|
![]()
Select a Specific Issue Area
![]()
![]() ![]()
|
-
- This letter, which was not
published yet, is in response to a pro-cloning letter that was
published in The Washington Post (see below).
-
- To the Editor:
In her April 18
letter R. Alta Charo calls Friends of the Earth "disingenuous" for
not acknowledging the Food and Drug Administration's claim to
jurisdiction over cloning full-term humans. But when the FDA
promulgated this interpretation of their charge in late 1998 most
commentators, including the former head of the agency's office of
biotechnology, agreed that it had exceeded its jurisdiction and
that the policy would never hold up in the courts. Indeed, this
same R. Alta Charo stated to your reporter less than a year ago:
"Can the government really stop me from cloning myself? Right now,
the law is clear as mud." ("Legal Barriers to Human Cloning May
Not Hold Up" Washington Post, May 23, 2001). When questioned in
the same story about how the Supreme Court would be likely to
decide a challenge to a human cloning ban she answered: "If they
were interested in protecting a broad notion of genetic connection
to the next generation, then cloning might be included as a
fundamental right." When a bioethicist tailors her comments to the
political requirements of the moment it must raise the question of
who is being disingenuous.
Sincerely,
Stuart A.
Newman
The writer is a professor of cell biology at New
York Medical College and a founding member of the Council for
Responsible Genetics.
- Published in The Washington
Post, April 18, in response to our letter below.
-
- Research Cloning: Safeguards Are
in Place
-
- In his April 15 letter, Mark Helm of
Friends of the Earth incorrectly asserts that neither current law
nor current legislative proposals will regulate cloning to allow
research while preventing reproductive uses to make a baby. This
is false. The Food and Drug Administration already prohibits
reproductive uses of cloning; its enforcement actions against the
one eccentric in the United States who wanted to try this sent her
scurrying offshore for more forgiving legal regimes.
-
- In addition, FDA regulation of
biologics and tissue transplantation already regulates research
using this technique, requiring that egg donations and egg
manipulations be done only after an assessment of risks and
benefits by an independent review board, which would include
oversight to ensure safeguards against unauthorized uses of the
eggs and embryos.
-
- The Feinstein-Kennedy bill would
extend this regulatory oversight even further, to encompass even
pure laboratory research in which no tissue transplantation is
anticipated. If Friends of the Earth is serious in its support for
regulated forms of this research, then it is time for them to
acknowledge that regulation already exists, and to abandon its
disingenuous calls for halting this important work for the
indefinite future.
-
-
- R. ALTA CHARO
- Madison, Wis.
-
- The writer was a member in 1993-1994
of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel and in 1996-2001 of the
presidential National Bioethics Advisory Commission.
- Published in Washington Post,
April 15, 2002
-
- Cloning Research, the Right
Way
-
- To the Editor:
-
- I work for Friends of Earth, the
group Michael Kinsley identified as leading the campaign for a
more cautious approach to cloning technologies [op-ed, April 10].
I also have a father who, like Mr. Kinsley, suffers from
Parkinson's disease. That's why I was shocked that Mr. Kinsley's
piece inaccurately portrayed Friends of the Earth as standing in
the way of medical research that might help my dad and millions
like him. Our position states, "We support research that would
help determine the therapeutic potential of human stem
cells."
-
- Our position also calls for a
moratorium on embryo cloning research until "strict government
regulation is established to prevent abuses of this technology."
Unfortunately, no legislation before Congress includes a
moratorium that will keep embryos out of the hands of scientists
who have vowed to clone humans, ensure that embryo cloning won't
lead to permanent genetic modification of human beings and protect
the health of women who would supply the massive egg harvests
needed for research.
-
- It appears, however, that a cautious
approach to embryo cloning for research may emerge that will allow
for medical progress while protecting egg donors and addressing
concerns about humanity's future. The outcome would be a set of
criteria under which therapeutic cloning research would be
allowed, rather than the total ban passed by the House. This would
mean that the hopes of Parkinson's sufferers such as Michael
Kinsley and my dad would not be dashed.
-
- Sincerely,
-
-
- Mark Helm
Director, Media
Relations
Friends of the
Earth
|
Friends of the Earth - 1025 Vermont Ave.
NW - Washington, DC 20005 USA Tel: 202-783-7400 - Fax: 202-783-0444 -
email: foe@foe.org |