we are learning, will inevitably raise public
concerns.
There is ample time for policymakers, ethicists, scientists,
and patient groups to discuss options that would prevent
human
cloning, but which would preserve promising health research. Congress
is at its best when its actions are informed and enriched by slow and careful
debate, by advice from expert sources, and when taken in respect for minority
opinion.
In the case of proposals to limit any of the tools for
scientific and medical research, the need for prudence is especially important,
due to the technical complexity of the issues and the consequences for public
health and well being.
On behalf of the Alliance for Aging Research, I
thank the committee again for its deliberations and for the opportunity to speak
to this issue.
LOAD-DATE: June 21, 2001