Post by Merkuri on Nov 19, 2004 11:59:03 GMT -5
[From Wired.com: www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,65761,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1]
Trouble for California Cloning?
By Kristen Philipkoski
02:00 AM Nov. 18, 2004 PT
The United Nations will likely decide Friday, after many delays, whether to vote on an international cloning ban, vote on a new declaration introduced by Italy or delay voting once again.
Just weeks after Californians voted for a $3 billion proposition to fund embryonic stem-cell research, which would include therapeutic cloning, the United Nations is considering a ban on all cloning. If the vote leads to a treaty that's eventually adopted by the United States, the treaty could cause problems for the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative.
Friday's vote, if it happens, would be just the first step toward a treaty. But if the General Assembly votes in favor of a ban on all cloning, which was introduced by Costa Rica with support from the United States, delegates would come up with final language, then individual nations would have to decide whether they will abide by the treaty.
"We are very concerned with U.S. pressure to try to ban international work in stem-cell research," said Robert Klein, a real estate developer and author of California's Proposition 71.
Belgium proposed an alternative that would ban reproductive cloning, which all states oppose, but allow therapeutic cloning, which researchers believe could help them develop treatments for many diseases including diabetes and Alzheimer's.
Italy proposed yet another alternative, since it remains unclear whether either Belgium's or Costa Rica's plans have enough votes to pass. Italy has drafted a declaration as a potential compromise. But the declaration's language -- which still might change before the General Assembly votes -- is almost identical to a total cloning ban, thanks to some subtle wording changes.
The document calls upon member states to "prohibit any attempts at the creation of human life through cloning processes and any research intended to achieve that aim." Research advocates prefer the phrase "human being" rather than "human life," since most people agree that an early embryo is a human life, but not necessarily that it is a human being. Therefore, the term "human being" would leave the declaration open to an interpretation allowing cloning for research.
The declaration also calls upon individual member states to write laws that would prohibit creating human life for research and insure "human dignity shall be respected in all circumstances and, in particular, woman shall not be exploited."
A representative from the Italian mission said the text of the declaration was still in negotiations.
Even if one of the treaty proposals receives a favorable vote Friday, it will face a long road to becoming a ratified treaty. And some doubt even then it would affect California.
"If the legal committee votes for a treaty that would ban therapeutic cloning, I don’t think it will have an effect on California," said Bernie Siegel, director of the Genetics Policy Institute, an organization that wants to preserve scientists' freedom to perform therapeutic cloning.
Such a treaty might at least have a psychological impact, and could influence voters should other states try to fund embryonic stem-cell research.
Cloning bills in the United States have been languishing in Congress for years, partially because lawmakers seem unable to separate therapeutic cloning, also known as somatic cell nuclear transfer, from reproductive human cloning, which would produce a baby who is a genetic copy of an adult.
Researchers want to use cloned human embryos to develop cell therapies or to teach scientists how to develop new treatments.
Social conservatives and the anti-abortion lobby have championed a ban on therapeutic cloning because early embryos are destroyed in the process. In September, President Bush told the United Nations that a complete cloning ban was one of his top priorities. And in late October, the United Nations postponed a cloning vote until after the United States' Nov. 2 elections.
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Trouble for California Cloning?
By Kristen Philipkoski
02:00 AM Nov. 18, 2004 PT
The United Nations will likely decide Friday, after many delays, whether to vote on an international cloning ban, vote on a new declaration introduced by Italy or delay voting once again.
Just weeks after Californians voted for a $3 billion proposition to fund embryonic stem-cell research, which would include therapeutic cloning, the United Nations is considering a ban on all cloning. If the vote leads to a treaty that's eventually adopted by the United States, the treaty could cause problems for the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative.
Friday's vote, if it happens, would be just the first step toward a treaty. But if the General Assembly votes in favor of a ban on all cloning, which was introduced by Costa Rica with support from the United States, delegates would come up with final language, then individual nations would have to decide whether they will abide by the treaty.
"We are very concerned with U.S. pressure to try to ban international work in stem-cell research," said Robert Klein, a real estate developer and author of California's Proposition 71.
Belgium proposed an alternative that would ban reproductive cloning, which all states oppose, but allow therapeutic cloning, which researchers believe could help them develop treatments for many diseases including diabetes and Alzheimer's.
Italy proposed yet another alternative, since it remains unclear whether either Belgium's or Costa Rica's plans have enough votes to pass. Italy has drafted a declaration as a potential compromise. But the declaration's language -- which still might change before the General Assembly votes -- is almost identical to a total cloning ban, thanks to some subtle wording changes.
The document calls upon member states to "prohibit any attempts at the creation of human life through cloning processes and any research intended to achieve that aim." Research advocates prefer the phrase "human being" rather than "human life," since most people agree that an early embryo is a human life, but not necessarily that it is a human being. Therefore, the term "human being" would leave the declaration open to an interpretation allowing cloning for research.
The declaration also calls upon individual member states to write laws that would prohibit creating human life for research and insure "human dignity shall be respected in all circumstances and, in particular, woman shall not be exploited."
A representative from the Italian mission said the text of the declaration was still in negotiations.
Even if one of the treaty proposals receives a favorable vote Friday, it will face a long road to becoming a ratified treaty. And some doubt even then it would affect California.
"If the legal committee votes for a treaty that would ban therapeutic cloning, I don’t think it will have an effect on California," said Bernie Siegel, director of the Genetics Policy Institute, an organization that wants to preserve scientists' freedom to perform therapeutic cloning.
Such a treaty might at least have a psychological impact, and could influence voters should other states try to fund embryonic stem-cell research.
Cloning bills in the United States have been languishing in Congress for years, partially because lawmakers seem unable to separate therapeutic cloning, also known as somatic cell nuclear transfer, from reproductive human cloning, which would produce a baby who is a genetic copy of an adult.
Researchers want to use cloned human embryos to develop cell therapies or to teach scientists how to develop new treatments.
Social conservatives and the anti-abortion lobby have championed a ban on therapeutic cloning because early embryos are destroyed in the process. In September, President Bush told the United Nations that a complete cloning ban was one of his top priorities. And in late October, the United Nations postponed a cloning vote until after the United States' Nov. 2 elections.
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
