Australia Bishops reject therapeutic cloning research

A statement from The Australian Catholic Bishops has objected to the proposed Australian legislation permitting therapeutic cloning. The Bishops said that they 'reject scientific experimentation on that most precious and vulnerable of our brothers and sisters, the human embryo'. They reiterated that the Australian Catholic Church supported research on adult stem cells, or those taken from the umbilical cord at birth, but drew the line when it came to research involving human embryos. The Bishops stated that their opposition is based on respecting 'basic human values' and it was 'not a religious argument'.

Current law governing embryonic stem cell (ES cell) research in Australia is contained in the Research Involving Human Embryos Act and the Prohibition of Human Cloning Act, both of which were passed in 2002 after much debate. The two acts together ban reproductive cloning, prevent scientists from cloning embryos to obtain stem cells and restrict them to research on surplus IVF embryos created before the acts were passed, and donated by IVF patients who no longer require them. All research must operate under a licensing scheme administered by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). However, the laws had a built-in three-year 'sunset clause', which means the debates needed to be revisited.

Last December, a six-member Legislative Review Committee, chaired by the now deceased John Lockhart, a former Federal Court judge, recommended that the existing laws on cloning and stem cell research should be relaxed, to allow the creation of cloned embryos for stem cell research. But the Bishops contend that 'since 2002 there have been no significant scientific developments to justify more permissive legislation and no change in the fundamental ethical issues'. They say that the proposed legislation, currently being debated before the Federal Parliament, will create a new class of embryos specifically created for research rather than for reproductive purposes. This, they say, is a 'complete reversal' of Parliament's decision to ban human embryo cloning.

The debate so far has sparked a range of responses from the scientific community in Australia. Concerns have been raised over the potential of therapeutic cloning to trigger tumours. Professor John Martin, of Melbourne University, said last week that the risk of cancer was not being highlighted by the Government. He said that research has shown a 25 per cent incident of cancerous tumours in embryonic stem cell studies. However, Professor Alan Trounson, of the National Stem Cell Centre, has dismissed Martin's claims, saying that techniques have removed this risk. He added that therapeutic cloning would not be used on humans until it was proven to be safe.

Meanwhile, the Australian Stem Cell Centre (ASCC) has distanced itself from a recommendation to allow the creation of 'chimeric' embryos using animal eggs and human genetic material. The ASCC outlined its opposition to such research in its submission to the Senate's community affairs committee, which is collecting views on embryo research. According to The Australian newspaper, ASCC head Stephen Livesy said that public alarm over the 'scientifically minor issue' of chimeras had sidetracked the discussion of therapeutic cloning. Amongst its 54 recommendations, the Lockhart review said that both therapeutic cloning and the use of chimeric embryos should be permitted.