Copyright 2002 Denver Publishing Company  
Rocky Mountain News (Denver, CO)
February 2, 2002 Saturday Final Edition
SECTION: COMMENTARY / EDITORIAL; Pg. 4B

LENGTH: 670 words

HEADLINE: TROUBLED HARVEST;
AS PROPOSED HUMAN CLONING BAN SHOWS, THE FRUIT OF SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS CAN PROVE TO BE BITTERSWEET, NETTLESOME

BYLINE: John R. Sladek

BODY:
In an effort to outlaw all potential uses for cloned cells, a bill introduced in the Colorado legislature could run the risk of trumping federal law and of halting some of our most promising medical research.

The bill would ban the cloning of human beings, something on which everyone should agree. In fact several bills in Congress would prohibit this and already biomedical research institutions around the world as well as here in Colorado support such a ban. However, the stipulation in this particular bill that human embryonic stem cells should not be generated could prevent much-needed research.

House Bill 1073 would prohibit research into new therapies for diseases that affect millions of Americans, such as diabetes, arthritis, burns, spinal cord damage and many more. Not only does it impose a ban on research, it also would punish citizens who might seek a cure out of state with a fine of up to $1 million and 10 years in prison on their return to Colorado. This is much too harsh for someone who is desperate for a treatment that could save his or her life.

The problem is that this bill does not distinguish between "reproductive cloning" - a process of creating a fertilized egg that then can be implanted into a host and carried to term, like the one that produced the cloned sheep called Dolly - and "therapeutic cloning" which generates cells not intended to produce a new individual, either animal or human.

Cellular technology holds great potential benefit to humanity because it can produce cells that can develop into specialized cells and possibly organs. While it may not be a therapy in wide use yet, it has shown great promise in animal research.

It can produce neurons to treat degenerative brain disorders such as Alzheimer's, which will affect 50 percent of Americans over the age of 85, and Parkinson's disease, which damages motor control of the body and eventually leads to death. Pancreatic cells can be derived to treat diabetes that affects up to 20 million Americans, including millions of children. New heart muscle cells hold the potential to replace those damaged by heart attacks. There are numerous other possible applications of cellular therapy.

Translational medicine starts with a scientific idea and takes findings from the laboratory to the clinic to treat human disease. This can take years of meticulous research, much of which is supported by the federal government in the form of grants.

Biomedical research can turn hope into prevention or treatment. The legislation introduced would prevent promising research that might allow us to replace organs ravaged by cancer or to reverse metabolic disease. It also would make it illegal for us to import promising new technology for research or treatment of our patients.

No one knows how long a discovery will take, but if we fail to take the first step toward a cure for life-threatening illnesses, we surely will not succeed. Proponents of the bill might argue that nothing is being taken from our research repertoire, because no one yet has proven that the technology in question will cure human diseases. That's like saying you should not open the door because you don't know what's on the other side. We won't know unless we have the opportunity to explore. Who would have guessed 100 years ago that the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center would perform the world's first liver transplant?

In fact, some argue that we have a moral obligation not to ignore promising technologies when so many people suffer from diseases such as Alzheimer's - diseases that, in a sense, are a product of our extended life span. It is not sufficient to simply prolong life through better health care, we also must attempt to maintain the quality of life in the later years.

We know of no reputable scientist who would support the cloning of human beings. But we need to preserve the exploration of new knowledge that has made America the world leader in biomedical research. Americans expect this of us.

NOTES:
John R. Sladek, Ph.D., is vice chancellor for research at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center.;
POINT / COUNTERPOINT

GRAPHIC: Illustration, By Mark Mattern , News Staff Artist

LOAD-DATE: February 8, 2002