A Position Statement on Human Therapeutic Cloning
by
L. Stephen Coles, M.D.,
Ph.D.
Los Angeles Gerontology
Research Group
UCLA School of
Medicine
E-mail: scoles@ucla.edu
URL: https://grg.org
A. Proposed Moratorium on
Human Cloning for a Period of Five Years
Back on March 5, 2001, long before the terms therapeutic cloning and
reproductive cloning were in popular use, we defined these terms and
wrote that the scientific community should create a moratorium on all attempts
to clone humans for at least five years or until we had additional time to gain
some much-needed experience with animal cloning that could give us an
indication of where our technology might take us and have a reasoned debate
about what we really wanted to do once we achieve this capability. After the five years were up, the ban should
not be permanent but renewable in one-year increments if sufficient progress
has not been made. We still believe
that without such a voluntary ban, the scientific community risks losing control of their freedom to pursue
research without the meddling of religious fundamentalists and their legal
minions.
Although we are
generally pronatalist with regard to the use of advanced technology for
assisted reproduction for infertile couples -- such as In Vitro Fertilization
(IVF), for example -- we wish to go on record as categorically opposing the use
of human reproductive cloning for any purpose at this time – on the
grounds that this technology is radically premature and inevitable early
failures could well set the entire field back many years.
Even after five years
of serious animal experimentation following the historic cloning of Dolly the
sheep by Dr. Ian Wilmut in Edinburgh with subsequent successes in pigs, cows,
goats, mice, rats, cats, rabbits [458,459], monkeys, and other exotic species
like the gaur (but conspicuously not with dogs or horses, despite intense
efforts), at the present time the overall failure rate is still excessive
(greater than 98 percent failure, even in the hands of teams of expert
veterinarians and infertility specialists). Embryos never implant (no
pregnancy), lead to spontaneous abortions (still births after implantation), or
sudden death soon-after-birth (because of unexplained congenital anomalies). In
short, if the truth be told -- "our technique is primitive, and we're
guessing most of the time."
Therefore, we must concur with Drs. Ian Wilmut, Editor-in-Chief of the journal Cloning, and Michael West, CEO of Advanced Cell Technology of Worcester, MA, that it is "criminally irresponsible" for gynecologists or others motivated by publicity to experiment with human embryos for the purpose of satisfying the real needs of prospective parents, gay couples, or other self-indulgent, but wealthy individuals [35]. Respectable scientists must disassociate themselves from those who have gone on record as seeking to accomplish this feat secretly in the near term, such as: (1) Dr. Richard Seed, Ph.D. of Chicago; (2) Dr. Brigitte Boisselier, Ph.D., Biochemist, former Visiting Professor of Chemistry at Hamilton College, Clinton, NY; Scientific Director of Clonaid, Inc. in The BAHAMAS; and Bishop of the Raelian Movement of Geneva, SWITZERLAND and Quebec, CANADA; and (3) Drs. Panos (Panayiotis) Zavos, Ph.D. Andrologist, Andrology Institute and former Professor in the Department of Animal Sciences, the University of Kentucky in Lexington with Dr. Sverino Antinori, M,D,, OB/GYN, Infertility Pioneer and Director of the International Associated Research Institute, Rome, ITALY; both of whom are otherwise respected infertility specialists. We believe that our profound biological ignorance will not be magically erased in the course of a few months by intense animal experimentation, and the inevitable failures of human reproductive cloning, which, when publicly leaked to the media for the first time, can only cause harmful long-term consequences for the progress of medical research. Instead, it is proposed that we should revisit this emotionally-charged issue in another five years, given the high stakes, until such time as our technique improves substantially and a heavy-handed legislative reaction will be less likely. An influential group of religious conservatives has already captured the heart and mind of the President on this subject, as became abundantly clear in his 15-minute address to the nation on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 [475]
On the other hand, we
should hasten to point out that human therapeutic cloning for the purpose
of harvesting embryonic stem cells is an acceptable approach to attempting to
cure diseases in human adults, and the immediate prospects for this particular
technology appear to be quite promising. Prof. Douglas Melton, a developmental
biologist at Harvard University, was one of the first to publish a scientific
study of the potential of embryonic stem cells. In work published in October
2000, he showed that such pluripotent cells could be turned into a wide variety
of cell types (muscle, nerve, and skin). Other scientists who have begun
working with these cells describe growing beating heart cells in culture; still
others are working to generate bone marrow for treating victims of leukemia and
other cancers [451, 452]. Please let's not "throw out the baby with the
bath water," as Jeremy Rifkin [453] might have us do when he stated
sarcastically in a recent Op-Ed Piece, "Customized human cloning even
offers the specter of a new kind of immortality." [454]
In summary, the above proposal for a five-year moratorium on human cloning is consistent with similar recommendations made by a number of organizations, including the National Academy of Sciences [20, 35, 126, 247, 248, 249, 250], the State of California [371], 112 ACE University Presidents [11], the American Association for the Advancement of Science [416], A letter to Congress signed by 40 Nobel Prize Winners [475], and various foreign governments, including Canada [529], Britain [140, 165, 425, 426, 427], Australia [449], Germany [395, 396], Sweden [310], and Japan [118]. However, we hasten to add that we do not favor any legislation that would criminalizes scientific investigation into therapeutic cloning, as we believe that this would set a truly negative precedent and impede medical progress toward "some of the most debilitating diseases known to man." By declaring scientifically-valuable biomedical research illegal, currently-proposed legislation to permanently ban all forms of cloning, if it were ever passed in the Senate and signed by the President, which he has suggested he would do, "would have a chilling effect on all scientific research in the United States. Such legal restrictions on scientific investigation would send a strong signal to the next generation of researchers that unfettered and responsible scientific investigation is not welcome in this country." [475]
B.
Proposed Moratorium on Human Cross-Species Cloning for a Period of Five Years
A recent news-item about XenoCloning
in South Korea has caused a world-wide
furor. Dr. Park Se Pill, an embryologist from Seoul, South Korea who
trained in the US under Prof. Neal First at the University of Wisconsin, says
that "work on cross-species fusion of a human nucleus and an enucleated
bovine egg has now been discontinued at Maria Bio Tech after a number of
his team's preembryos went for about a week or so and then failed to continue
normal mitotic divisions." Thus, they were never able to achieve their
goal of obtaining human stem cells from the cloned embryo once divisions came
to a halt. Dr. Park speculated that the reason was "a failure to achieve
proper signaling between the maternal bovine mitochondria and the human
nucleus." However, Dr. Park predicted that "with enough practice this
barrier could be overcome by other scientists." [456]
We again wish to go on
record as asking the scientific community for a five-year moratorium -- this
time on Human Cross-Species Cloning.
This is no longer a frivolous hypothetical. It has been recently rumored
that Dr. Sheng Huizhen, a US-trained biologist at the Shanghai No. 2 Medical
University in China, successfully derived human stem cells from an enucleated
rabbit egg implanted with a human nucleus. Furthermore, the US Patent Office
has received applications from ACT of Worcester, MA and from the College of
Veterinary Medicine at Seoul National University in South Korea on the
methodology for doing Human/Bovine XenoCloning. The arguments in favor of
XenoCloning are that animal eggs are considerably less expensive to obtain than
human eggs and that "it is a question of the freedom of scientists to use
whatever means that may be available to make progress," according to Dr.
Jung Sung Chul, a Section Chief at the Korean National Institutes of
Health.
However, our reasons for recommending against
pursuing Human XenoCloning are clear, independently of any moral reservations
from non-scientists. (For closely-related endangered-species XenoCloning or
surrogate mothering [like the recent case of the gaur/cow] may have legitimate
extenuating circumstances outside the scope of this argument.) First, we don't
have a clue about what we're doing as far as signaling between the nucleus and
the egg's ooplasm is concerned, mitochondrial or otherwise. So the closer we
get to perceived success, the more dangerous the experiment may be for the
ostensible recipient of any stem cells that are obtained. Secondly, we haven't
been successful with human eggs yet, not withstanding rumors to the contrary,
where the ostensible signaling problems should be easier to solve. At this
particular moment when the US Senate is about to vote on the future legality of
Human Cloning, we don't need to inject any new controversy about untrustworthy,
irresponsible scientists who will create "Frankenstein Hatcheries" if
left to their own devices. Our opponents will certainly exploit every
opportunity to paint all scientists with a disreputable brush to serve their
own end of "Banning all forms of Cloning," which is still a real
possibility..
C. Let's Defuse the
Rhetoric by Sharpening Our Vocabulary
On December 7, 2002 of
last year, we wrote that ordinary English has proven itself to be inadequate to
facilitate the debate that will soon be under way in the U.S. Senate. We would like to recommend the following
terminology whenever speaking about the distinction between Human Therapeutic
Cloning and Reproductive Cloning, as follows:
1. The term preembryo shall be defined as a pre-implantation
zygote during the interval from conception to approximately [10 - 14] days
thereafter. Conception is the
fertilization of a human ovum (a haploid [n] female gamete) by a sperm
(a haploid [n] male gamete). A zygote contains a full [2n] complement of
chromosomes [22x2 + XY or XX = 46 chromosomes] in each and every cell. In
particular, a preembryo will normally develop by successive mitotic divisions
starting with a single diploid cell into a multicellular blastocyst first by forming
a morphological ball and later by invagination, that will subsequently contain
several hundreds of cells (including a large number of undifferentiated pluripotent
embryonic stem cells that are fated to form the tissues of the fetus). Blastocysts containing non-diploid cells are
typically pathological and will not normally implant.
2. The term embryo shall be reserved exclusively for a post-implantation
blastocyst that has begun the process of placentation (formation of a
placenta within the wall of the womb) accompanied by differentiation into three
fundamentally different tissue types (endoderm, mesoderm, and ectoderm),
with neural streak formation and the beginnings of organogenesis
(formation of a spinal cord).
3. The term fetus shall be reserved for a prenatal
post-organogenesis embryo that has developed mature limbs (with visible digits
[fingers and toes]), a beating heart, and other distinguishable features of a
human face (eyes, ears, nose, mouth, and so on).
4. The term neonate (or baby) shall be reserved for a
post-fetus that has been delivered either vaginally or by C-Section and whose
umbilical cord has just been severed from its placenta.
5. The term person shall be reserved for an embryo whose fate
has been unambiguously determined to be a single individual (by
ultrasound or other visual means for examination). Note that a preembryo's fate
could be multiparous (as with identical twins [both male or both
female]), in which case there would be two (or more) persons derived from a
single preembryo. Conversely, note that, on rare occasions, two preembryos
(fraternal twins presumably of the same gender) could fuse to form a single
person (with chimera formation at the cellular level).
The value of this
careful terminology is to obviate the absurd, emotionally-charged religious
debates that arise from statements of the form: "People begin at
conception," which is completely inconsistent with the facts of biology.
One might just as well say that "People begin with eggs or sperm" or
"People begin with a twinkle in a man’s eye as he spies a beautiful woman
across the street." At what seemingly-arbitrary point should we seek to
punish someone for being disrespectful of sentient human life? Although we
cannot be sure of the precise moment, it seems to make the most sense, on
conservative grounds, to appreciate that, since preembryos can never be a
described as a person using the definitions above, we can never penalize someone for
"killing" a preembryo on moral grounds. In the same sense that one cannot be
charged with the crime of "killing" a dead person, one cannot be charged with the
crime of destroying or "killing" a preembryo. Linguistically speaking, the object of the
verb "kill" is required to be either a person or at least a living creature for the word to
even make sense in English. Just as one does not normally speak of killing your fingernail/toenail
clippings, except metaphorically, one cannot speak about "killing" a cluster of
undifferentiated cells that have not yet become a person, even though under the right
circumstances they may have the potential to become a person(s). .
D.
What do Germ Cells Know that Somatic Cells Don't?
It can now be argued
that, although the senescence of somatic cells in our bodies appears to be
immutable, our germ-line cells (eggs and sperm) are, by definition, what gives
sexually- reproducing species like ourselves their continuity over many
hundreds of thousands of years. So it seems that our germ cells
"know" something that our disposable somatic cells do not.
Discovering the molecular basis for the immortality of germ-line cells and how
their clocks can be reset through the process of fertilization and embryogenic
development may well be crucial to our ultimate understanding of the aging
process itself. [Of course, we know that both old eggs and old sperm (although
sperm are always freshly made, we are speaking here of sperm produced by older
males) do age statistically over time (as is well known to
gynecologists/andrologists who specialize in the diagnosis of infertility),
since older gametes do result in a higher rate of congenital defects among
those that are successful, despite the fact that there are many
"hoops" that all sperm must swim through to demonstrate their
virility and, among other things, outcompete the potentially contemporaneous
sperm of rival males.] Once the winning sperm penetrates an egg during
fertilization (no matter what the age of the male donor) resulting in a
successful pregnancy, the gametes can together perpetuate the species without
an apparent degradation in DNA quality over subsequent generations (in other
words, we are not successive copies on a Xerox machine, rendering the 10,000th
copy essentially unintelligible due to the classic accumulation of errors,
given a fixed signal-to-noise ratio); and this appears to be true for all
sexually-reproducing species. [Note that the biological process of speciation itself
(without which Homo sapiens would never have evolved from other (lower) species
on the preexisting phylogenetic tree) depends on a non-zero mutation rate
during DNA copying (enzymatic post-editing of freshly synthesized DNA does
bring the rate to within one error per billion nucleotide replications, which,
albeit small, is still "non-zero") which can help to explain many
forms of somatic pathology, like oncogenesis, for example.]
The "resetting of
the clock" may have to do with the membrane depolarization of the egg's
surface (very similar, we imagine, to the depolarization of a neural axon with
sodium/potassium channels) that serves to inhibit competing sperm from
attempting multiple penetrations (the so-called problem of polyspermy
[Curiously, in some species, polyspermy is physiologic and not pathological.])
except that the electrical charge runs over the spherical surface from one pole
to the other rather than linearly, as with the case of an axon. Alternatively,
there is also an accompanying calcium "tsunami" that travels through
the interior of the egg's cytoplasm (assumed to be rather like a seismic wave
that travels through rather than over the surface of the Earth) that may be
responsible for this "resetting." It may demethylate the nuclear DNA,
disrupt the nuclear membrane temporarily (so that paternal DNA can co-mingle
with maternal DNA and participate in "crossing over" activity), and
may also do something to reset the egg’s mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), for all we
know.
How do eggs and sperm
solve the problem of oxidative stress resulting from the over production of
free radicals that so badly damage senescent somatic cells? Their solution(s) are not obvious. We clearly need oxygen to survive, but ultimately, it's what probably kills us
too. Yet this hypothesis is too
simplistic. There are certain creatures, like parrots or bees, that adapt to
very different metabolic rates than we enjoy and yet exhibit very different
maximum lifespans. We believe that the key is somehow in the mitochondrial
defense mechanisms that process the Krebs Cycle and the Electron Transport
Chain in each species, not in the Oxygen molecules themselves. We need to
examine how mitochondrial membranes protect against free radicals in each
species' germ line and what happens when mitochondria get old. How are germ
line mitochondria different from somatic mitochondria, if
indeed they are? Or maybe they’re just
protected differently. We should not
jump to the premature conclusion that oxidation (combustion) is to blame for
aging. Metabolism may be a very different process in young and old
organisms.
E. Xenotransplantation of
Custom Pig Organs into Humans
We believe that the
nay-sayers regarding dangerous pig viruses are focusing on the wrong problem
[355-360]. The fear of deadly swine retroviruses being inadvertently spread in
the general human population as a result of porcine transplants into a few
human recipients is like arguing "How many angles can dance on the head of
a pin?" or "How should we rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic
while it sinks." The media creates the impression that we're half way to
the moon, just because a few pioneers have climbed a mountain and jumped off a
cliff with feathers glued on to their arms furiously flapping away. The reality
is that we're not even at the "Wright Brothers" stage of going to the
moon. There is hardly a science of aeronautics let alone astronautics to draw
on. For example, does anyone know if the "double knock-out of the porcine
galactose gene" (GGTA1) isn't fatal to pigs? Maybe the surface markers are
there for a reason (for pigs)? And this is just the first hyper-immune
rejection problem of xenotransplantation. What about other antigenic markers on
porcine cell surfaces that will cause the cells to be killed off "more
slowly," once the human host Killer T-Cells discover that someone was
trying to "pull a fast one"? And what about the stimulation of latent
autoimmune diseases in the host, even if "foreign" antigens get to be
reasonably-well tolerated? Instead of letting the speculative day-traders run
up the stock of companies like Infigen, Inc. of DeForest, WI, as though a
clinical solution to rejection were just around the corner (Biotransplant
shares shares rose 9.8 percent in after-hours trading one day, while PPL's
stock soared 46 percent on the London Stock Exchange the next day. [354]), we
ought to let the real scientists work quietly for five more years to get their
arms around the problem. Instead, we get spikes of unfounded optimism (up
ticks) followed by unfounded disillusionment (down ticks) where "blind
shepherds are leading the sighted but stupid sheep." Aren't there any
long-term investors left?
F. Prof. Leon Kass, A
Panoply of Errors
Dr. Leon R. Kass,
President Bush’s choice last Summer to chair the President’s Council on
Bioethics, once stated his opposition to IVF as a “degradation of parenthood,”
However, he has long since changed his mind on this particular subject, and we
can forgive him this minor inconsistency.
On the other hand, he has never changed his opinion regarding the
potential value of “Anti-Aging Medicine.”
Just has he continues to oppose the more novel forms of interference in
the process of procreation, he is "adamantly opposed to scientific efforts
to conquer death," which he perceives to be a "necessary and
desirable end." [Sigh!] “The
finitude of human life is a blessing for every human individual, whether
he knows it or not,” he says. Dr. Kass
sees it as “unfortunate that medical ‘progress’ has been set on a course to
erase human values and possibly destroy man himself.” In his writings, Dr. Kass refers to the soul to mean that
any living organism, even a bacterium, is not just a collection of molecules
but a thing with needs, desires, and awareness.” [1]
We wish to go on record
as being categorically and diametrically opposed to this point of view. It seems unlikely that we could ever
reconcile our contradictory views with Kass in our respective lifetimes. It’s almost as though Dr. Kass’s work was
translated into a foreign language and then back into English with a “not”
inadvertently inserted by a sloppy translator into virtually every
conclusion. This is not a problem of
not understanding English; we both appear to speak, read, and write our native
language fluently. Yet it seems as
though one of us is linguistically challenged in that we can’t even figure out
“Who human beings are?” We both agree,
I presume, that all forms of life should be treated with dignity and respect,
but attempting to turn a present necessity (death) into a virtue makes Dr. Kass
what we would call an “apologist for the status quo.” Let us examine the ways in which our positions diverge once the
fundamental premise about life is open to scrutiny:
1. Every life form is a
collection of molecules, and nothing more.
There is no “soul.” There is no
metaphysical “ghost in the machine,” as it were. It is true that certain states of organization not normally found in inanimate objects do
exhibit non-intuitive special “emergent” properties, like consciousness. But this does not mean that there exists an
independent spiritual entity that migrates to a different place once our
physical body ceases to exist. However,
denying the existence of a soul does not mean that humans, living or dead,
should be treated with any less dignity or respect. But it does mean that reductionism as a form of scientific
inquiry has no limitations in principle, as Dr. Kass would have us
believe. If, in the future, we can
engineer the neck genes so as to create a short-necked giraffe, there would be
nothing wrong, in principle, with doing so, even as a high-school science
project. It would only be wrong to
cause such a creature to suffer competition with long-necked giraffes in the
wild. So there are consequences that will
result from all the new options that will be provided to us by science and
technology in the future, and we must deliberate with great care in deciding
which options are worthy of exercising just because we can exercise
them.
2. The finitude of human life is not a blessing. To the contrary, it is a present (and
hopefully temporary) fact of life that has been thrust upon us by a “blind
watchmaker.” Dr. Kass fails to appreciate that “death is an
imposition on the human race,” and once the technical means present themselves,
“will become unacceptable,” as Alan Harrington wrote in the Introduction to his
book “The Immortalist,” a prescient manifesto published in 1969
[2]. "We must cast off the
apologetic myth and strip away the protective orthodoxy's that have blocked
most of us from focusing on our real goal – achieving immortality, pure and
simple. Otherwise, we must confront our
personal mortality – the void into which we must all vanish if our
scientific/technology tools advance too slowly to help us within the interval
of our own lifetimes."
3. We actually agree with Dr. Kass that “the new immortals would not be
like us at all.” But rather than
deplore the notion that the human race could perish, as we know it, we should
embrace this transition. There is no
reason not to welcome the opportunity to escape from the predicament of the
human condition at long last.
4. Indeed death is neither necessary
nor desirable. Death, and its
precursor aging, is not inevitable; it is an artifact of sexual reproduction, a
system invented by a stochastic Darwinian machine with no concept of human
dignity.
In the future, our new
messiahs will be wearing white lab coats; they will not be members of the
clergy. We only wonder how long it will
take us from the completion last year of the first draft of the Human Genome
Project to the complete “parts list” (proteomics [5]) and the complete “blue
prints” (molecular embryology [6]) of the human organism to lead us back to the
“Garden of Eden,” from which we were expelled so long ago. Will it be 10 years? 15 years? 20
years? A word of caution is in order –
even having a complete parts list and a valid blueprint doesn’t guarantee success. There is still more work to be done to
figure out how to maintain an organism at a particular age while satisfying all
the metabolic constraints and while still preserving the architecture of the
tissues. By comparison, the current
political controversy that surrounds therapeutic vs. reproductive cloning seems
like “small potatoes.” Instead, we
should go for the “big enchilada.”
Nevertheless, looking
at the short term, as the controversial topic of human cloning is debated in
the US Senate, we should not lose sight of the fact that a “parts list” for a car
or a house is not the same as the car or the house
itself. Nor is a preembryo the same as
a human person. Fifty percent, or more,
of all fertilized eggs are unceremoniously flushed out with the menstrual
period unbeknownst to the Mother who had had intercourse that month but never
got pregnant presumably due to a failure of implantation. Note that the exact
statistics of “disappointed fertilizations” in the general population is not
known to physicians, since no one until recently ever had an incentive to
measure this rate precisely, and some OB/GYNs have estimated that only as
little as 20 percent of all fertilizations result in detectable pregnancies
(let alone live births). This means that the natural failure-to-implant rate
could be as high as 80 percent, whether due to primary congenital defects in
the preembryo or secondary temporary defects in the uterine lining of the
Mother. Of course, permanent defects in
the uterus lead to female-factor infertility.
This is related to the so-called “seed” vs. “soil” problem. On the other hand, statistics for treatment
of couples complaining of infertility (for either parent-factor) are compiled
with great precision for obvious economic reasons. IVF still costs in the neighborhood of $5,000 per attempt with a
lot of personal inconvenience for the woman undergoing hyper-ovulation
treatment, and one doesn’t ever want to have to repeat the process, if it’s not
absolutely necessary. Even under the best of circumstances in the most
experienced hands, the success rates don’t go over 30 percent. This also explains why the number or twins
and triplets is so common using these procedures, and even worse how selective
reduction of embryos in high multiparous pregnancies (like five or more
embryos, where the presence of too many fetuses endangers the lives of all,
given the limited real estate in the womb) causes so much controversy.
This largely invisible
“yield” problem (to borrow a term from industrial manufacturing) is not really
a problem for Nature. Nature always
makes the most efficient trade-off in egg/sperm production for each species
according to survival statistics. No
one complains about the loss of female eggs every month (the so-called
“disappointed uterus” problem). No one
complains about the “wastage” of sperm every month. Why should we complain about the natural wastage of fertilized
eggs? This phenomenon is something that
was hardly even known to non-professionals.
So why should we complain about the alternate use of preembryos for
therapeutic purposes? Yet in Kansas the state Legislature has just voted 70 to
50 to direct the Attorney General to file a lawsuit asking the Kansas Supreme
Court to make the declaration that “Life begins at Conception” [3]. Hello.
Of course, life begins at conception.
But, so what? The real question
is not “Is it life?”, but “Is it a person?” What we need be careful about is to
identify whether the person lobbying in political terms has an ulterior motive
like winning “legal” rights for preembryos.
The real purpose may well be to
recognize embryos as people, and thereby deny mothers the right to an
abortion if they wish to have one. [4]
This, of course, is the political agenda of the Anti-Abortion Movement
and is far beyond the scope of this limited discussion.
G.
So What Are the Chances of Beating the Grim Reaper?
The answer according
to Jeffrey Kluger in a recent issue of Time Magazine [456] is slim to
none. Citing sources like Prof. Leonard Hayflick, Ph.D. of the University of
California in San Francisco and Dr. Robert Butler, M.D. former Director of the
National Institute on Aging and now Head of the International Longevity
Institute in New York City, to support his argument, he concludes, "it is
theoretically possible [to do genetic engineering on senescent genes or introduce
proteins that block their operation], but with what could be thousands of genes
involved in aging, that may be as far beyond biologists as building a starship
is beyond rocket scientists."
Well, we don't think
so. Of the approximately 35,000 genes identified in the human genome so far,
there are likely to be no more than a few hundred gerontic
(longevity-determining) genes -- not thousands of such genes. [Dr. Richard
Cutler of the Kronos Longevity Research Institute and I have a bet on this
number that goes back to 1995.] But even if we allow for thousands of gerontic
genes instead of hundreds, so what? Does that mean that the problem is now
intractable? The fallacy of Mr. Kluger's logic is that he "reasons by
analogy," and his metaphor is flawed. His logic represents a "failure
of imagination." Egyptian pharaohs did not stop building pyramids because
they needed thousands of stones that weren't immediately available. They had a
vision. So did the Wright brothers. So did President John Kennedy when he said,
"Let's send men to the moon in ten years and return them safely back to
Earth."
So how do we refute
Mr. Kluger's pessimistic metaphor? Answer: By providing lots of counter
examples of how it could be done if we wanted to do it: (1) Let's say we wanted
to create a giraffe with a short neck? Could this be done as a high-school
science project? Certainly not today. But it might be doable in ten years by a
team of focused biotechnologists. (2) Similarly, let's say that we wanted to
create an elephant with a short trunk. Same answer. (3) Then for something a
lot more difficult... Let's say we start with a given four-legged mammal and
ask "What genes does one need to change to adapt it to full-time life in
the sea?" (not like a polar bear or a penguin or a seal or a walrus that
are all well adapted to underwater ocean swimming for very long periods of
time, but then spends variable amounts of time on land for other purposes). We
mean like a whale, a dolphin, or a manatee who never comes on land for any
purpose whatsoever.
Imagine all of the
genes one would have to modify to
(1) get the legs to stick together with a tail attached at the end for
vertical-motion propulsion (different from horizontal, in the case of
fish);
(2) convert the arms and fingers to flippers;
(3) thicken the skin with insulating blubber and fabricate a truly
water-proof coating (to perfectly resist the corrosive effects of salt water
and really cold ocean temperatures);
(4) get the nose to migrate from being above the mouth (where it presumably
serves to smell and thereby avoid eating spoiled food in land mammals) to the
top of the skull (where it can become a blow hole instead);
(5) sphericalize the eye lenses so as to better focus on distant
objects while under water; and
(6) recess the testicles and penis inside the body with proper
heterothermic temperature adaptations (significantly different resting
temperatures in different selected parts of the body) so as to create a
perfectly streamlined profile for faster swimming. Employing the jargon of
computer programmers who seek to add new functionality to someone else's code,
such an addition would be called a “patch.” Notice with regard to the latter
paradox, men share with all male mammals the seemingly-bizarre predicament of
having to place their testicles outside their body in a relatively vulnerable
location (while, conversely, female ovaries don't seem to mind functioning at
normal body temperatures) for the sake of some biochemical endothermic reaction
that we really don't understand at the molecular level but which is needed to
accommodate an exquisitely-stringent requirement for successful
spermatogenesis. The controlling enzymatic network of genes appears to be
"hard wired," as it has resisted any attempt to change it over millions
of years for the sake of just a few degrees of extra heat, when we first
decided that being warm-blooded had significant survival value for
mammals.
Anyway, its been done!
There are whales; there are dolphins; and there are manatees, who all decided
that they would be better off by going back into the ocean from whence they
originally came many moons ago. This fact of evolution provides an existence
proof. It may have taken a few hundred million years, but recall that this
reprogramming was accomplished using a "random-number generator,"
what we call “natural section” in the context of Darwinian Evolution. So maybe
that's why it took so much time.
When we have completed
the genomic sequencing of all mammals (from Aardvarks to Zebras) and have
catalogued every protein in each type of body (to be done in the next 20
years), we will know what it takes to go back to the ocean and not just to go
fishing. Therefore, adjusting the phenotype we call "lifespan,"
either up or down, if that's what we want to do, may suddenly become a
"piece of cake" for a genomic programmer, sort of like "twisting
a dial."
While it's true that
building a brand new full-scale Egyptian-style pyramid is still not a
high-school science project after four thousand years, even using modern
technology, nevertheless, architects and engineers could build one if we wanted
to (given a proper economic incentive or a religious imperative). But it does
require that we don't suffer a failure of nerve along the way. It would require
a shared vision.
On a more personal
note, when I worked at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena for eight
years, I guess I could have been called a "rocket scientist" [even
though my official title was "Group Chief Technologist"]. And, in my
opinion, there's nothing stopping rocket scientists, in principle, from
building a starship if we ever had the collective will to do so [with apologies
to Gene Roddenbery of Star Trek, since our design might not look like The
U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701, which we're so used to seeing on television
every week].
Science and technology over the last century has shown us
that we can do essentially anything we set our minds to do (providing that it
doesn't violate the laws of physics). So as far as a biological starship is
concerned, what are we waiting for? Perhaps someone needs to issue a new
"Prime Directive" so we can get on with the engineering of a real
form of Anti-Aging Medicine.
A team led by Profs. Yang Huanming (Chinese Academy of Sciences) and Jun Yu (of the University of Washington in Seattle) with The Beijing Genomics Institute in collaboration with the Torrey Mesa Research Institute in San Diego (Stephen A. Goff) owned by Swiss agricultural giant Syngenta International and with a contract to Myriad Genetics, Inc. of Salt Lake City, UT spent about $30 million to complete the sequence of rice as announced in today's issue of Science. Rice appears to contain [50 - 55],000 genes, compared with only about 35,000 for humans. Yet, humans have six times more base pairs, which means that there is an average increase in density of an order-of-magnitude (a lot less random repeats of nonsense DNA apparently). Other cereal plants have considerably more DNA than rice. For reference, barley has ten times more base pairs while corn has five times more base pairs. Yet, there is a 98 percent homology between the genes in rice, wheat, corn, and barley. "Unexpectedly, rice may turn out to be the Rosetta Stone of all [plant] genome sequences," said Gane Ka-Shu Wong at the University of Washington in Seattle.
A separate international
consortium led by Japanese scientists expects to complete their own version by
the end of the year," according to Dr. Takuji Sasaki, Chairman of the
International Rice Genome Sequencing Project. There are about 11,000 gaps still
needing to be filled in. "All the initial drafts of the different strains
of the rice genome sequences assembled by different collaborators should be
pooled and finalized in about 18 months" experts said. [467-470]
I.
Conclusions
We see no reason to
rush into the arena of human cloning until we have a much broader base of
knowledge to be obtained through experiments with mice, rats, primates, and
other mammals over the next five years.
The reason suggested for accelerating the work with humans is the “opportunity cost” of those who may die of
diseases that could potentially be cured by human therapeutic-cloning
interventions [21]. However, our
position is that there is no reason to rush at a time when the risks of making
mistakes for lack of technical understanding are so great, and the likelihood
of a damaging backlash by our political opponents is so great. Instead, we
should try to do it right. We need to
develop a joint government/university/pharmaceutical-industry research program
to understand the basic biology of stem cells and the chemokines that make them
tick, both the embryonic and the adult variety. If this can be done with mice and/or cows,
so be it. If it can be done with human
stem cells, consistent with the 64 cell lines approved by President Bush last
Summer, so be it Then clinical
interventions with human patients will make sense in due course when a great
deal of the uncertainty that now plagues this work can be resolved..
Annotated
Bibliography on Human Cloning
[2001 -
2002]
As new developments take place, please
see
https://grg.org/breakingnews.html
for more details, including a large number of photos
of animal clones in the archives.
1. Nicholas Wade, “Leon R.
Kass, Scientist at Work: Moralist of Science Ponders Its Power,” The New
York Times, pp. D1,2 (March 19, 2002).
2. Alan Harrington, The Immortalist (Random House, New York;
1969).
[Although this book is now out-of-print, the paperback edition from
1978 is still available in limited supply.]
[Note: The second half of the book, which discusses the
trajectory of scientific accomplishments from the popular press, has not stood
the test of time after more than 30 years; but the first half, which speaks to
the philosophical issues of apologism, is just as valid today as when it
was first written. Even Mr. Harrington
himself, whom I spoke to briefly in New York City in 1970, did not fully
understand how off-the-mark the scientific predictions would be by the time the
philosophical issues were ready to be considered seriously by the research
community.]
3. Associated Press, “Kansas Court May Rule on When Life Begins,” The
Los Angeles Times, p. A28 (March 22, 2002).
4. Aaron Zitner, “A Cold War on Embryo Adoptions,” The Los Angeles
Times, pp. A1, 24 (March 22, 2002).
5. Carol Ezzell, “Proteomics:
Biotechs Next Big Challenge: Proteins Rule,” Scientific American, Front
Cover Article, pp. 40-47 (April 2002).
6. Francis Collins, Eric Lander, William Clark, and Jerry Shay, “The
Human Genome Project Parts I and II,” Assignment Discovery (The
Discovery Channel; February 15, 2002 and re-aired March 22, 2002; 9:00 AM PST;
TRT = 1 hour).
[This beautifully-animated description of the Human Genome Project and
its implications for society, primarily targeting the secondary-school
audience, takes a positive look at where technology is going. There is no hesitation by these
world-recognized scientists, following in the legacy of Watson and Crick, to
speculate about the implications of their work for significant increases in
human longevity. Their only caution is
that it may not be just around the
corner, and when we get there, we will still have to debate how these
technologies are to be used for benefit of man.]
7. Aaron Zitner, "Funds for Embryo Research Won't Quell
Debate," p. A5, The Los Angeles
Times (March 15, 2001)
8. Robert P. Lanza, Arthur L. Caplan, Lee M. Silver, Jose B. Cibelli,
Michael D. West, and Ronald M. Green, "The Ethical Validity of Using
Nuclear Transfer in Human Transplantation," JAMA, Vol. 284, p. 3175 (December 27, 2000).
9. Louis Roccanova, Patricia Ramphal, and Philip Rappa, III,
"Mutation in Embryonic Stem Cells," Science, Vol. 292, No.
5516, pp. 438-440 (April 20, 2001).
10. Calvin B. Harley, Jane S. Lebkowski, Melissa K. Carpenter, and
Thomas B. Okarma, "Response: Evidence that the Expansion of Human ES Cells
for Therapeutic Use Will Not be Hampered by Genetic Mutation Has Been Published
in Three Sets of Studies,"
Science, Vol. 292, No. 5516, pp. 438-440 (April 20, 2001).
11. “112 University Presidents
Have Asked President Bush to Maintain Federal Rules that Permit Funding for
Limited Embryonic Stem-Cell Research,” ACE Letter: http://www.acenet.edu/washington/home.h
tml (March 27, 2001).
12. Editorial, "Bar Would-Be Human Cloners," p. B8, The
Los Angeles Times (March 28, 2001).
13. Aaron Zitner, "Lawmakers Propose Human Cloning Ban, Alien
Order Notwithstanding," p. A22, The Los Angeles Times (March 29,
2001)
14. Antonio Regalado, "Human Cloning Attempt Is Opposed in
Hearing," pp. A1, B5, The Wall
Street Journal (March 29, 2001).
15. Sophia Fox, "Law to Prohibit Human Reproductive Cloning,"
Genetic Engineering News, Vol. 21, No. 10, pp. 30-31 (May 15, 2001).
16. Eric Cohen, "The Politics of Cloning: We Must Soon Make Tough
Decisions about How to Regulate the Genetic Revolution. But in the Debate Over
Creating Human Life, Traditional Alliances Are No Longer Relevant," The
Los Angeles Times, pp. M1, M6 (Sunday, June 3, 2001).
[Eric Cohen is a former Managing Editor of The Public Interest and a
Resident Fellow at the New America Foundation. He states, "Stem cells and
cloning, however significant, are only the beginning... The mapping of the
human genome raises the prospect of not just new genetic therapies for disease
but genetic enhancements, or so-called "germ-line interventions,"
that would affect all future generations. Eventually, the line between therapy
and enhancement may become too difficult to draw -- with genetic backwardness
one day becoming the social equivalent of disease, and genetic equality
becoming the next social egalitarian crusade."]
17. Louis M. Guenin, "Morals and Primordials," Science,
Vol. 292, No. 5522, pp. 1659-60 (June 1, 2001).
[Dr. Guenin is a resident philosopher in the Department of Microbiology
and Molecular Genetics at the Harvard Medical School. He boldly takes on the
Catholic Church's position regarding "Zygotic Personhood" by defining
the notion of an epidosembryo and then quoting Aristotle's Historia
Animalium (583b, Vol. II, p. 109 in the Britannica Great Books
series; c. 335 B.C.) in which the notion of hylomorphism (the correspondence
of form and matter) permits one to conclude that an embryo without neural
tissue (before five weeks) cannot have a soul, and therefore cannot be
conscious, and therefore cannot be a person for purposes of the "duty not
to kill." This line of argument makes one appreciate the "debt of
gratitude" that we owe to the ancient Greek philosophers.]
18. David Munn and Louis M. Guenin, "Moral Issues of Human Embryo
Research," Science, Vol. 293, No. 5528, p. 211 (July 13,
2001).
19. Prof. Michael C. Brannigan, Ph.D., Chairman of the Department of
Philosophy and Executive Director of the Center for the Study of Ethics, La
Roche College, Pittsburgh, PA, "What If We Assign Moral Status to Human
Embryos?" Genetic Engineering News, Vol. 21, No. 12, pp. 6, 68 (June
15, 2001).
20. Irving L. Weissman and David Baltimore, “Disappearing Stem Cells,
Disappearing Science,” Science, Vol. 292, No. 5517 (April 27,
2001).
21. Robert Lanza, Jose Cibelli, and Michael West, "Ethical Reasons
for Stem-Cell Research," and Elliott Dorff, Carol Tauer, and Ronald M.
Green, Science, Vol. 292, No. 5520, p. 1299 (May 18, 2001)
[The authors state that "According to data supplied by the Centers
for Disease Control's National Center for Health Statistics approximately 3,000
Americans die every day from diseases that in the future may be treatable with
ES-derived cells and tissues."]
22. Antonio
Regalado, "Cloned Livestock Mustn't Be Eaten Yet, FDA Warns," The Wall Street Journal, pp. B1, B4
(June 5, 2001).
23. Antonio Regalado, "Bush Administration Says It Opposes Cloning
of Human Embryos for Research," The
Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, 4 (June 21, 2001).
24. Aaron Zitner, "Bush Administration Backs Complete Ban on Human
Cloning," The Los Angeles Times,
pp. A1,19 (June 21, 2001).
25. Aaron Zitner, "Heart Association Chills Embryo Studies," The
Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 14 (June 21, 2001).
26. Letter to the Editor, James Underdown, Executive Director, Center
for Inquiry West, Los Angeles, "Heart Assn. Withdraws from Embryo
Research," The Los Angeles Times, p. B12 (June
21, 2001).
27. Aaron Zitner, "Possible Stem Cell Compromise Cited by Bush
Catholic Advisors," The Los
Angeles Times, pp. A1, A19 (July 8, 2001).
28. Robert Pear, "Move in G.O.P. to Block Study of Embryo Cells:
Three in House Urge Halt to Aid, But Party is Split," The New York
Times, pp. A1, 10 (July 3, 2001).
29. "House GOP Urges Bush to Keep Stem Cell Ban," The Los
Angeles Times (July 3, 2001).
30. "Senator Seeks Support for Stem Cell Research," The
Los Angeles Times (July 2, 2001).
31. Dr. Joseph Antin, M.D., Dana Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard
Medical School interviewed on Lou Dobbs "Money Line" CNN-TV (Monday,
July 2, 2001; 3:30 PM PDT; TRT = 4:25 min).
32. "Bush Remains Undecided, But the Public Favors Embryo
Research," The Wall Street Journal, p. A1 (June 29,
2001);
33. Gretchen Vogel, "Bush Grapples with Stem Cells, Cloning,"
Science, Vol. 292, No. 5526, pp. 2409-10 (June 29, 2001);
34. Sharon Begley, et al, "Cellular Divide," Newsweek,
pp. 22-31 (July 9, 2001).
35. Rudolf Jaenisch and Ian Wilmut, "Don't Clone Humans!" Science,
Vol. 291, p. 2552 (March 30, 2001).
36. Marjorie Miler, "Britain Proposes Law Against Cloning of
Humans," The Los Angeles Times, p. A10 (April 20,
2001).
37. Aaron Zitner and Stephanie Simon, "Reprogramming of Genes at
Core of Cloning Debate," The Los Angeles Times, p. A31 (April 22,
2001).
38. Nicholas Wade, "Grants for Stem Cell Work Are Delayed," The
New York Times (April 24, 2001).
39. Laurie McGinley, "GOP Lawmakers Seek to Ban Cloning of Humans
Funded Privately or by U.S.," The Wall Street Journal (April 26,
2001).
40. Aaron Zitner, "Diabetes Study Fuels Stem Cell Funding
War," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 29 (April 27,
2001).
41. Nicholas Wade, "Scientists Report Two Major Advances in
Stem-Cell Work: Debate Likely to Heat up, Advances Come as Bush Weighs
Arguments of Researchers and Foes of Abortion," The New York Times,
pp. A1, 12 (April 27, 2001).
42. Gautam Naik, "'Therapeutic Cloning' Holds Promise of Treating
Disease," The Wall Street Journal, pp. B1, B3 (April 27,
2001).
43. Ronald Brownstein and Aaron Zitner, "Compromise in Works for
Embryo Cells, The Los Angeles Times, p. A14 (June 28, 2001).
44. Aaron Zitner, "Group's Human Cloning Efforts Hit FDA Snag,"
The Los Angeles Times (June 30, 2001).
45. Jeffrey L. Fox, "US Biotech Policy Issues Remain in
Limbo," Nature Biotechnology , Vol. 19, No. 6, pp. 496-7 (June
2001).
46. Editorial, "Miracle Cures and Embryonic Science," Nature
Biotechnology , Vol. 19, No. 4, p. 287 (April 2001).
47. Thomas Maugh, II, "Fat May Be the Answer for Many
Illnesses," The Los Angeles Times , p. A1, A20 (April 10,
2001).
48. Denise Grady, "Fat Is Good Source of Stem Cells, A Study
Says," The New York Times, p. A13 (April 10, 2001);
49. Antonio Regalado, "Scientists Say Embryo Research Is Needed
Despite Fat Finding," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B1, B3
(April 27, 2001).
50. Patricia A. Zuk, Min Zhu, Hiroshi Mizuno, Jerry Huang BS, J.
William Futrell, Adam J. Katz, Prosper Benhaim, H. Peter Lorenz, and Marc H.
Hedrick, "Multilineage Cells from Human Adipose Tissue: Implications for
Cell-Based Therapies," Tissue Engineering, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.
211-228, (Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., New
York; April 2001).
51. Robert Lee Hotz, "More
Doubt Cast on Cloning Safety," The Los Angeles Times, p. A26 (July
6, 2001).
52. David Humpherys, Kevin
Eggan, Hidenori Akutsu, Konrad Hochedlinger, William M. Rideout III, Detlev
Biniszkiewicz, Ryuzo Yanagimachi, and Rudolf Jaenisch, "Epigenetic Instability
in ES Cells and Cloned Mice," Science,
Vol. 293, No. 5527, pp. 95-97 (July 6, 2001).
53. Laurie McGinley,
"Stem-Cell Research Stirs Passionate Debate and Changing
Politics," The Wall Street
Journal, pp. A1, 30 (July 9, 2001).
54. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "Reserved Scientist Creates an Uproar
with His Work on Stem Cells,"
The New York Times, p. A10 (July 10, 2001).
55. Rep. Constance A. Morella (R-MD), "Stem-Cell Research Needs
United Support," Science, Vol. 293, No. 5527, p. 47 (July 6,
2001).
56. Edwin Chen and Aaron Ziner, "Bush Mulls Stem-Cell Issue,"
The Los Angeles Times, p. A21 (July 13, 2001).
57. Laurie McGinley, "Nancy Reagan Urges GOP To Back Stem-Cell
Studies," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B2 (July 12,
2001).
58. Aaron Zitner, "Embryos Created for Stem Cell Research," The
Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 10 (July 11, 2001).
59. "Embryos Are Used From Human Donors to Make Stem Cells," The
Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B8 (July 11, 2001).
60. "Cloning of Embryos for Research Raises Ethics
Questions," The Wall Street Journal, p B2 (July 12, 2001).
61. Susan E. Lanzendorf,
Catherine A. Boyd, Diane L. Wright, Suheil Muasher, Sergio Oehninger, and Gary
D. Hodgen, Jones Institute for Productive Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical
School in Norfolk, "Use of Human Gametes Obtained from Anonymous Donors
for the Production of Human Embryonic Stem-Cell Lines," Fertility and
Sterility, Vol. 76, No. 1, pp. 132-7 (July 2001).
62. Antonio Regalado, "FDA Warns Reproductive Clinics to Stop
Using Fertility Technique," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B2
(July 11, 2001).
[Since May 1997, the St. Barnabas Medical Center in Livingston, NJ has
conducted 30 ooplasmic transfers in which mitochondria from the eggs of younger
donors appeared to rejuvenate the eggs of older women that were subsequently
fertilized by sperm from their husbands, resulting in 16 live births. This
greater than 50 percent success rate is much higher than the traditional rate
of about 30 percent at even the best IVF Clinics. The only concern is that the
babies have genetic material from three parents (remember that mitochondria
have unique mtDNA){Note: Inherited mitochondrial pathologies are
extremely rare.} But, does the FDA have the legal authority to prohibit this
sort of IVF research, which they've never done before?]
63. Editorial, "The Real Pro-Life Decision," The Los
Angeles Times, p. B14 (July 12, 2001).
64. Mary Tyler Moore and Christopher Reeve, Op-Ed Piece, "Seize
the Promise Held by Stem Cells," The Los Angeles Times, p. M5 (July
15, 2001).
65. "Do You Copy?" Wired Magazine, p. 74 (August
2001).
66. July 12/13, 2001. Stem Cell Research: A National Public Radio
Special Report.
[The debate over stem cell research is gaining visibility, as President
Bush is expected to announce soon whether his Administration will permit
federal funding for research using cells from human embryos. The pressure
surrounding the decision has been intense: The NIH, Secretary of Health and
Human Services Tommy Thompson, and a growing number of Republican lawmakers all
urge the president to pay for research. But others inside the White House
oppose the funding, saying research on cells derived from human embryos is
unethical and should be banned. Many
scientists are convinced that studying these cells will reveal a wealth of
knowledge about the basic biology of human beings, and could lead to treatments
for a variety of disease. So even without Federal support, embryonic stem cell
research will proceed -- but at a much slower pace.]
67. On National Public Radio's All Things Considered, Mr. Joe
Palca interviewed Dr. Michael West, CEO of Advanced Cell Technologies, Inc. of
Worcester, MA on their attempt to create cloned human embryos from which to
harvest stem cells (July 12, 2001).
68. On National Public Radio's Morning Edition, Mr. Joe Palca
asked whether the FDA really has the authority to regulate cloning? (July 13,
2001).
69. “Sperm-Free Fertilization," Science, Vol. 293, No. 5529, p. 423 (July 29, 2001).
70. "Australian Firm Isolates Stem Cells from Embryos," The
Wall Street Journal (July 24, 2001).
71, Antonio Regalado, "Ethicists, Bodyguards Monitor Scientists'
Efforts to Create Copy of Human Embryo,"
The Wall Street Journal, pp. B1, 4 (July 13, 2001)
72. Gautam Naik, "Stem-Cell Research is Forging Ahead in
Europe," The Wall Street
Journal, pp. B1, 4 (July 13, 2001).
73. July 18, 2001; A new 200-page NIH Report entitled "Stem Cells:
Scientific Progress and Future Research Directions -- Opportunities and
Challenges: A Focus on Future Stem Cell Applications" (June 19, 2001) and
is now available for free download from the Internet.
74. Aaron Zitner, "Bible Guides Senate on Stem Cell Studies:
Debate on Controversy Focuses on When an Embryo Becomes a Life," The
Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 16 (July 19, 2001).
[Note: C-SPAN-TV Congressional testimony provided by Dr.
Michael West, CEO of Advanced Cell Technology, who lectured his opponents with
stories from the Bible (the Tower of Babel and "When I was a child, I
spoke like a child...") I rather suspect that, although his opponents may
enjoy quoting from the Bible themselves, they don't like to have the Bible
quoted back to them. Therefore, it is unlikely that any compelling arguments
were made that would change the minds of the opponents. On an unrelated matter,
one of the Senators asked Dr. West his estimate of how much money was being
invested in stem-cell research by the private sector in this country, and he
replied that, "between the two companies currently supporting this area in
a significant way {presumable Geron and ACT}, the combined total might be $10
million per year." To place this number in perspective, these same
Senators are used to dealing not with millions but with billions of dollars in
the context of other Federal Government appropriations, making this issue
appear, from their point of view, to be a "tempest in a teapot," in
terms of the amount of time it was consuming.]
75. Antonio Rgalado, "Stem-Cell Report by NIH Fuels Debate Between
Backers, Opponents of Funding," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B2
(July 19, 2001).
76. Anuj Gupta, "The Personal Sides of the Stem Cell Debate:
Advocates and Opponents of Embryonic Research Make Their Cases on the
Hill," The Los Angeles Times, p. A10 (July 18, 2001).
77. Laurie McGinley, "Influential GOP Senator William Frist, M.D.,
Supports Stem-Cell Research," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, A20
(July 18, 2001).
78. Laurie McGinley, "Senator Trent Lott Now Opposes Federal Funds
for Embyryonic Stem-Cell Study," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1,
A20 (July 17, 2001).
79. Antonio Regalado, "Top Researcher of Stem Cells To Move
Abroad," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B1, B8 (July 16, 2001).
[Dr. Roger Pedersen of the University of California in San Francisco
will leave the US to go to the University of Cambridge, UK, where public
funding of embryonic stem-cell research is more readily obtained.]
80. Aaron Zitner, "Uncertainty Is Thwarting Stem-Cell
Researcher," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 11 (July 16,
2001).
81. Stem Cell News Website: http://www.stemcellnews.com
(July 20, 2001).
82.Gretchen Vogel, "Stem-Cell Research: NIH Review Outlines
'Enormous Promise'," Science, Vol. 293, p. 413 (July 20,
2001).
83. Gretchen Vogel, "Rumors and Trial Balloons Precede Bush's
Funding Decision," Science, Vol. 293, No. 5528, pp. 186-7 (July 13,
2001);
84.Richard Boudreaux and James Gerstenzang, "Pope Urges Bush to
Reject Human Embryo Cell Research," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1,4
(July 24, 2001);
85. Jim VandeHei, "Pope Urges Bush to Bar Experiments on
Embryos," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, 20 (July 24,
2001);
86. Alessandra Stanley, "Bush Hears Pope Condemn Research in Human
Embryos," The New York Times, pp. A1, 8 (July 24,
2001);
87. Nicholas Wade, "Grappling with the Ethics of Stem Cell
Research," The New York Times, p. D3 (July 24, 2001);
88. Letters from Joanne Hedge and Joshua Belsky, "Cloning Pets
Diminishes Both Animal and Man," The Los Angeles Times, Section B
(July 25, 2001);
89. Sarah Lubeck, "House Panel Votes to Ban Human Cloning," The
Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B7 (July 25, 2001).
[The House voted to criminalize any human cloning. The Weldon Bill will
now move to the full House.]
90. Paul Conrad, "Other Than That, Your Eminence, What Are Your
Thoughts about Stem-Cell Research," Political Cartoon showing President
Bush skewered by a Papal Crucifix, The Los Angeles Times, p. B13 (July
25, 2001);
91. Paul Conread, :The Creation of Stem-Cell Research," The Los
Angles Times, p. B15 (July 27, 2001).
92. John Balzar, "No Steam Over Stem Cell," The Los
Angeles Times, p. B15 (July 27, 2001); ["Surely we cannot argue over
each new development, like we have been doing with stem-cell research all the
way to the White House, without overlooking 10,000 other important scientific
biological issues."]
93. Jeremy Rifkin, "Will Companies Hold Control of Life Made in a
Petri Dish?," The Los Angeles Times, p. B11 (July 23,
2001).
[Mr. Rifkin seeks to call our attention to Geron and ATC as the really
dangerous private-sector companies.]
94. Jeremy Rifkin, "Odd Coupling of Political Bedfellows Takes
Shape in the New Biotech Era," Second of Two Parts, The Los Angeles
Times, p. B13 (July 24, 2001).
95. Jack Germond, "Bush Can't Please All Republican Factions,"
The Los Angeles Times, pp. M1, 2 (July 22, 2001).
[Germond says, "Of all the issues on the table today, the most
politically dangerous is the debate over Federal funding of stem-cell
research"; and the Pope is said to have made a passionate plea to President
Bush to ban embryonic stem-cell research, saying "this is one of the great
moral questions of the new century."]
96. “Special Report on Stem-Cell Research” (CNN-TV, 10:00 PM
EDT; July 23, 2001).
97. Greg Miller, “Adult Stem-Cell Talents Grow,” New Scientist
Weekly Newsletter, No. 95 (July 28, 2001).
98. Scott Hensley, “Applera to Catalog Genetic Variations,” The Wall Street Journal, (July 24,
2001).
99. Andrew Pollack, "Race Under Way to Winnow Down Genetic
Data," The New York Times,
pp. C1, 15 (July 24, 2001).
100. Scott Hensley, Antonio Regalado, and Laurie McGinley,
"Stem-Cell Test Restored Motion to Paralyzed Mice," The Wall
Street Journal, p. A3 (July 25, 2001).
101. Vaclav Ourednik, Jitka Ourednik, Jonathan D. Flax, Michael Zawada,
Cynthia Hutt, Chunhua Yang, Kook I. Park, Seung U. Kim, Richard L. Sidman, Curt
R. Freed, Evan Y. Snyder, “Segregation of Human Neural Stem Cells in the
Developing Primate Forebrain,” Science, (Published online July 26,
2001).
102. Laurie McGinley, "House Speaker [Dennis Hastert] Opposes
Federal Funding of Stem-Cell Research Using Embryos," The Wall Street
Journal, p. B6 (July 30, 2001);
103. Editorial, "Healthy Sibling Rivalry," The Los Angeles
Times, p. B12 (July 21, 2001).
["One sign of conflict within the Administration is in the debate
over stem-cell research, which has pitted White House Officials against each
other."]
104. Letters "Ethics and Embryos," The Los Angeles Times, p. D4 (July 31, 2001).
105. John F. Wong, Ph.D., Chairman, SciFin, Inc. Los Angeles, CA,
"Politics and Science Converge on Stem Cell Studies: Private-Sector
Research May Boost Biotech Market,"
Genetic Engineering News, Vol. 21, No. 13, pp. 51, 53, 77 (July
2001).
106. Geeta Anand, "Scientists Turn Stem Cells into Insulin Producers," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, 2
(July 31, 2001);
107. Reuters, "Stem Cells Are Used to Produce Insulin," The
New York Times, p. A11 (August 1, 2001).
108. Thomas H. Maugh, II, "Israeli Study Creates Insulin-Producing
Cells," The Los Angeles Times, p. A11 (August 6, 2001).
109. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "Tangled Issues: Human Cloning and Stem
Cells," The New York Times,
p. A1, 17 (July 31, 2001).
110. Megan Garvey, "House Approves Strict Ban on Human
Cloning," The Los Angeles Times,
pp. A1, 12 (August 1, 2001).
111. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "House Backs Ban on Human Cloning for
any Objective," The New York
Times, pp. A1, 11 (August 1, 2001).
112. Laurie McGinley, "House Votes to Prohibit Human
Cloning," The Wall Street
Journal, pp. A1, 2 (August 1, 2001).
113. Editorial, "Fearsome Biotech," The Los Angeles Times, p. B14 (August 2,
2001).
114. James P. Pinkerton, "Banning Research Will Knock Us Out of
the Race for Cures," The Los
Angeles Times, p. B15 (August 2, 2001).
115. Antonio Regalado, Laurie McGinley, and David Hamilton, "Vote
to Criminalize Human Cloning Gives Researchers, Investors Pause," The Wall Street Journal, p. B1, 4
(August 2, 2001).
[Dr. Peter Mombaerts, a scientist at the Rockefeller University in New
York who has cloned mice, estimates that "fewer than three dozen
researchers in the U.S. truly understand the possibilities inherent in cloning
research." Furthermore, this ban, if it ever becomes law, is likely to
have some unintended victims, particularly new fertility techniques such as
'egg reconstruction.' Dr. Michael West, CEO of ACT in Worcester, MA said that
they have applied for a patent on a process called "ooplasmic
transfer," which is, in effect, the reverse of therapeutic cloning. By
dribbling the soupy liquid inside an egg on top of an adult cell, 'like water
balloons,' it seems that it might possible to dedifferentiate that adult cell
into its embryonic state."]
{Note: This sounds like a "sledge hammer" approach compared
to the sort of "scalpel" type of approach that we could achieve once
we have a detailed map of the human proteome and have cataloged all of the
embryogenic specialization tissue-communication molecules. But remember that it
is not really enough to know what the communication/tissue-specialization factors
are. Their concentration might be just as important as their makeup in
"instructing" cells about their respective fates. It is already
known, for example, that when one doubles the concentration of a particular
immune cytokine in the thymus gland that blank T-helper cells can be
"educated" to differentiate into a totally different type of white
blood cell. So there is not a simple one-to-one correspondence between the
complete table of cytokines and the table of cell types. It is much more complicated
than that.]
116. Nigel Hawkes, Health Editor, “Hope of Repair for Damaged Hearts,” The
London Times (August 2, 2001).
[Story from the Journal of Clinical Investigation.]
117. “Japan Approves Stem-Cell Guidelines,” The Wall Street Journal,
p. A1 (August 2, 2001).
118. Dennis Normile, "Japan Readies Rules that Allow
Research," Science, Vol. 293, No. 5531, p. 775 (August 3,
2001).
119. Gautam Naik and
Antonio Regalado, "Scientists Seek Methods to Create Stem Cell Without
Using Embryos," The Wall Street
Journal, pp. B1,4 (August 3, 2001).
120. Laurie McGinley and Antonio Regalado, "New Theory Could Roil
Stem-Cell Debate," The Wall
Street Journal, pp. A1, B4 (August 3, 2001).
[In this article, we learn that Dianne Irving, a biologist who now
specializes in philosophy and bioethics and is a consultant to the American
Life League, has written a position paper that suggests that individual
stem cells may have the potential to become "whole embryos." Dr. Paul
Berg, a Nobel Laureate and Professor of Biochemistry at Stanford University,
called the paper "utter nonsense."]
121. Michael Ramirez, "Political Cartoon: Playing God with Fetal
Parts," The Los Angeles Times, p. M5 (August 5, 2001).
122. Laura Minges, "Will Stem Cell Research Help or Harm the
Disabled?" The Los Angeles Times, p. B19 (August 5,
2001).
[Laura Minges, who is herself a victim of Cerebral Palsy, argues that
disabilities are no excuse to prematurely eliminate people who are born with
congenital afflictions, using a prenatal diagnosis of some sort to abort them
before they are born. They, after all, have a right to live too. I hate to
sound patronizing to someone with a disability, but I believe we all have a
duty to expose flawed reasoning whenever it appears. It reminds me of the
paradoxical statement made by a congenitally deaf person that "deafness is
a superior state compared with the 'hearing state' on the grounds that 'silence
had greater degree of acoustic purity'."]
123. Daniel C. Maguire, Professor of Moral Theology at Marquette University,
"Listen to the Many Voices on 'When Life Begins'," The Los Angeles Times, p. B11 (August
6, 2001).
124. "Man Reconsiders on Cloning Dead Son," The Los Angeles Times, p. A10 (August
6, 2001).
[Mr. Mark Hunt, an attorney who lost his ten-year-old son in 1999, has
withdrawn his support from Dr. Brigitte Boisselier of the Raelian Movement due
to a loss of confidence. On August 7th, the media revealed that Mr. Hunt had
invested $500,000.]
125. Aaron Zitner, "Team Claim It Will Clone Humans," The Los Angeles Times, p. A13 (August
7, 2001).
[Dr. Panos Zavos, a former University of Kentucky infertility
researcher, will announce his plans to clone 200 human babies starting in
November.]
126. Antonio Regalado, "Scientists Convene to Discuss Future of
Human Cloning," The Wall Street
Journal, p. B7 (August 7, 2001).
[An NAS Report is to be published this Fall; There will be 19
presentations; The Sessions were hosted by Dr. Irving Weissman, Ph.D., from
Stanford University Medical School.]
127. Philip Cohen, “Human Clone
Promise Attacked,” New Scientist, No. 97 (August 11, 2001)
128. Aaron Zitner, "Researchers Defend Human Cloning
Plans," The Los Angeles Times,
pp. A1, 14 (August 8, 2001).
129. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "Despite Warnings, 3 Vow To Go Ahead on Human
Cloning," The New York Times, pp.
A1, 12 (August 8, 2001).
130. Antonio Regalado and Laurie McGinley, "Would-Be Cloners of
People Face Barrage of Critics," The
Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, 2 (August 8, 2001).
131. Patt Morrison, "Just Send In No-Clones, Then Send Out the
Checks," The Los Angeles Times,
p. B3 (August 8, 2001).
132. Letters, "Fears of Biotech Color the Debate," The Los Angeles Times, p. B12 (August
8, 2001).
133. Madison Shockley, of USC's Anneberg School for Communication,
"We're All God's Creatures Even If Cloned," The Los Angeles Times, p. B13 (August 8,
2001).
134. Janet Hook and Ronald Brownstein, "Bush OKs Limited Stem-Cell
Funding," The Los Angeles Times,
pp. A1, 19 (August 9, 2001).
135. Aaron Zitner and Edwin Chen, "President Steers a Middle
Course on His Most Sensitive Policy Issue So Far, Saying He'll Allow Some
US-backed Studies that Don't Destroy More Human Embryos," The Los
Angeles Times, pp. A1, A18 (August 10, 2001).
136. Megan Garvey, "New Medical Frontiers Give Panel Chief
Pause," The Los Angeles Times, p. A20 (August 10, 2001).
137. Paul Conrad, "Political Cartoon: In the Beginning God Created
Blastocyst," The Los Angeles Times, p. B15 (August 10,
2001).
138. Laurie McGinley, Jeanne Cummings, and Antonio Regalado, "Bush
to Allow Limited Stem-Cell Funding," The Wall Street Journal, pp.
A1, 3 (August 10, 2001).
139. "Stem-Cell Issue Entangles Science and Policy," The
Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, A10 (August 10, 2001).
140. Nicholas Wade, "Stem-Cell Studies Advance in Britain: Fewer
Limits and Less Discord Than in the United States," The New York Times,
pp. A1, 14 (August 14, 2001).
141. Frank Bruni, "Bush Says He Will Veto Any Bill Broadening His
Stem-Cell Policy," The New York Times, pp. A1, 14 (August 14,
2001).
142. Antonio Regalado and David P. Hamilton, "Geron Is Sued Over
Control of Stem Cells," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, 3, 8
(August 14, 2001).
143. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "Suit Seeks to Expand Access to Stem
Cells," The New York Times, p. C2 (August 14, 2001).
144. Denise Gellene, "Group Sues Geron Over Stem-Cell Lines,"
The Los Angeles Times, p. C3 (August 15, 2001).
145. Bloomberg News Wire Service, "Geron in Stem-Cell Settlement
Talks: University Group Had Sued Firm to Keep It From Exercising Exclusive
Control Over Certain Cell Types," The Los Angeles Times, p. C2
(August 17, 2001).
[The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) of Madison, WI is
suing Geron Corp. of Menlo Park, CA over the alleged expiration of
exclusive-rights options on various cell lines. WARF wants to distribute cell
lines to other academic researchers while Geron insists that any clinical
application of the cell lines must be licensed from them directly.]
146. George F. Will, "Extremism in the Pursuit of Science Is No
Virtue," The Los Angeles Times, p. B13 (August 14,
2001).
147. Robert Scheer, "Stem the Tide of Research?
Fuhgeddaboutit," The Los Angeles Times, p. B13 (August 14,
2001).
148. Michael Ramirez, "Political Cartoon: Aid: No Mr. President,
We Cannot Harvest Saddam Hussein's Stem Cells... President: How About Tom
Daschle?," The Los Angeles Times, p. B21 (August 11,
2001).
149. Michael Ramierez, "Political Cartoon: Man with Three Arms
Says, 'And We Almost Guarantee, One Out of Ten Clones Will be Normal, Maybe,'"
The Los Angeles Times, p. M5 (August 12, 2001).
150. Editorial, "One Decision, More to Go," The Los
Angeles Times, p. B20 (August 11, 2001).
151. Isadore Rosenfeld, "Parkinson's Sufferers Hang in
There!" Parade Magazine Sunday Supplement to the Los Angeles Times,
pp. 12, 13 (August 12, 2001).
[“The most promising breakthrough, though controversial, appears to be
gene and stem-cell therapy, as well as the transplanting of fetal cells that
make dopamine."]
152. Denise Gellene, "Biotechs Fall on Stem-Cell News," The
Los Angeles Times, p. C1, 2 (August 11, 2001).
153. Aaron Zitner and Edwin Chen, "Stem-Cell Decision Doesn't
Quell Debate," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 12 (August 11,
2001).
154. Frank Bruni and Katharine Q. Seelye, "Bush Gives His Backing
for Limited Research on Existing Stem Cells," The New York Times,
pp. A1, 16, 17 (August 10, 2001).
155. Editorial, "President Bush Waffles," The New York
Times, p. A22 (August 10, 2001).
156. Letters, "When Life Begins in a Free Society," The
Los Angeles Times, p. B21 (August 11, 2001).
157. Aaron Zitner, "Scientists Try Unfertilized Eggs as Source of
Stem Cells," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 20 (August 12,
2001).
[Michael West, CEO of ACT in Worcester, MA, said "Using proteins
found in egg-cell protoplasm, it may be possible to prompt adult cells, such as
skin cells, to revert to stem cells similar to those in embryos."]
158. Eric Cohen, "Bush's Stem-Cell Ruling: A Missouri
Compromise," The Los Angeles Times, p. M2 (August 12,
2001).
159. David P. Hamilton, "Geron Is on Top of the Stem Cell, but
Wall Street Isn't Sold," The Wall Street Journal, pp. C1, 2 (August
13, 2001).
160. Ronald Brownstein, "Bush Won't Budge on Stem Cell Position,
Health Secretary Says," The Los Angeles Times, p. A9 (August 13,
2001).
["Sens. Harkin and Kennedy will hold hearings next month to
explore the effectiveness of the 60 cell lines, among other
questions."]
161. Letters, "Bush's Decision on Stem-Cell Research," The
Los Angeles Times, p. B10 (August 13, 2001).
162. Bart Kosko, "Bush's 'Slippery Slope' Could Drag Roe
Backward," The Los Angeles Times, p. B11 (August 13,
2001).
["It's useful to view life using Fuzzy Logic; Life no more begins
all-or-none at conception than outer space begins exactly 100 miles
up."]
163. Charles Ornstein, "Stem-Cell Controversy Stirs Emotions Among
Those with Chronic Diseases," The Los Angeles Times, p. B1 (August
13, 2001).
164. Antonio Regalado, Jill Carroll, and Laura Johannes, "Scramble
Over Stem Cells," The Wall Street Journal, p. B1, 4 (August 13,
2001).
165. Gautam Naik, "Britain Moves to Establish First Embryo
Stem-Cell Bank to Supply Unlimited Lines," The Wall Street Journal,
p. A1, B1, 4 (August 13, 2001).
166. David Hamilton and Antonio Regalado, "Biotech Industry
Unfettered but Possibly Unfulfilled, The Wall Street Journal, p. B1, 4
(August 13, 2001).
167. Steve Johnson, "Rather Defends Remark After Stem-Cell
Segment," The Los Angeles Times, p. F7 (August 14,
2001).
[Note: I received a message on my daily newswire service
downloaded to my beeper on Monday afternoon, August 13th that a reporter at Newsweek
Magazine found evidence that the President actually made the policy
decision, which he reported in his Thursday night Address-to-the-Nation, one
month ago (rather than one day before [on Wednesday], as reported by White
House Staff the next day [Friday]) which is consistent with my own hypothesis
explained in the third paragraph of the August 9th news item above]
168. James P. Pinkerton, "Quality-of-Lifers Will Need Quantity-of-Lifers,"
The Los Angeles Times, p. B13 (August 15, 2001).
["Newsweek reports in its latest issue that the President
had made up his mind to proceed with Federally-funded stem-cell research back
in early July. Indeed, the magazine asserts that while the NIH suggested
proceeding with just 30 cell lines, the White House upped it to 60. Why? Newsweek
suggests that Bush wanted to empower enough stem-cell lines so that he wouldn't
have to confront the issue again."]
169. Robert S. McElvaine, "Cloning Aside, It Still Takes Two to
Tango," The Los Angeles Times, p. B15 (August 16,
2001).
170. Editorial, "Bush's Soft Spot," The Los Angeles Times,
p. B12 (August 15, 2001).
["... he is signaling compromise. The fist was his decision on the
funding of stem-cell research. Now the Administration is taking the soft road
on an important case..."]
171. Paul Conrad, "Political Cartoon, But on the Other Hand [Man
with two heads holds a science book on Stem-Cell Research]," The Los
Angeles Times, p. B13 (August 15, 2001).
172. Danziger, "Political Cartoon, Stem Cells are like way cool. I
mean let's say I hit a huge-O tree and paralyze my brain. I go home and stick
some stem cells in my ear, and in a couple of weeks I'm back on the road..
[Man, driving a convertible sports car, to a woman], " The Los Angeles
Times, p. B13 (August 15, 2001);
173. Letters, "Use Private Funds for Stem-Cell Research," The
Los Angeles Times, p. B16 (August 17, 2001).
174. Matthew Miller, "Don't Sell Short the Newly Spun W," The
Los Angeles Times, p. B16 (August 17, 2001).
["Unlike liberals who see the stem cell debate as further proof
that Bush is a 'front man,' I see it as proof that Bush can reflect and grow.
Now if only Bush would turn these newfound muscles to the ways America values
the born, not just the unborn."]
175. Donald Kennedy, "Editorial: Enclosing the Research
Commons," Science, Vol. 294, p. 2249 (December 14,
2001).
["August's Executive Order on stem-cell research promises to
transfer a major public program into the proprietary sector. That's where
things may be headed; stay tuned."]
176. Chris Adams, "Bioethics Appointee Says He Is No
Indoctrinator," The Wall Street
Journal, pp. A1, B1 (August 17, 2001).
177. Laura Johannes, "Embryo Donors Ask: What Now?" The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B1
(August 17, 2001).
178. Reuters Health, "Harvard to Become Supplier of Embryonic Stem
Cells through Boston IVF, an
Organization of Fertility Clinics,” The Boston Globe (August 25,
2001).
179. Reuters Health, "Bush Says 50 Stem Cell Lines 'Ample' Despite
FDA Restrictions" (August 24, 2001)
180. "Mystery Surrounds Fertility Clinic Tied to Stem-Cell Lab in
India" The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B1, B4 (September 7,
2001).
181. Jonathan Rauch, "Sure You Can Clone Mozart, but You Can't
Reproduce Him," The Los Angeles Times, p. B11 (August 20,
2001).
182. Debora Vrana, "Investors Divided on Stem Cells," The
Los Angeles Times, pp. C1, C8 (September 1, 2001).
183. "Mix of Stem Cells with Mouse Cells is Obstacle," The
Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, p. A26 (August 24,
2001).
184. Aaron Zitner, "Scientists Try Unfertilized Eggs as Source of
Stem Cells," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 20 (August 12,
2001).
185. Charles Ornstein, "Donor Stops Big Payment to Stanford:
Angered by the Bush Policy on Stem-Cell Research, Technology Mogul Jim Clark
withholds $60 million of the $150 million He Pledged for Biomedical
Studies," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, A2, B1, B10 (September 1,
2001).
186. Cartoon, The Los Angeles Times, p. B19 (August 18,
2001).
187. Cartoon, Newsweek, p. 13 (August 20, 2001).
188. Cartoon, The Los Angeles Times, p. B13 (August 29,
2001).
189. Denise Gellene, "Stem-Cell Product Still Eludes Research
Firms," The Los Angeles Times, p. C1, C13 (August 26,
2001).
190. Jill Carroll and James VandeHei, "Mouse Cells in Stem Lines
May Limit Use," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, A3 (August 24,
2001).
191. Mark Oppenheimer, "Cloning and the Cult," The Wall
Street Journal, p. W13 (August 24, 2001).
192. Antonio Regalado and Meera Louis, "Ethical Concerns Block
Widespread Patenting of Embryonic Advances," The Wall Street Journal,
pp. A1, B1, B4 (August 20, 2001).
193. "Stem-Cell Talks Begin Today Between the Government and the
University of Wisconsin," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B4
(August 21, 2001).
194. Carl T. Hall, "Abortion Forces Gave Birth to Bush Slogan:
Stem-Cell Policy Speech Used Idea of 'Snowflake,'" The San Francisco
Chronicle, p. A11 (August 20, 2001).
195. Carl T. Hall, "The Forgotten Embryos," The San
Francisco Chronicle, pp. A1, 11 (August 20, 1001).
196. Tom Abate, "Georgia Firm Could Test Geron-Wisconsin Stem-Cell
Advantage," The San Francisco Chronicle, pp. D1, D4 (August 20,
2001).
197. Question on Number of Stem Cell Lines," The New York Times,
p. A12 (August 21, 2001).
198. Sarah Lueck, "Wisconsin Shows Stem-Cell Quest Can Become a
Juggernaut," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, A18 (August 23,
2001).
199. Antonio Regalado and Jill Carroll, "Stem-Cell Pack Is
Expected to be Reached between U.S., Holder of Important Patent," The
Wall Street Journal, p. B4 (August 21, 2001).
200. Marlene Cimons, "Scientist Offers Free Cell Lines," The
Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, A8 (August 25, 2001).
[Prof. Douglas Melton, Chairman, Cell and Molecular Biology Department,
Harvard University.]
201. Tim Friend, "Free Stem-Cell Lines Will Be Offered to
Researchers," USA Today, p. 10D (August 22, 2001).
202. Editorial, "Send in the Clones?" U.S. News &
World Report, pp. 12, 16, 80 (August 20/27, 2001).
203. Laura Johannes, "Embryo Donors Ask: What Now?" The
Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B1, B4 (August 17, 2001).
204. "US to Name Facilities with Stem Cells for Study," The
Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, p. A13 (August 27,
2001).
205. Benedict Carey, "Get Up-to-Date on National Stem-Cell
Debate," The Los Angeles Times, p. S2 (August 27,
2001).
206. Andrew Pollack, "Obscure Biotech Company Becomes Big Player
in Stem-Cell World," The New York Times, pp. C1, C8 (August 28,
2001).
[CyThera is located in San Diego, CA]
207. Five Letters, "Stem-Cell Players, Lining Up," The Los
Angeles Times, p. A18 (August 28, 2001).
208. Denise Gellene, "Group Sues Geron over Stem-Cell Lines,"
The Los Angeles Times, p. C3 (August 15, 2001).
209. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "Suit Seeks to Expand Access to Stem
Cells," The New York Times, p. C2 (August 14, 2001).
210. Antonio Regalado and David P. Hamilton, "Geron Is Sued over
Control of Stem Cells," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, A3 (August
14, 2001).
211.Antonio Regalado and Jill Carroll, "NIH Names Developers of
Stem-Cell Lines Eligible for Funds, Sparking New Questions," The Wall
Street Journal, pp. A1, A3, A6 (August 28, 2001).
212 Nicholas Wade, "List of Stem-Cell Researchers Shows Hand Had
Been Tied," The New York Times, p. A10 (August 28,
2001).
213. Aaron Aitner, "NIH Identifies Stem-Cell Sets OK'd for
Funds," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, A10 (August 28,
2001).
214. "BreasaGen of Australia has offered stem cell line
free-of-charge to researchers subject to a license agreement for any future
clinical applications," "Your Health," CNN-TV (Saturday,
August 25, 2001; 12:40 PM PDT).
215. Denise Gellene, "Biotechs Fall on Stem-Cell News: Shares Drop
as Companies Try to Reassess Their Status in the Wake of Bush's Decision,"
The Los Angeles Times, pp. C1, C2 (August 11, 2001).
216. Four Letters, "Stem Cells: Politics or Principles?" The
Los Angeles Times, p. B19 (August 18, 2001).
217. "The Vatican Warned that Experimentation on Human Embryos
Could Spawn a New Form of Slavery," The Wall Street Journal, p. A1
(August 30, 2001).
218. Chris Adams, "Congress Braces for Vigorous Debate on Bush's
Stem-Cell Funding," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1 A10 (August 31,
2001).
219. Robert Frank, Veronica Brooks, and Antonio Regalado, "A Stem-Cell
Line in Singapore Lab Nears a Payoff," The Wall Street Journal, pp.
B1, B4 (August 31, 2001).
220. Michael D. Lemonick, David Bjerklie, and Andrew Goldstein,
"Cloning: Humans May Have It Easier," Time Magazine, pp. 56-7
(August 27, 2001).
221. Editorial, "US Stem Cell Policy Comes Under Fire," Nature
Biotechnology, Vol. 19, No. 10, p. 893 (October 2001).
222. David P. Hamilton, "Wisconsin Foundation Escalates Stem-Cell
Battle with Geron," The Wall Street Journal, p. B8 (October 31,
2001).
223. Thomas H. Maugh, II, "Gene Study Seeks Secret of Long
Life," The Los Angeles Times,
pp. A1,14 (August 28, 2001).
224. Robin Fields, "For Many, the Romanticism of Living for a
Century Gives Way to the Reality,"
The Los Angeles Times, p. A14 (August 28, 2001).
225. “Aging Gene on Chromosome 4,” CNN-TV (Monday, August 27, 2001; 805
AM PDT; TRT = 2 minutes).
226. Laura Johannes, "Age-Old Quest -- Can the Kahn Siblings Help
Scientists Bottle Secret to a Long Life? Harvard Team Makes Progress in the
Hunt for a Gene that Controls Longevity,"
The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1,4 (August 27, 2001).
227. Annibale A. Puca, Mark J. Daly, Stephanie J. Brewster, Tara C.
Matise, Jeffrey Barrett, Maureen Shea-Drinkwater, Sammy Kang, Erin Joyce, Julie
Nicoli, Erica Benson, Louis M. Kunkel, and Thomas Perls, "A Genome-Wide
Scan for Linkage to Human Exceptional Longevity Identifies a Locus on
Chromosome 4,” Proc. of the National
Academy of Sciences, USA, Vol. 98, Issue 18, pp. 10505-10508 (August 28,
2001).
228. “Lab Creates Human Blood Cells," The Los Angeles Times, p. A11 (September 4,
2001).
229. Antonio Regalado, "Scientists Produce Blood Cells from Stem
Cells," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B2 (September 4,
2001).
230. Nicholas Wade, "Team Says It Coaxed Human Stem Cells to
Produce Blood," The New York
Times, p. A17 (September 4, 2001).
231. Dan S. Kaufman, Eric T.
Hanson, Rachel L. Lewis, Robert Auerbach, and James A. Thomson, “Hematopoietic Colony-Forming Cells Derived
from Human Embryonic Stem Cells,” Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences,
USA, Vol. 98, pp.10716-21 (September 4, 2001).
232. Alan Trounson, “The Genesis of Embryonic Stem Cells: Does
Parthenogenesis Offer a More Promising Means of Developing Immune-Matched ES
Cells?” Nature Biotechnology, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 237-8 (March
2002).
233. Aaron Zitner, "Stem Cell Distribution Deal Told," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, A8
(September 6, 2001).
234. "White House Cuts Estimate of Available Stem
Cells," The Wall Street Journal,
pp. A1, 2, 24 (September 6, 2001).
235. Aaron Zitner, "Stem Cell Research Quandary Greets a Returning
Congress: Lawmakers Reacting to Bush's Funding Limit, Say They Will Try to
Overturn It If It Is Too Restrictive,"
The Los Angeles Times, p. A11 (September 4, 2001).
236. Kevin Sack with Gustav Niebuhr, "After Stem-Cell Rift, Groups
Unite for Anti-Abortion Push," The
New York Times, pp. A1, 17 (September 4, 2001).
237. Vaclav Ourednik, Jitka Ourednik, Jonathan D. Flax, W. Michael
Zawada, Cynthia Hutt, Chunhua Yang, Kook I. Park, Seung U. Kim, Richard L.
Sidman, Curt R. Freed, Evan Y. Snyder, "Segregation of Human Neural Stem
Cells in the Developing Primate Forebrain," Science, Vol. 293, No. 5536, pp. 1820-4 (September 7,
2001).
238. Diane Chun, "Fetal Tissue Implanted Safely, Doctors
Say," The New York Times,
p. D8 (September 11, 2001).
239. Douglas K. Anderson, Edward D. Wirth, Richard G. Fessler, et al., Journal
of Neurotrauma, Vol. 18, pp. 911-45 (2001).
240. Sheryl Gay Stolberg,
"Scientists Urge Bigger Supply of Stem Cells: Report Backs Cloning to
Create New Lines," The New York Times, pp. A1, A16 (September 11,
2001).
241. "Science Academy Report Cites Need for Additional Cell
Lines," The Los Angeles Times, p. A8 (September 11,
2001).
242. "More Stem-Cell Lines Need To Be Generated, Panel of
Scientists Say," The Wall
Street Journal, p. A16 (September 12, 2001);
243. Editorial, "The Politics of Principles," Nature
Biotechnology, Vol. 19, p. 789 (September 2001).
244. Editorial, "US Deliberates on Embryonic Sem Cells,
Cloning," Nature Biotechnology, Vol. 19, p. 791 (September 2001).
245. Constance Holden, "NIH's List of 64 Leaves Questions,"
Science,
Vol. 293, No. 5535, p. 1567 (August 31, 2001).
246. Gail Dutton, "Advancing Stem-Cell Research: Bioindustry Assesses
Options in Wake of Presidential Ban on Establishing New Cell Lines," Genetic
Engineering News, pp. 1, 70, 87 (August 31, 2002 <date
check>.
247. Irving L. Weissman, “Scientific and Medical Evidence Supports a
Ban on Human Reproductive Cloning, But Not on Procedures to Produce Stem Cells”
(National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C.; February 8, 2002).
248. Bert Vogelstein, “When A Clone Is Not a Clone” (National Academy
of Sciences, Washington, D.C.; December 7, 2001).
249. Stem Cells and the Future of Regenerative Medicine
(Committee on the Biological and Biomedical Applications of Stem Cell Research,
Board on Life Sciences, National Research Council, Board on Neuroscience and
Behavioral Health, Institute of Medicine; National Academy of Sciences;
Washington, D.C.; 112 pages; 2002).
250. Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Reproductive Cloning
(Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Policy and Global
Affairs Division, Board on Life Sciences, Division on Earth and Life Studies,
National Research Council; Washington, D.C.; 350 pages; 2002).
251. Paul Berg, "Progress with Stem Cells: Stuck or
Unstuck?" Science, Vol.
293, No. 5537, p. 1953 (September 14, 2001).
252. Constance Holden, "HHS Inks Cell Deal; NAS Calls for More
Lines," Science, Vol. 293, No. 5537, pp. 1966-7 (September 14,
2001).
253. John M. Leferovich, Khamilia Bedelbaeva, Stefan Samulewicz,
Xiang-Ming Zhang, Donna Zwas, Edward B. Lankford, and Ellen Heber-Katz,
"Heart Regeneration in Adult MRL Mice," Proc. National Academy of
Sciences. USA, Vol. 98, Issue 17, pp. 9830-5 (August 14, 2001).
254. G. Condorelli, U. Borello, L. De Angelis, M. Latronico, D.
Sirabella, M. Coletta, R. Galli, G. Balconi, A. Follenzi, G. Frati, M. G.
Cusella De Angelis, L. Gioglio, S Amuchastegui, L. Adorini, L. Naldini,
A.Vescovi, E. Dejana , and G. Cossu, "Cardiomyocytes Induce Endothelial
Cells to Trans-Differentiate into Cardiac Muscle Implications for Myocardium
Regeneration," Proc. National
Academy of Sciences, USA, Vol. 98, Issue 19, pp.10733-8 (September 11,
2001).
255. “Geron Develops Human Embryonic Stem-Cell Lines Without the Need
for an Under Layer of Mouse ‘Feeder’ Cells,” The Wall Street Journal, p.
B6 (October 2, 2001).
256. "Aging Cells May Promote Tumors Nearby," Science News,
Vol. 160, p. 214 (October 6, 2001).
257. Ana Krtolica, Simona Parrinello, Stephen Lockett, Pierre-Yves
Desprez, and Judith Campisi, "Senescent Fibroblasts Promote Epithelial
Cell Growth and Tumorigenesis: A Link Between Cancer and Aging," Proc.
National Academy of Sciences, USA, Vol. 98, No. 21, pp. 12072-7 (October 9,
2001).
258. Subramianian Rajagopalan and Julie K. Andersen, "Alpha
Synuclein Aggregation: Is It the Toxic Gain of Function Responsible for
Neurodegeneration," Mechanisms of Aging and Development, Vol. 122,
No. 14, pp. 1499-1510 (2001).
259. Olaf Riess, Ross Jakes, and Rejko Kruumlger, "Genetic
Dissection of Familial Parkinson's Disease," Molecular Medicine Today,
Vol. 4, No. 10, pp. 438-444 (1998).
260. Phuong B. Tran and Richard J. Miller, "Aggregates in
Neurodegenerative Disease: Crowds and Power?" Trends in Neurosciences,
Vol. 22, No. 5, pp. 194-7 (1999).
261. E. Masliah, E. Rockenstein, I. Veinbergs, et al.,
"Dopaminergic Loss and Inclusion Body Formation in Alpha-Synuclein Mice:
Implications" Science, Vol. 287, pp.1265-9 (February
2000).
262. “Puffer Fish Genome Sequenced,” The New York Times, p. D4
(October 30, 2001).
263. Vicki Brower, “Curis Corp. of Cambridge, MA: Harnessing the Body's
Ability to Heal,” HMS Beagle, Issue 113 (October 26, 2001).
264. Aaron Zitner, "Stem Cell Studies Vie for Federal
Backing," The Los Angeles Times, p. A32 (November 8,
2001).
265. Antonio Regalado, "NIH Registry Sets Stem-Cell Eligible for
U.S. Funding," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B2 (November 8,
2001).
266. Andrew Pollack, "New Work May Provide Stem Cells While Taking
Baby From Equation," The New York Times, p. D3 (November 6, 2001).
[This article speculates about the prospects for parthenogenesis {embryogenesis
without prior fertilization}. Although a parthenote {an embryo resulting
from parthenogenesis} would normally be female because one must start by
chemically or electrically stimulating an egg, the procedure could be designed
to produce male parthenotes as well, by using techniques involved in
therapeutic cloning by first enucleating the egg and reinserting chromosomes
from an adult male nucleus or from two identical sperm {or even
male/male pathenotes from two different sperm donors (or fathers)}. Dr. Michael
West, CEO of Advanced Cell Technology of Worcester, MA) was asked by the
reporter if any of these speculations had been attempted in humans, but he
tactfully replied that he "didn't want to discuss human experiments at
this time, lest he jeopardize an upcoming publication in a scientific journal.
{Note: To my knowledge, no such experiments have been reported in the
scientific literature as of this date, although, for other mammals, female
parthenotes were first produced for mice and rabbits more than ten years ago,
and, parthenogenesis was accomplished for frogs in the 1950s at Oxford
University in England.}].
267. Simon Melov, Susan R. Doctrow, Julie A. Schneider, Joanna
Haberson, Manisha Patel, Pinar E. Coskun, Karl Huffman, Douglas C. Wallace, and
Bernard Malfroy, "Lifespan Extension and Rescue of Spongiform
Encephalopathy in Superoxide Dismutase-2 Nullizygous Mice Treated with
Superoxide Dismutase-Catalase Mimetics," Journal of Neuroscince,
Vol. 21, pp. 8348-53 (November 1, 2001).
268. Ron Winslow, "Gene Therapy in Heart Studies Shows
Promise," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B7 (November 14,
2001).
269. Jose B. Cibelli, Ann A. Kiessling, Kerrianne Cunniff, Charlotte
Richards, Robert P. Lanza, Michael D. West, "Rapid Communication: Somatic
Cell Nuclear Transfer in Humans: Pronuclear and Early Embryonic
Development," e-Biomed: The Journal of Regenerative Medicine, Vol.
2, pp. 25-31 (Mary Ann Liebert, Inc, November 26, 2001).
[Abstract: Human therapeutic cloning requires the reprogramming
of a somatic cell by nuclear transfer to generate autologous totipotent stem
cells. We have parthenogenetically activated 22 human eggs and also performed
nuclear transfer in 17 metaphase II eggs. Cleavage beyond the eight-cell stage
was obtained in the parthenogenetic-activated eggs, and blastocoele cavities
were observed in six. Three somatic cell-derived embryos developed beyond the
pronuclear stage up to the six-cell stage. The ability to create autologous
embryos represents the first step towards generating immune-compatible stem
cells that could be used to overcome the problem of immune rejection in
regenerative medicine.]
[Note: Although this is a relatively brief paper, we believe
that it actually could have been split into two shorter papers with different
titles, since two radically different methodologies were being utilized to
develop the embryos {Parthenogenic Activation (PA) and Somatic Cell Nuclear
Transfer (SCNT)}. The reasons for the failure of the embryos to thrive
(continue to cleave in vitro) beyond a three-day period was never made
clear, contributing to confusion over why embryonic stem cells were never
obtained, which was the original goal of the project. This criticism was written on November 30, 2001, long before the
controversy over this publication was made public.]
270. Joannie Fischer, "The First Human Clone: How American
Scientists Made History by Creating Lifesaving Embryo Cells: The Breakthrough
Promises Cures for Terrible Diseases," U.S. News and World Report,
Vol. 131, No. 23, pp. 50-63 (December 3, 2001).
271. Michael West, "Three Revolutions: Recombinant DNA, Genomics,
and Genetic Programming," The Second Annual Conference on Regenerative
Medicine (Washington, D.C., December 2, 2001).
272. Tanja Dominko, "Progress on Nuclear Transfer in
Primates," The Second Annual Conference on Regenerative Medicine
(Washington, D.C., December 3, 2001).
273. Aaron Zitner, "U.S. Scientists Use Cloning to Create Human
Embryos," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 12 (November 26,
2001).
274. Science File, "Stem Cell Studies' Bizarre Start," The
Los Angeles Times, p. A10 (November 26, 2001).
275. Antonio Regalado, Laurie McGinley, Jill Carroll, and Gautam Naik,
"Stem-Cell Researchers Make Cloned Embryos of a Living Human," The
Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, A8 (November 26, 2001).
276. Cover Article, Exclusive Report, "The First Human Clone The
Clone Makers Tell Their Story," Scientific American, pp. 44-51
(January 2002).
[Regarding the distinction between Therapeutic and Reproductive
Cloning, Dr. West stated in this article that "Due to potential health
risks Reproductive Cloning is 'unwarranted at this time' and 'should be
restricted' until the safety and ethical issues surrounding it are
resolved."]
277. Aaron Zitner, "2 Cloning Studies Could Mute Critics' Safety
Fears: Cattle in Tests Survived at Rates Similar to Those Born Through Accepted
Methods," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 48, 49 (November 23,
2001).
278. Antonio Regalado, Gautam Naik, and Jull Carroll, "Study Finds
That Cloned Cattle That Live to Adulthood Are Normal: Research Could Play a
Role as FDA Ponders Regulations; Some Question the Findings," The Wall
Street Journal, pp. A1, B1, 5 (November 23, 2001).
279. Gina Kolata and Andrew Pollack, "A Breakthrough on Cloning?
Perhaps, or Perhaps Not Yet," The New York Times, pp. A1, 12
(November 27, 2001).
[Another article by Gina Kolata "Human Embryos Cloned: Cells Die
Soon After," was reprinted in The Los Angeles Daily News,
pp. 1, 8 (November 26, 2001).]
{Dr. Anthony Perry formerly with the University of Hawaii and who
pioneered the "Honolulu Technique" for cloning mice said,
"Cloning is as much of an art as a science. Some people develop a feel for
the work, while others, no matter how hard they try, never get very good at it.
It requires fine hand-eye coordination and constant practice under the
microscope." For example, he reportedly worked on his technique ten
hours-a-day seven days-a-week for months before he got reasonably good.
"If you stop practicing even for two weeks, you tend to get rusty," he
said.]
280. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "Bush Denounces Cloning and Calls for
Ban: New Research Puts Pressure on Senate to Act on a Divisive Issue," The
New York Times, p. A12 (November 27, 2001).
281. Nick Anderson and James Gerstenzang, "Human Cloning Success
Startles Lawmakers: Some Urge Quick Senate Debate on Issue; Others Call for
Deliberations, President Sides with Foes," The Los Angeles Times,
pp. A1, 13 (November 27, 2001).
282. Michael Ramirez, Political
Cartoon, Three White-Coated Mad Scientists Are Stabbing a Newborn Baby on the
Alter of "SCIENCE," One Says, "You Lucky Guy You, We Are
Sacrificing You to the God of Immortality," The Los Angeles Times,
p. B11 (November 27, 2001).
283. Megan Garvey, "Cloned Embryo Use Is Debated: Scientist
Involved in the Latest Advance Says He Sees [therapeutic cloning] as
[Synthesizing Pharmaceuticals], Not the Creation of Human Beings," The
Los Angeles Times, pp. A2, 16 (November 28, 2001).
[Dr. Jose Cibelli of ACT presented a report to the National Research
Council yesterday in Washington, D.C. on their work on human therapeutic
cloning. He said, "If cloning works properly, it will reset the 'clock.'
Imagine having a brand new [healthy juvenile] immune system starting up in your
70s." However, others said, "That's just a fantasy." Cibelli
reposted, "We haven't promised that people would live
forever."]
284. AP -- "The U.S. Senate Is in No Rush to Ban Cloning,"
(November 28, 2001).
285. Lead Editorial, "Far Cry from Frankenstein," The Los
Angeles Times, p. B12 (November 28, 2001).
["...But the researchers at ACT are not the evil Dr. Frankensteins
that some legislators are making them out to be. As Rep. James C. Greenwood
(R-PA) pointed out in a Congressional debate about cloning two months ago,
"Some will say, 'But wait a minute, once you put [my] cheek cell into this
empty cell and it divides, we have a soul.' ... That's ridiculous."]
286. Alexander M. Capron, "Stop, Think, But Don't Ban Cloning: A
Moratorium Makes More Sense," The Los Angeles Times, p. B13
(November 28, 2001).
["Genetic problems occur when an embryo gets its start through
cloning rather than sexual fertilization... Rather than a flat ban [as the
House of Representatives recommended last July], a five-year ... moratorium
would allow further knowledge to be accumulated about mammalian cloning as well
as serious, sustained reflection about the sort of world that human cloning
could engender... Also, a moratorium should reassure researchers and patient
advocates that if it becomes apparent that laboratory cloning is essential to
achieving important therapeutic goals, that the door has not been closed
forever."]
287. Margulies, Political Cartoon: A patient says to his psychiatrist,
"My parents always liked my clone better...", The New Jersey
Record, reprinted in the The Los Angeles Times, p. B13 (November 28,
2001).
288. Denise Gellene and Elizabeth Mehren, "Human-Cloning Firm
Received Federal Aid," The Los Angeles Times, pp. C1, 12 (November
29, 2001).
289. "Human-Cloning Claim Creates Controversy," Science
News, Vol. 160, p. 341 (December 1, 2001).
290. John Travis, "Dolly Was Lucky: Scientists Warn that Cloning
is Too Dangerous for People," Science News, Vol. 160, No. 16, pp.
250-1 (October 20, 2001).
291. "Mouflon: A Rare Sheep Is Cloned from a Dead Donor," Science
News, Vol. 160, No. 16, p. 252 (October 20, 2001).
292. Robert P. Lanza, Jose B. Cibelli, David Faber, Raymond W. Sweeny,
Boyd Henderson, Wendy Nevala, Michael D. West, Peter J. Wettstein, "Cloned
Cattle Can Be Healthy and Normal," Science, Vol. 294, No. 5548, pp.
1893-4 (November 30, 2001).
293. Eliot Marshall and Gretchen Vogel, "Cloning Announcement
Sparks Debate and Scientific Skepticism," Science, Vol. 294, No.
5548, pp. 1802-3 (November 30, 2001).
[Dr. John Gearhart of Johns Hopkins University told Reuters that the
effect of this announcement was "to scuttle backstage talks among
congressional staffers on how to reach a compromise on the use of embryos in
research."]
294. David Magnus and Arthur Caplan, "NAS Cloning Hearing
Disappoints Participants," Science, Vol. 294, No. 5547, p. 1651
(November 23, 2001).
295. Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., "The Political Issue of 'Human
Cloning'," (August 28, 2001), p. 4, 21st Century (Fall
2001).
296. Vicki Glaser, "Regenerative Medicine: Developments Pursued Despite
Ongoing Political Debate," Genetic Engineering News, Vol. 22, No.
1, pp. 1, 42, 54, 59 (January 1, 2002).
297. John F. Wong, "Storm Clouds Brewing for Cloning and Stem
Cells," Genetic Engineering News, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 47, 54
(January 1, 2002).
["Experts in the field of reproductive biology questioned the real
motives behind ACT's Announcement, since they viewed it as non-innovative and
merely as an act to gain notoriety... This was simply a ploy to create a media
event and thereby attract new investors in its upcoming find-raising
effort."]
298. ED, "UK Bans Reproductive Cloning," Nature Biotechnology, Vol. 20, No. 1,
p. 9 (January 2002).
[December 4, 2001; London, UK; British lawmakers will ban human reproductive but not therapeutic cloning. The Human Reproductive Cloning Act 2001 was
rushed through Parliament after a High Court decision that the government had
no control over the use of embryos created by cloning.]
299. Leonid A. Gavrilov and Natalia S. Gavrilova, "The Reliability
Theory of Aging and Longevity," Journal of Theoretical Biology,
Vol. 213, No. 4, pp. 527-545 (2001).
300. Eliot Marshall and Gretchen Vogel, "Cloning Announcement
Sparks Debate and Scientific Skepticism," Science, Vol. 294, No.
5548, pp. 1802-3 (November 30, 2001).
[Prof. John Gearhart of Johns Hopkins University reportedly told
Reuters News Service that "ACT's announcement has caused congressional
staffers to scuttle backstage talks on reaching a compromise on the use of
embryos in research."]
301. Harold Varmus, "The Weakness of Science for Profit," The
New York Times, p. A23 (December 4, 2001).
302. Gregory Stock, "A Tempest in a Petri Dish," The Los
Angeles Times, p. M1, 6 (December 2, 2001).
303. Four Letters to The Times, "Brave New World of Cloning,"
The Los Angeles Times, p. B25 (December 8, 2001).
304. "Human-Cloning Claim Creates Controversy," Science
News, Vol. 160, p. 342 (December 1, 2001).
[William A. Haseltine, Editor of the Journal of Regenerative Medicine
in which ACT detailed its experiments, defended the work as the beginning of a
long-term effort to make replacement cells and tissues for people. He said,
"This is not a big step; this is just the first step."]
305. Hillary Rosner "Body and Soul: The First Great Bioethics
Debate Began 2000 Years Ago with a Clash Between the Scalpel and the
Cross," Wired, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 90-91 (January 2002).
306. "Why Human Clones Won't Work Yet," Discover Magazine,
Vol. 23, No. 1, p. 64 (January 2002).
307. "The Waiting List for Clones," Discover Magazine,
Vol. 23, No. 1, p. 68 (January 2002).
308. Natalie Angier, "Defining the Undefinable: Being Alive,"
The New York Times, pp. D1, 6 (December 18, 2001).
309. Nicholas Wade, "Dr. William A. Haseltine: Apostle of
Regenerative Medicine Foresees Longer Health and Life," The New York
Times, p. D5 (December 18, 2001).
310. Gretchen Vogel, "Germany Dithers Over Stem Cells, While
Sweden Gives Green Light," Science, Vol. 294, No. 5550, p. 2262
(December 14, 2001).
311. Bryn Nelson, "Cell Therapy Hinges on Beating Rejection,"
The Los Angeles Times, p. S4 (December 31, 2001).
312. Reuters, "Monkey Embryos Grown from Eggs," The Los
Angeles Times, p. A20 (December 3, 2001).
313. Reuters, "Monkey Eggs Grow Into Embryos in Experiment," The
Washington Post, p. A7 (December 3, 2001).
314. Benedict Carey, Many Facets of Cloning Debate Are
Accessible," The Los Angeles Times, p. S2 (December 3, 2001).
[For example, The Public Human Genome Project and the Human Cloning
Foundation are two such sites.]
315. Editorial, "Frontiers of Cloning," The Los Angeles
Times, p. A20 (November 27, 2001).
316. Antonio Regalado, "Group Seeks Massachusetts Probe of Cloning
Experiments' Legality," The Wall Street Journal, p. B6
(November 30, 2001).
317. Gautam Naik, "In Two Separate Studies, Human Stem Cells Are
Used to Generate Brain Tissue in Mice," The Wall Street Journal, p.
A1, B14 (December 3, 2001).
[Cites articles in Nature Biotechnology (2001)].
318. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "Senate Declines to Take Up Proposed
Cloning Moratorium," The New York Times, pp. A1, 12 (December 4,
2001).
319. "GOP Effort to Force Action on Oil, Cloning Collapses," The
Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, 6 (December 4, 2001).
320. Helen Dewar, "Energy, Cloning Fights Sidetracked: Fearing
Defeat, Senate GOP Votes to Delay Showdowns," The Washington Post
(December 4, 2001).
321. Abigail Trafford, "Second Opinion: Cloning Hysteria," The
Washington Post, p. F1,11 (December 4, 2001).
322. Tom Graham, "Virginia Clinic is Mum on 'Success Rate'," The
Washington Post, p. F6 (December 4, 2001).
323. "Many Costs to Bear: Women Who Donate Eggs to Infertile
Couples Earn a Reward But Pay a Price," The Washington Post, pp.
F1, 6 (December 4, 2001).
324. Aaron Zitner, "Cloning Advocates Fights the Clock on Capitol
Hill: Bush Called Firm's Work 'Morally Wrong,' House, Senate Tried to Ban
Procedure," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 20 (December 4,
2001).
325. Aaron Zitner, "Seven Senators Back Legal Human Cloning for
Research," The Los Angeles Times, pp.A1, 23 (December 5,
2001).
326. Jill Carroll and Antonio Regalado, "Congress Urged Not to
Enact Cloning Ban," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B9 (December
5, 2001).
327. "Scientist Makes the Case for Cloning," USA Today,
p. 8D (December 5, 2001).
[Dr. Michael West says, "Therapeutic Cloning is
Needed."]
328. Stahler, Political Cartoon, Boy asks his Mother: "How can
there be more than one Santa?" Mother answers Son: "Cloning
Dear." USA Today, p. 15A (December 5, 2001).
329. Denise Gellene, "Biotech Companies Trying to Milk Cloning for
Profit," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, C1,4 (December 16,
2001).
[Infigen and ACT are suing each other over the terms of a confidential
patent settlement. On the moral front, some livestock owners are deeply
conservative and are uncomfortable with cloning. "There are people who
think that this is something you don't taper with." Yet, according to one
dairy farmer, Mr. Robert Schauf, in the Bible it says, "God gave man
dominion over the animals, and God gave [scientists] the ability to figure out
[cloning]. That's my feeling."]
330. Gina Kolata, "In Cloning, Failure Far Exceeds Success," The
New York Times, pp. S1, 4 (December 11, 2001).
331. Robert Pawliuk, Karen A. Westerman, Mary E. Fabry, Emmanuel Payen,
Robert Tighe, Eric E. Bouhassira, Seetharama A. Acharya, James Ellis, Irving M.
London, Connie J. Eaves, R. Keith Humphries, Yves Beuzard, Ronald L. Nagel, and
Philippe Leboulch. "Correction of Sickle Cell Disease in Transgenic Mouse
Models by Gene Therapy," Science,
Vol. 294, No. 5550, pp. 2368-71 (December 14, 2001).
332. Laura Johannes, "Modified AIDS Virus Is Utilized for
Blood-Cell Disorder in Mice," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B4
(December 14, 2001).
333. "Sickle-Cell Cured in Mice Reported in Gene Therapy," The
Los Angeles Times (December 17, 2001).
334. N. Seppa, "Gene Therapy for Sickle-Cell Disease?" Science
News, Vol. 160, No. 24, p. 372 (December 15, 2001).
335. Achim Kramer, Fu-Chia Yang, Pamela Snodgrass, Xiaodong Li, Thomas
E. Scammell, Fred C. Davis, and Charles J. Weitz, "Regulation of Daily
Locomotor Activity and Sleep by Hypothalamic EGF Receptor Signaling," Science, Vol. 294, No.5551, pp. 2511-15
(December 21, 2001).
336. Marcia Barinaga, "A Time to Rest: Clock Signal
Identified," Science, Vol. 294, No.5551, pp. 2454-5 (December 21,
2001).
337. Nicholas Wade, Life
Script: How the Human Genome Discoveries Will Transform Medicine and Enhance
Your Health (Simon & Schuster; ISBN: 0743216059 Hardcover - 204 pages;
2001).
[See especially the Chapters 5 and 6 entitled, "Regenerative
Medicine" and "The Quest for Immortality," respectively (pp.
119-163). These chapters discuss the topic of telomerase in cell
culture.]
338.. Mark Ridley, The
Cooperative Gene: How Mendel's Demon Explains the Evolution of Complex Being (The
Free Press, New York; 2001).
[Mark Ridley is a zoologist at Oxford University (not to be confused
with his fellow countryman, Matt Ridley, a Science Editor who also writes on
the topic of genomics (Genome: The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters)
who says that "evolution of complex animals on the Earth was by no means
inevitable and is, in fact, rather counterintuitive." In comparing
Dawkins' notion of the "selfish" gene, Ridley doesn't mean to say
that Dawkins is wrong. It's just that Dawkins notion is insufficient to explain
how life could have evolved from simple, one-celled organisms to complex,
highly-organized living systems that walk on, swim in, or fly over the Earth.
Somewhere between the bacteria and us primates perhaps at about the stage of
simple microscopic worms God did have to "play dice" (under the
constraints of Natural Selection). How to channeling photonic-energy into such
complexity using a chaotic mechanism is not obvious... But the only thing that
has kept humans from evolving into a still more complex life form is our
genetic mutation rate. The complexity of a species is the result of an
evolutionary equilibrium between the raw DNA-polymerase mutation rate which
facilitates the process of speciation (Note that the absolute number of
mutations increases with the size of the genome and ours is 3 Giga base pairs)
on the one hand and the correctional mechanisms like post-copy proofreading or
editing enzymes and the invention of sexual reproduction (with diploid
chromosomes and Mendelian Inheritance (dominant/recessive genes) on the
other.]
339. Michael Ruse and Aryne Sheppard, Eds., Cloning: Responsible
Science or Technomadness? (Prometheus Books; Amhurst, New York;
2001).
[Dr. Ian Wilmut, the father of Dolly, has a good paper at the beginning
of this collection.]
340. Collin Tudge, The Impact of the Gene: From Mendel's Peas to
Designer Babies (Hill and Wang, New York; 2000).
341. Sophia Fox, "genOway Succeeds in Cloning of Healthy
Rat," Genetic Engineering News,
Vol. 22, No. 1, p. 30 (January 1, 2002).
342. G. Ferbeyre and G. S. W. Lowe,. "The Price of Tumor
Suppression?" Nature, Vol.
415, pp. 26-27 (January 3, 2002).
343. S. D. Tyner, et al., "p53 Mutant Mice that Display Early
Aging-Associated Phenotypes," Nature, Vol. 415, pp. 45-53 (January
3, 2002).
344. "Protein that Wards Off Cancer also Affects Aging, Study
Finds," The Washington Post, reprinted in The Los Angeles Times,
p. A14 (January 3, 2002).
345. "Cancer-Fighting Protein Was Found to Spur Faster Aging in
Mice," The Wall Street Journal, p. A1 (January 3, 2002).
346. Nicholas Wade, "Cancer Fighter Exacts a Price: Cellular
Aging," The New York Times, pp. D1, 6 (January 8,
2002).
347. Evelyn Strauss, "Cancer-Stalling System Accelerates
Aging," Science, Vol. 295, No. 5552, pp. 28-9 (January 4,
2002).
348. Federico Quaini, Konrad Urbanek, Antonio P. Beltrami, Nicoletta
Finato, Carlo A. Beltrami, Bernardo Nadal-Ginard, Jan Kajstura, Annarosa Leri,
and Piero Anversa," New England
Journal of Medicine, Vol. 346, No. 1, pp. 5-15 (January 3, 2002).
349. Ron Winslow, "Gender Study Suggests Heart Can Repair
Itself," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B1,3 (January 3,
2002).
350. Gina Kolata, "Doctors Advance in Helping Body to Repair
Itself," The New York Times, pp. D1,2 (January 15,
2002).
351. Caroline Seydel, "Stem Cells May Shore Up Transplanted
Hearts," Science, Vol. 295, No. 5553, pp. 253-4 (January 11,
2002).
352. Gautam Haik, "British Firm Clones Pigs for
Transplants," The Wall Street
Journal, pp. A1, B5 (January 3, 2002).
353. Jocelyn Kaiser, "Cloned Pigs May Help Overcome
Rejection," Science, Vol. 295, No. 5552, pp. 25-27 (January 4,
2002).
354. "Pigs Up, Sheep Down," Science, Vol. 295, No.
5554, p. 437 (January 18, 2002).
[A graph of PPL Therapeutics stock price for {Dec. 28th to Jan. 8th}
is shown in this short article revealing a 30 percent uptick on January 3rd
with the announcement of the birth of the pigs followed by a 25 percent
downtick over the next days following the announcement of Dolly's arthritis on
January 4th.]
355. Gutam Naik and Antonio Regalado, "Biotech Firms Bypass
Journals to Make News," The Wall Street Journal, pp. B1,3 (January
28, 2002).
356. Laura Johannes, "Pig-Clone Advance Made by Novartis and
Biotransplant," The Wall Street
Journal, pp. A1, 8 (January 4, 2002).
357. AP, "Pig Organ Breakthrough Raises Infection Fears," The
Los Angeles Times, p. A32 (January 4, 2002).
358. Michael D. Lemonick, "Pig Parts for People? It Won't Happen
for Years, But a Laboratory Breakthrough Puts an Unlimited Source of Organs a
Step Closer," Time Magazine, p. 65 (January 14, 2002).
359. Antonio Regalado, "Researchers Deem Cloned Mice Normal,
Fueling Debate Over Procedure's Safety," The Wall Street Journal,
pp. A1, B6 (January 11, 2002).
360. "Gene-Knockout Piglets Cloned," Genetic Engineering
News, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 6, 50 (January 15, 2002).
[Alpha-1,3 GT gene knockout may provide a near-term solution for
overcoming xenograph rejection.]
361. Marjorie Miller and Thomas
H. Maugh, II, "Dolly's Arthritis Raises New Fears About
Cloning," The Los Angeles Times,
pp. A1, 10 (January 5, 2002).
362. Gutam Naik, "Dolly's Arthritis Fuels Concerns of Health Woes
Tied to Cloning," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, 20 (January 7,
2002).
363. Sophia Fox, "Dolly's Arthritis Raises Concern Over
Cloning," Genetic Engineering News, Vol. 22, No. 2, p. 24 (January
15, 2002).
364."Symptoms of Parkinson's Relived in Rats," The Wall Street Journal, p. A1
(January 8, 2002).
365. Gretchen Vogel, "Rat Brains Respond to Embryonic Stem
Cells," Science, Vol. 295, No. 5553, pp. 254-5 (January 11, 2002).
[Dr. Studer stated that "the relative ease with which
dopamine-producing cells developed from the injected ES cells suggests that
there might be a way to prompt rare stem cells already in the brain to become
dopamine-producing neurons, allowing doctors to avoid the issue of
transplanting cells altogether."]
366. Lars M. Björklund, Rosario Sánchez-Pernaute, Sangmi Chung, Therese
Andersson, Iris Yin Ching Chen, Kevin St. P. McNaught, Anna-Liisa Brownell,
Bruce G. Jenkins, Claes Wahlestedt, Kwang-Soo Kim, and Ole Isacson,
"Embryonic Stem Cells Develop into Functional Dopaminergic Neurons after
Transplantation in a Parkinson Rat Model," Proc. National Academy of
Sciences. USA, Vol. 10, p. 1073 (January 8, 2002).
367. Bloomberg News, "Geron Settles Suit on Embryo Stem
Use," The Los Angeles Times,
p. B2 (January 10, 2002).
368. David P. Hamilton and Antonio Regalado, "Geron Gives Up Some
Stem-Cell Rights," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, 3, 14 (January
10, 2002).
369. Antonio Regalado and Jill Carroll, "Research, Red Ink: An
Academic Group Seeks Balance," The Wall Street Journal, p. B4
(January 14, 2002).
370. Rosie Mestel, LA Times,
Medical Writer, “Panel Urges State to Limit Human Cloning to Research, Therapy
Science: Report Calls for a Ban on Using the Process to Produce Babies,” pp.
A1, 2, B1, 14 (January 12, 2002).
371. “State of California Medical Panel Urges In Favor of Therapeutic
Cloning But Against Reproductive Cloning,” San Francisco
Chronicle (January 12, 2002).
[Report by a state-appointed advisory panel urges a State Senate
Committee to permanently extend the state's current ban on human reproductive
cloning but permit the cloning of human embryonic stem cells for medical
research.]
372. J. Travis, "Gene Variant Tied to Human Aging," Science News, Vol. 161, No. 3, p. 36
(January 19, 2002).
373. Dan E. Arking, Alice Krebsova, Milan Macek Sr., Milan Macek Jr.,
Albert Arking, I. Saira Mian, Linda Fried, Ada Hamosh, Srabani Dey, Iain
McIntosh, and Harry C. Dietz, "Association of Human Aging with a
Functional Variant of Klotho,"
Proc. National Academy of Sciences, USA, Vol. 10,.p. 1073,
Published online before print (January 15, 2002).
374. Laurie McGinley, "Bioethics Panel Advising Bush Fills Its
Roster," The Wall Street
Journal, p. B2 (January 17, 2002).
375. Aaron Zitner, "States Hurry to Block Plans to Clone Humans:
Several Legislatures Act as Congress Debates the Practice, [A Florida] Bill
Would Let Clones Sue Doctors [Who Perform Cloning]," The Los Angeles
Times, pp. A1, 14 (January 17, 2002).
[James Kallinger, Republican Florida State Legislator from the Orlando
area who introduced the bill, said, "whether or not [the cloning] took
place in Florida, clones, their relatives, and estates could also sue for
emotional distress and other injuries. This sends a message, as far as Florida
courts can reach, to scientists trying to clone humans."]
376. Richard T. Cooper, "Bioethics Panel's Topic Number One:
Perfection," The Los Angeles Times, p. A24 (January 18,
2002).
377. "The Jones Fertility Institute in Norfolk, VA said that it
will now terminate work it started in July to create human embryos for the sole
purpose of harvesting stem cells," The Wall Street Journal, p. A1
(January 18, 2002).
378. Nuno Arantes-Oliveira, Javier Apfeld, Andrew Dillin, and Cynthia
Kenyon, "Regulation of Life-Span by Germ-Line Stem Cells in Caenorhabditis elegans," Science,
Vol. 295, No. 5554, pp. 502-5 (January 18, 2002).
379. Megan Garvey and Richard
T. Cooper, "Scientists' Panel Endorses Cloning to Create Stem
Cells," The Los Angeles Times,
pp. A1, 19 (January 19, 2002).
380. Constance Holden and Jocelyn Kaiser, "Report Backs Ban;
Ethics Panel Debuts," Science, Vol. 295, No. 5555, pp. 601-2
(January 25, 2002).
381. N. Seppa, "Forbidden Tests: Panel Seeks Ban on Human
Clones," Science News, Vol. 161, No. 4, p. 52 (January 26,
2002).
382. "Cloning Bills Blossom" Science, Vol. 295, No.
5556, p. 779 (February 1, 2002).
["Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) has proposed a new Bill (S. 1893)
similar to one proposed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)(S. 1758). Feinstein's
Bill would keep the door open for research using cloned embryos but impose
civil penalties on anyone who tries to clone a human being. Harkin's Bill adds
criminal penalties to the mix. More than 20 research organizations have already
endorsed Feinstein's Bill over competing legislation backed by Sen. Sam
Brownback (R-KS) that would ban both reproductive and therapeutic cloning (S.
790). The next step will be hearings on Bronback's Bill in March or April with
a full Senate debate coming sometime later."]
383. Jeremy Rifkin, "Evolution's Pregnant Pause: Artificial
Wombs," The Los Angeles Times,
p. B11 (January 21, 2002).
384. "Senate Panel Hears
Cloning Arguments," The
Washington Post, reprinted in The
Los Angeles Times, p. A29 (January 25, 2002).
[Dr. Catherine Verfaillie, biologist at the University of Minnesota,
testified in a Senate Subcommittee yesterday in Washington, D.C., "Even
though we're excited about the fact that there appear to be cells in adult
tissue that seem to have greater potential than we thought they would, it's too
soon to say whether they have the equivalent potentiality of embryonic
cells."]
385. Mahendra S. Rao and Mark P. Mattson, "Stem Cells and Aging:
Expanding the Possibilities [Review]," Mechanisms of Aging and
Development, Vol. 122, No. 7, pp. 713-34 (2001).
386. Thomas H. Maugh, II, “Stem Cell Treatment for SCID Infants a
Success,” The Los Angeles Times (January 28, 2002).
[The February issue of Blood reports that stem cells transplants
were performed on 117 Severe Combined Immune Deficiency (SCID) children over 19
years at Duke University. Of the 21 who received transplants in the first four
weeks, 20 are still alive and leading normal lives. The oldest is already
19.]
387. Gutam Naik and Antonio Regalado, "Biotech Firms Bypass
Journals to Make News," The Wall Street Journal, pp. B1,3 (January
28, 2002).
388. Editorial, "A Ready-Made Controversy," Scientific
American, Vol. 286, No. 2, p. 10 (February 2002).
[A chorus of scientific detractors, who point to serious potential
flaws in the experiment by ACT to clone a human embryo, say that the embryos,
one of which divided into just six cells after five days, all died because
"the cells were actually fragmenting
and not undergoing true cell-cycle mitotic division [with chromosomal
synthesis and segregation into distinct nuclei]." Three leading scientists
formerly on the e-Biomed: The Journal of Regenerative Medicine Editorial
Board resigned in protest because of their unhappiness over the "rush to
publication." Even ProBio, Inc.,
an Australian intellectual property rights company that owns the license for
one of the cloning techniques used by ACT, shrugs off the importance of the
company's "achievement. "It may serve more of a media function than a
scientific one," said ProBio CEO Laith Reynolds. On the other hand, Dr.
William Haseltine, Editor-in-Chief of
e-Biomed, defended the decision to publish this paper as follows:
"I stand by the scientific process which means that the manuscript was
reviewed by people knowledgeable in the field. It's up to other scientists to
determine whether the science is sound."]
389. Gary Stix, "What Clones?: Widespread Scientific Doubts Greet
Word of the First Human Embryo Clones," Scientific American, Vol.
286, No. 2, pp. 18-19 (February 2002).
[Prof. John P. Gearhard, M.D., Ph.D., of Johns Hopkins University
Medical School and a former Member of the Editorial Board of e-Biomed: The
Journal of Regenerative Medicine announced his resignation from the Board
over this matter. "I feel very embarrassed and chagrined by this
publication," he said in an interview with the BBC. Mrs. Mary Ann Liebert,
the Journal's publisher, was planning to meet with Dr. Gerhard to attempt to
change his mind.]
390. Editorial, "Publish and Be Damned," Nature
Biotechnology, Vol. 20, No. 1, p.1 (January 2002).
[This particular Editorial was a very hostile attack, employing phrases
like "the ludicrous manner ... in which this modest announcement was
made... should serve as a warning to all companies that intend to publicize
their research..."]
391. Jeffrey L. Fox, "Human Cloning Claim Renews Debate," Nature
Biotechnology, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 4-5 (January 2002)
392. Jose B. Cibelli, Keith H. Campbell, George E. Seidel, Michael D.
West, and Robert P. Lanza, "The Health Profile of Cloned Animals," Nature
Biotechnology, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 13-14 (January 2002).
393. "Cloned Cattle Healthy," Nature Biotechnology,
Vol. 20, No. 1, p. 35 (January 2002).
394. “Test Tube Kidneys Created: The Technique Employs Cloning
Technology – Scientists Have Created Fully Functioning Kidneys in the
Laboratory,” The BBC (January 29, 2002).
395. Vanessa Fuhrmans and William Boston, "German Parliament Votes
'Yes' on Import of Stem-Cell Lines," The Wall Street Journal, pp.
A1, B10 (January 31, 2002).
396. Carol J. Williams, Richard Boudreaux (Rome), Ela Kasprzycka
(Warsaw), Janet Stobart (London), and Sarah White (Paris), "Lawmakers Ban
Stem-Cell Imports in German Vote (sic): Only Existing Embryos in the Country
Can be Used for Research, Parliament Decides. Some see a Blow to Promising
Treatments (sic)," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A2, 3 (January 31,
2002).
397. David P. Hamilton and Antonio Regalado, "Geron Starts Process
on Cloning Patent Underpinning Rival," The Wall Street Journal, pp.
A1, B4 (February 1, 2002).
[Geron Corp., Infigen, Inc., and ACT May All Litigate Over Patents. The
US Patent Office may have to resolve competing claims by these three companies
in a so-called Interference Process that could take two years before
they decide whose claims about what were filed soonest.]
398. Jose B. Cibelli, Kathleen
A. Grant, Karen B. Chapman, Kerrianne Cunniff, Travis Worst, Heather L. Green,
Stephen J. Walker, Philip H. Gutin, Lucy Vilner, Viviane Tabar, Tanja Dominko,
Jeff Kane, Peter J. Wettstein, Robert P. Lanza, Lorenz Studer, Kent E. Vrana,
and Michael D. West, "Parthenogenetic Stem Cells in Nonhuman Primates,"
Science, Vol. 295, No. 5556, pp. 779-780 (February 1, 2002).
399. Thomas H. Maugh, II, "Chemicals Turn Monkey Egg Into
Embryo," The Los Angeles Times,
p. A14 (February 4, 2002).
400. Antonio Regalado, "Stem Cells Without Cloning," The
Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B1 (February 1, 2002).
[Competitors seem to be lurking everywhere. A new company called
Stemron Corp. of Gaithersburg, MD (Arthur Mandell, formerly an executive for
business development at Human Genome Sciences is the CEO) says that they
"wish to develop universal human stem cell lines based on [200 -
300] parthenotes that could provide close matches for the majority of the U.S.
population." Stemron has filed three patents covering
parthenogenically-derived stem cells from a tissue bank. This is the "Red Cross
blood-bank" model of cellular therapy, but there are many reasons to
believe that such a model would not obviate the "rejection problem,"
and that human therapeutic cloning would still be needed on a case-by-case
basis for each host. At last check, the Stemron website was still "under
development."]
401. Gregory M. Fahy, "Therapeutic Cloning Under Fire: An
Interview with Michael D. West," Life Extension Magazine, Vol. 8,
No. 3, pp. 38-46 (March 2002).
402. Saul Kent, "Don't Let the U.S. Government Ban Therapeutic
Cloning," Life Extension Magazine, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 49-60 (March
2002).
403. Rosie Mestel, "Mice Created by Cloning Have Shorter Life
Spans, Study Finds," The Los
Angeles Times, p. A15 (February 11, 2002).
404. Philip Cohen, “Cloned Animals Meet Early Deaths,” New Scientist
and Nature Genetics 1038/ng841 (February 10, 2002).
405. "Piglets Cloned from Ear Cells of Prized Boars," The
Los Angeles Times, p. A13 (February 12, 2002).
[Scientists at Infigen, Inc. have announced that they cloned piglets
from the ear cells of two prized boars. This is the first time that a pig has
been cloned from an adult cell, as opposed to fetal cells. One of the goals of
cloning farm animals is to be able to duplicate prized animals precisely, but
there are potential human therapeutic applications as well, involving organ
transplantation without rejection.]
406. Taeyoung Shin, Duane Kraemer, Jane Pryor, Ling Liu, James Rugila,
Lisa Howe, Sandra Buck, Keith Murphy, Leslie Lyons, and Mark Westhusin,
"Cell Biology: A Cat Cloned by Nuclear Transplantation," Nature (February 14, 2002).
407. Antonio Regalado, "Only Nine Lives for Kitty? Not If She's
Cloned," The Wall Street Journal , pp. A1, B1, B4 (February 14,
2002).
408. Aaron Zitner, "In Texas, Cloning Advance Comes on Little Cat
Feat A Genuine Carbon Copy," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 24
(February 15, 2002).
409..Gina Kolata, "What Is Warm and Fuzzy Forever? With Cloning,
Kitty" The New York Times, pp. A1, A19 (February 15,
2002).
410. Michael Ramirez, Cartoon: Political Commentary: Picture of two men
talking and being stared at by dozens of stray cats in an alley, "Some
people may consider pet cloning frivolous, but how else could I replace my
little fluffy wuffy kitty-pooh?" The Los Angeles Times, p. M5
(February 17, 2002).
411. Letters to the Editor, "Cat Cloning Really Sets the Fur
Flying," The Los Angeles Times, p. B20 (February 23,
2002).
[Two self-righteous letter-writers from Encinitas and La Verne,
California are incensed that the cloners of "CC" wasted precious
resources doing a scientific "parlor trick" (prestidigitation) at
great expense, when all they had to do was visit their local animal shelter, if
all they wanted was to have another kitten. Note: But why do rich people
indulge the presence of poverty in their midst? All they would have to do would
be to give away their money; or more to the point, why do even poor people
bother to have their own children when all they would have to do would be to
adopt an orphan, many of whom will never be so lucky as to be adopted before
their time runs out? Throughout history, nearly all wealthy individuals have
indulged themselves in selfish pursuits, regardless of the envious opinion of
poor people -- mostly in secret, but occasionally in conspicuous, ostentatious
public displays. Frequently, it has been these wealthy persons -- and their
foundations -- who have contributed the most to scientific progress. Thanks to
them and their self-indulgent pursuits, real scientific progress has been made
for the benefit of everyone. Otherwise, as my Aunt Tillie said, "we
shouldn't be going to the moon. We should stay home and watch television the
way God intended us to."]
412. Richard A. Friedman, "A Dog's Life," The New York
Times, p. A27 (February 26, 2002).
["Cloning might produce a replica, but it can't bring about
immortality..."]
413. Jeffrey Kluger and Sora Song, "Here, Kitty, Kitty!" Time
Magazine, pp. 58-9 (February 25, 2002).
414. Constance Holden, "Carbon-Copy Clone Is the Real Thing,"
Science, Vol. 295, No. 5559, pp. 1443-4 (February 22, 2002).
[By the way, Mr. Robert Young of Atlanta, Georgia reports that the
world's record for the oldest domestic cat is 34 years, although there's been a
claim for 36 years.]
415. Taeyoung Shin, Duane Kraemer, Jane Pryor, Ling Liu, James Rugila,
Lisa Howe, Sandra Buck, Keith Murphy, Leslie Lyons, and Mark Westhusin,
"Cell Biology: A Cat Cloned by Nuclear Transplantation," Nature
(February 14, 2002).
416. “AAAS Position Statement
on Human Cloning” Adopted by the AAAS Board of Directors in Boston,
Massachusetts (February 14, 2002).
417."Six or Seven Hours of Sleep Is Better, Study Says," The Los Angeles Times, p. A28
(February 25, 2002).
418. Daniel Kripke, a Psychiatrist at the University of California at
San Diego, ”Sleep and Longevity,” The Archives of General Psychiatry
(February 2002).
419. Brendan A. Maher, "The Stem Cell-Cloning Plot Thickens:
Ethical Challenges Get Cloudy with the Entrance of Parthenogenesis," The Scientist, Vol. 16, No. 4, p. 19
(February 18, 2002).
420. E. Russo, "Bypassing
Peer Review," The Scientist, Vol. 14, No. 5, p. 1 (March 6,
2000).
421. T. Agres and E. Russo, "Cloning Controversy Re-Emerges in
US," The Scientist, Vol. 16, No. 1, p. 29 (January 7,
2002).
422. S. P. Westphal, "Is This the One?" New Scientist,
Vol. 173, p. 4 (January 26, 2002).
423. R. Weiss, "Scientists Claim an Advance in Therapeutic
Cloning," The Washington Post, p. A4 (January 30,
2002).
424. AP, London; “UK Couple Given Permission for a 2nd Baby to Help 1st
Baby with Thalassemia.” (February 24, 2002).
[Using IVF and Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis, a British couple has
been given permission by the HFEA to allow a 2nd baby to help a 1st baby with
fatal Thalassemia achieve a cure.]
425. “House of Lords in UK Gives OK to Therapeutic Cloning” CNN
Headline News (February 28, 2002; 10:30 AM PST).
426. Reuters, "Researchers Get Britain's OK on Embryo Cells,"
The Los Angeles Times, p. A5 (February 28, 2002).
427. "The UK Issues Licenses for Stem-Cell Experiments," The
Los Angeles Times, p. A4 (March 2, 2002).
["Britain is also setting up a National Stem-Cell Bank -- similar
to a blood bank -- to store the cells and make them available to
researchers." However, it is not yet clear, based on the published
scientific literature, whether the Universal Stem-Cell-Donor/Blood-Bank
Model or the Patient-Specific-Therapeutic-Cloning/Autologous-Transfer
Model will be the one that finally succeeds in overcoming the problem of
acute rejection.]
428. AP, Washington, D.C., “Cloned Mice Grow Up to Be Fat Mice.” (March
1, 2002)..
[Cloned mice developed obesity when they reached adulthood, according
to a new study that raises doubts about cloning animals for human
transplantation and about cloning humans themselves. Dr. Ian Wilmut, the
pioneer researcher who cloned the sheep Dolly, says the report raises
the question of whether any clones are entirely normal.]
429. "Stem-Cell Funding Guidelines Issued by Canada," The
Wall Street Journal, p. A1 (March 5, 2002).
430. "Scientists Say Gene Decoders Needed Them," The New York Times, p. A18 (March 5,
2002).
431. Scott Hensley and Antonio Regalado, "Scientists Publish
Critique of Celera's Work: Rivals Charge Firm Recycled Public Data in Genome
Map," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, 2, 6 (March 5,
2002).
432. Laura Johannes, "New Study Suggests that Blood May Contain
Useful Stem Cells," The Wall
Street Journal, p. A1, B3 (March 7, 2002).
433. Martin Körbling, Ruth L. Katz, Abha Khanna, Arnout C. Ruifrok,
Gabriela Rondon, Maher Albitar, Richard E. Champlin, and Zeev Estrov,
"Hepatocytes and Epithelial Cells of Donor Origin in Recipients of
Peripheral-Blood Stem Cells,” New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 346,
No. 10, pp. 738-746 (March 7, 2002).
434. Aaron Zitner, "Senate Torn Over Cloning: Prominent Voices for
and Against Using the Technique on Humans Speak before Lawmakers," The Los Angeles Times, p. A10 (March
6, 2002).
435. William Bristol and Jeremy Rifkin, "First Test of the Biotech
Age: Human Cloning: Do We Have the Will and the Wisdom to Say No?" The
Los Angeles Times, p. B11 (March 5, 2002).
436. Aaron Zitner, "Clones, Free Love, and UFO's," The Los
Angeles Times, p. A1, 12 (March 5, 2002).
[This article reveals that the secret location of Dr. Brigitte
Boisselier's US Cloning Lab, before it was shut down by the FBI in April 2001,
was actually Nitro, West Virginia. The Raelian's new secret lab is somewhere
abroad. Monsieur Vorilhon (The Prophet Rael) has claimed that 3,000 persons
(followers?) have signed up for Clonaid's reproductive services. The first
human clone, according to their leader, will be like the Messiah.]
437. Bert Vogelstein, Bruce Alberts, and Kenneth Shine, "Please
Don't Call It Cloning!" Science, Vol. 295, No. 5558, p. 1237
(February 15, 2002).
438. Karby Leggett and Antonio Regalado, "As West Mulls Ethics,
China Forges Ahead In Stem-Cell Research: Prof. Lu's Lab Says It Cloned A Human
Embryo in 1999 And Is Getting Better at It," The Wall Street Journal, p. A1, 6 (March 6,
2002).
[Prof. Lu Guangxiu of Xiangya, China May Have Beaten ACT to the First
Human Clone "China's policy makers are rushing to embrace therapeutic
cloning as a potential tool for extending human life." Although the
Xiangya team has not yet published in Western journals, "they are
beginning to realize that they need to subject their work to scientific
scrutiny to win the global recognition they deserve." One of the Chinese
innovations in technique is leaving the egg's nucleus in tact while injecting
the donor nucleus in close proximity. Then, they allow both to grow -- in some
cases for as long as ten hours -- before enucleating the egg's nucleus just
before the egg would normally undergo mitosis. This technique helps to preserve
the normal volume of ooplasm which is frequently depleted when the nucleus is
removed first, as is normally the case. The little-understood chemokines in the
egg's cytoplasm are what appear to facilitate the egg's ability to return the
donor-nucleus DNA to an "embryonic" state. (maybe demethylation?) in
which it is capable of developing into a preembryo.]
439. Antonio Regalado, "Cloning Breakthrough May Aid In Treatment
of Host of Diseases," The Wall
Street Journal, p. A1, B8 (March 8, 2002).
[In today's issue of the journal
Cell, Dr. George Q. Daley of the MIT Whitehead Institute in
Cambridge, MA, reported on a potent combination of therapeutic cloning, stem
cells, and gene therapy partly restored health to mice inflicted with Severe
Combined Immune Deficiency (SCID). One surprise, however, was that the limited
immune systems of the sick mice still attempted to attack the autologous cloned
cells as though they were "foreign." The theoretical promise of
therapeutic cloning is that the autologous tissues should never be rejected,
but that has yet to be proven. "It is much more complicated than we
imagined," Dr. Daley said. (Note: Could it be that embryonic surface
antigens on the stem cells are construed as "cancer," and even a
limited immune system attempts to trigger apoptosis in neoplastic cells? This cannot
be the complete answer, but we really need to investigate this phenomenon
urgently to rule out alternative hypotheses of adult immune surveillance
attempting to destroy cells exhibiting embryonic antigens. Perhaps,
differentiating the cells in culture before inoculation will conceal their
embryonic origin and return them to a state of "tolerance.")]
440. “Adult Stem Cells May Not Be As Powerful As Embryonic Stem Cells
After All,” The Wall Street Journal, p. A1 (March 14, 2002).
[Adult stem cells may not be as promising a source for tissue
regeneration as embryonic stem cells, studies in the current issue of Nature
suggest. Scientists at the University of Edinburgh in SCOTLAND and the
University of Florida in Gainsville found that adult cells failed to show an
ability to copy tissue they were injected into.]
441. Helen Pearson, “Stem-Cell Powers Challenged: Fusion May Explain
Adult Stem-Cell Morphing. ”Nature, Vol. 416 (March 14,
2002).
442. N. Terada, et al., "Bone Marrow Cells Adopt Phenotype of
Other Cells by Spontaneous Cell Fusion," Nature, Advanced online
publication Nature730 (2002).
443. Q. L. Ying, J. Nichols, E. Evans, and A. G. Smith, "Changing
Potency by Spontaneous Fusion," Nature, Advanced online publication
Nature729 (2002).
444. Tinker Ready, "Scientists Resign Over Stem-Cell Study," Nature
Medicine, Vol. 8, No. 3, p. 200 (March 2002).
[Three Editorial Board Members of the
Journal of Regenerative Medicine resign because of ACT
publication: Dr. Davor Solter from the Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology
in GERMANY; John Gearhart of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in
Baltimore, USA; and Robin Lovell-Badge of the National Institute of Medical
Research in London, UK all felt that they could not endorse the findings as
published by ACT last November 2001 and have resigned in protest.]
445. Antonio Regalado and Meeyoung Song, "Furor Over Cross-Species
Cloning: Fusing Human DNA and Egg of Cow Creates Embryo and World-Wide
Debate," The Wall Street
Journal, pp. A1, B1, 9 (March 19, 2002).
446. Alan Trounson, "The Genesis of Embryonic Stem Cells: Does
Parthenogenesis Offer a More Promising Means of Developing Immune-Matched ES
Cells?" Nature Biotechnology, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 237-8 (March
2002).
447. “Stem Cells Make Blood Vessels,” The Wall Street Journal,
p. A1 (March 26, 2002).
[Stem-cell researchers from MIT and Israel discovered that cells
derived form a human embryo can grow into blood vessels, an ability with
promise in fighting heart disease.]
448. Shulamit Levenberg, Justin
S. Golub, Michal Amit, Joseph Itskovitz-Eldor, and Robert Langer,
"Endothelial Cells Derived from Human Embryonic Stem Cells," Proc.
of the National Academy of Science, USA, Vol. 99, No. 7 (March 26,
2002).
449. “Australia Will Approve Stem Cell Harvesting from Spare IVF
Embryos for Research,” The Age newspaper of Canberra (March 26,
2002).
[Australian scientists have apparently won their campaign to use stem
cells taken from spare IVF embryos for research, winning the support of the
prime minister and state ministers. Quoting senior government sources, the
paper said that "during a special meeting of cabinet last week ministers
had warned that Australia risked losing world-class scientists offshore if it
banned the use of the embryos for stem-cell research." "[Prime
Minister John] Howard will consult with church leaders before finalizing his
decision on embryonic stem-cell research before a meeting of state ministers
next week," his deputy John Anderson said today.]
450. "Metaphor of the Week," Science, Vol. 295, No.
5560, p. 1637 (March 1, 2002).
["It is a truism that the blastocyst has the potential to become a
human being. Yet at that stage of development it is simply a 'clump' of
cells... An analogy might be what one sees when walking into a Home Depot.
There are the parts for at least 30 homes. But if there is a fire at the Home
Depot, the headline doesn't read '30 Homes Burn Down.' It's 'Home Depot
Burns Down'.”
– Michael Gazzaniga, Dartmouth
University Neuroscientist at a meeting of the President's Bioethics Panel last
month in Washington, D.C.]
451. Antonio Regalado, "Private Studies of Embryo Cells Raise
Concerns," p.. A1, B1, B4, The Wall Street Journal (March 21,
2001).
452. Sophie Petit-Zeman, "Regenerative Medicine: The Regeneration
of Tissues and Organs Offers a Radical New Approach to the Treatment of Injury
and Disease. It's a New Medicine for a New Millennium, but Does the Reality
Match the Hype?" Nature Biotechnology, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 201-206
(March 2001).
453. Jeremy Rifkin, The Biotech Century: Harnessing the Gene and
Remaking the World (J. P. Tarcher; 1999; Paperback -- 271 pages).
454. Jeremy Rifkin, "Commentary: We Clone Perfect Babies at the
Risk of Losing Our Compassion," p. B9, The Los Angeles Times (March
20, 2001).
455. John Pickrell, "Human Cloning: Experts Assail Plan to Help
Childless Couples," Science, Vol. 291, No. 5511, pp. 2061,3 (March
16, 2001).
456. Jeffrey Kluger, "Can We Learn to Beat the Reaper? Science Has
Been Winning Battles Against Old Age, But Can It Win the War?" Time
Magazine, p. 102 (January 21, 2002).
457. Antonio Regalado and Meeyoung Song, "Furor Over Cross-Species
Cloning: Fusing Human DNA and Egg of Cow Creates Embryo and World-Wide
Debate," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B1, 9 (March 19,
2002).
458. "French Rabbits are Reproducing Like Sheep," The
Los Angeles Times, p. A4 (March 30, 2002).
459. Vanessa Fuhrmans, "Out of the Cloning Hat Comes a Rabbit, Four Times Over, Just in Time for Easter," The Wall Street Journal, p. B5 (April 1, 2002).
460. Sergio Pistoi, "Father of the Impossible Children: Ignoring Nearly Universal Opprobrium, Severino Antinori Presses Ahead with Plans to Clone a Human Being," Scientific American, Vol. 286, No. 4, pp. 38-39 (April 2002).
461. Gregory Stock, Redesigning Humans: Our Inevitable Genetic Future (Houghton Mifflin Co; New York; 2002).
462. Francis Fukuyama, Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution (Farrar, Straus, & Giroux, New York; 2002).
463. Nicholas Wade, "A Dim View of a 'Posthuman Future'," The New York Times, pp. D1, 4 (April 2, 2002).
["Although Dr. Fukuyama credits science and technology with giving a forward direction to history over the last 500 years," he says that "human cloning should be banned outright," since he regards it as "immoral in and of itself and as an opener for still worse things to come, like enhancing human qualities by germline genetic engineering."]
464. Four Letters to the Editor by Peter B. Martin of Coconut Creek, FL, Frank L. Cocozzelli of Staten Island, NY, Sara Jasper Cook of Cortlandt Manor, NY, and Dr. Albert Roos of St. Louis, MO, "Questioning the Moralist," The New York Times, p. F3 (March 26, 2002).
[All four of these letters were decidedly hostile to Dr. Kass's position.]
465. Letter to the Editor by Rev. Alexander Harper of Norwalk, CT, "Criticism of a Moralist," The New York Times, p. F4 (April 2, 2002).
[However, the following week a minister from Connecticut wrote a letter about the four letters: "I was disappointed at letters (of March 26th cited above) only in caustic criticism of the President's choice of Dr. Leon Kass as Chairman of the President's Council on Bioethics. As a teacher of a course on the Science and Ethics of Stem-Cell Research, I am thankful that we have such a thoughtful scientist as Dr. Kass, who has kept his sense of humane values as Head of such an important Advisory Council for the President. As war is too important to leave to the generals, so are the consequences of bioengineering too important to leave to laboratory technicians."]
466. Editorial, "Indiana Jones Goes to
D.C.," The Los Angeles Times, p. B16 (March 28, 2002).
["Concerns raised about where [Elias] Zerhouni stands on cloning and
stem-cell research are to the point. At Johns Hopkins, Zerhouni played a key
role in developing such research, arguing that it should be "as unimpeded
as possible, because it may have a huge potential for all mankind."
However, the Bush Administration has suggested recently that Zerhouni would
support constraints favored by the far right, specifically a Bill by Sen. Sam
Brownback (R-KA) that would criminalize even the cloning of a person's own
cells to treat illnesses such as Parkinson's Disease.]
467. Antonio Regalado and Peter Landers, "Map of Rice DNA May Help Tailor Crops," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B6 (April 5, 2002).
468. Robert Lee Hotz and Aaron Zitner, "Rice's Genetic Map May Help Build a Better Cereal: Science: Researchers Hope to Boost Yield and Make the Grain More Nutritious," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 34 (April 4, 2002)
469. Jun Yu, et al., "A Draft Sequence of the Rice Genome ( Oryza sativa L. ssp. indica)," Science, Vol. 296, p. 79 (April 5, 2002).
470. Stephen A. Goff, et al., "A Draft Sequence of the Rice Genome (Oryza sativa L. ssp. japonica)," Science, Vol. 296, p. 92 (April 5, 2002)..
471. (Reuters) "Scientists Skeptical About Claim of Cloning: Controversial Italian Fertility Specialist Refuses to Confirm Reports of a Woman's Pregnancy. Some Doctors Express Outrage," The Los Angeles Times, p. A2, 9 (April 7, 2002).
472. J. Travis, "Stem-Cell Success: Mice Fuel Debate on Embryo Cloning," Science News, Vol. 167, No. 11, p. 163 (March 16, 2002).
[Advanced Cell Technology of Worcester, MA has reportedly used therapeutic cloning to derive bovine stem cells to create kidneys that it has transplanted into adult cows. Dr. Robert Lanza of ACT has confirmed these reports but declined to offer any further details, noting that "the company planned to publish its results soon."]
473. "Clones Face Uncertain Future," Science News, Vol. 167, No. 12, p. 189 (March 23, 2002).
[The National Institute for Infectious Diseases in Tokyo reported in the March 2002 issue of Nature Genetics that cloned animals have a shorter-than-normal-lifespan. In one of the experiments, 10 of 12 cloned mice died within 800 days of birth, whereas only 1 of 7 mice produced through natural mating died within that span. Autopsies conducted on six cloned mice that appeared to die prematurely revealed liver damage and pneumonia, suggesting a weakened immune system compared with normal controls.]
474. Interview with Dr. Thor Lemischka of Princeton University, "Good News about Stem-Cell Therapy," Bottom Line Health, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 7-9 (April 2002).
[Researchers at Johns Hopkins University injected specially-altered embryonic stem cells into the spinal cords of rats that were paralyzed with ALS (Lou Gehrig's Disease), and "three months later, the rats were able to move their paralyzed hind quarters and walk, although clumsily." Although adult stem cells are now being successfully used in transplants, more research is needed to determine whether they hold the same promise as embryonic stem cells.]
475. "President Bush Seeks Senate Ban on All Forms of Human Cloning both Therapeutic Cloning and Reproductive Cloning," CNN-TV (April 10, 2002; 1:30 PM EDT; TRT = ~30 minutes). See http://www.whiteho use.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020410-4.html for the full text as supplied by the White House.
[President George W. Bush used his pulpit in the East Room of the White House to lecture Americans and undecided Senators with a 15-minutes sermon on "the meaning of human life." There was an invitation-only audience of obviously sympathetic listeners providing hearty applause at all the right places. The level of orchestration was so tightly scripted and professionally rehearsed, the lecture had the look and feel of a mini "State-of-the-Union" address scripted by a Hollywood director to perpetrate the illusion that he spoke for all Americans, even though this is a highly controversial topic for many of us. He "preached to a choir" of 175 sympathetic lawmakers, religious activists, researchers, and even some disabled people, issuing abstract platitudes like " life is a creation not a commodity." And furthermore, "No human life should be exploited or extinguished for the benefit of another."
On the other hand, 40 Nobel Prize Winners were not convinced. They signed a letter the same day distributed to the Senate, saying that therapeutic cloning was actually a good idea for Americans and it should certainly not be criminalized, warning that a legislative ban "would impede progress against some of the most debilitating diseases known to man."
However, the mood of the Senate on this issue is fiercely independent of either the White House or the House of Representatives and clearly crosses traditional party lines. In the Senate, debate is now likely to take place in late May, and we can expect to hear considerably more testimony from the scientists who have actually proposed to carry out this sort of research, including Dr. Michael West, CEO of Advanced Cell Technology in Worcester, MA.
Curiously, Mr. Bush explained that he "wants the NIH to fund much more work on Adult Stem-Cell Biology," something that does not have the same moral taint, and we here have no objection to such funding and would certainly encourage it if we could.
Note: During the lecture, the President coined the term "Research Cloning" to refer systematically to what we and other scientists have consistently called "Therapeutic Cloning" for more than a year now without a hint that he must have known that he was deliberately changing "our" accepted jargon for his own purposes. This curious turn-of-phrase will, no doubt, inject confusion into the debate among those Senators who are undecided, but clearly this ploy served his agenda of discrediting all forms of human cloning quite well.
As far as Congressional lobbying groups are concerned, on the one hand we have
(1) The Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research, which represents patient advocacy groups, such as
The Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation), the biotech industry, and several other scientific groups
like The Alliance for Aging Research in Washington, D.C.; Daniel Perry, Executive Director and the newly-formed International Society of Stem Cell Research with Drs. Leonard Zon of Children's Hospital in Boston, Irving Weissman of Stanford University, and Douglas Melton of Harvard University; Dr. Zon says "the Society will offer advice on clinical trials of new stem-cell therapies and weigh in on hot topics such as human therapeutic cloning". The Society plans to hold its first annual meeting late next year; while on the other hand we have
(2) a newly-formed opposition lobbying group called "Americans to Ban Cloning," a patriotic-sounding consortium of groups seeking a comprehensive, world-wide ban on all forms of cloning.
CNN followed the President's address with 15 minutes of additional commentary by Sen. Tom Daschel (D-SD), Dr. Panos Zavos, Ph.D., an andrologist from Lexington, KY, and Prof. Alex Capron of USC in Los Angeles, a former member of the President's Bioethics Advisory Commission during the Clinton Administration.]
476. Laurie McGinley and Antonio Regalado, "Cloning Clamor Grows: Nobel Winners Oppose a Ban, Sen. Frist Announces His Support As Senate Prepares for Debate," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, B1,3 (April 10, 2002).
477. Geeta Anand and Antonio Regalado, "Slow Road for a Stem-Cell Researcher," The Wall Street Journal, pp. B1,3 (April 10, 2002).
478. Ronald Brownstein and Aaron Zitner, "Bush to Urge Senate to Ban All Cloning," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 14 (April 10, 2002).
479. Aaron Zitner, "Bush Presses for Cloning Ban," The Los Angeles Times, p. A17 (April 11, 2002).
480. Editorial, "Off Track on Cell Research," The Los Angeles Times, p. B14 (April 11, 2002).
481."Bush Restates Ban on Human Cloning," The Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, D8 (April 11, 2002).
482. Connie Mack, "There's Nothing 'Anti-Life' about Medical Cloning," The Los Angeles Times, p. B15 (April 12, 2002).
483. Science Scope: "Stem Cells United," Science, Vol. 295, No. 5564, p. 2343 (March 29, 2002).
484. Wolfgang Enard, Philipp Khaitovich, Joachim Klose, Sebastian Z”llner, Florian Heissig, Patrick Giavalisco, Kay Nieselt-Struwe, Elaine Muchmore, Ajit Varki, Rivka Ravid, Gaby M. Doxiadis, Ronald E. Bontrop, and Svante Paabo, "Intra- and Interspecific Variation in Primate Gene Expression Patterns," Science, Vol. 296, pp.340-343 (April 12, 2002).
485. Rosie Mestel, "Chimps May Have Something to Tell Us," The Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, 20 (April 12, 2002).
[Prof. Calib Finch, Director of USC's Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, said that the work published in today's issue of Science -- describing differential gene expression in the brains of humans vs. other primates, like Chimps, Orangutans, and Rhesus macaques, by teams at UC San Diego, GERMANY, and The Netherlands, including Drs. Ajit Varki and Pascal Gagneux -- could tell us a great deal about longevity genes. We know that the maximum lifespan for chimps is [55 - 60] years under ideal conditions (such as are found in zoos) {but only [40 - 45] years in the wild} while the maximum lifespan for humans is significantly more at 122 years (Madam Jeanne-Louise Calment of FRANCE). Yet the genomes of the two species are 98.7 percent homologous. So what does this mean for the numbers of gerontic genes? "If human aging is inherently slower than chimp aging, it seems plausible that we may be able to discover some of the genes that influence the species-aging phenotype, and these could become new targets for intervention in disease," he said.
Finch believes that the ApoE gene could be one of the candidate gerontic genes. It is associated with our more efficient processing of meat compared with chimps, who eat more vegetable matter in their diets. He speculates that perhaps there was a single mutation in ApoE that is responsible for our ability to avoid the cardiovascular implications of high blood cholesterol that is associated with substantial meat consumption that our kindred primate species don't have. The same amount of meat fat that will not affect humans can triple the cholesterol level in the blood of a chimp.]
486. Sharon Begley, "What Distinguishes Us from the Chimps? Actually, Not Much," The Wall Street Journal, p. A13 (April 12, 2002).