The UK scientist who led the team responsible for creating Dolly the sheep has suggested using cloning technology to eradicate disease genes in early human embryos. In a new book, currently being serialised in the Daily Telegraph newspaper, Professor Ian Wilmut says that it would be possible to take an embryo affected by a hereditary disorder such as Huntington's disease and isolate stem cells from it. The genetic defect could be corrected in these cells, and then their DNA could be used to create new embryos, free from the disease, he proposes. Wilmut argues that such a procedure would not amount to human reproductive cloning - to which he remains 'implacably opposed' - since cloning an embryo of around 100 cells is not the same as cloning a person.
Dolly the sheep, the first cloned mammal, was born in 1997 following the use of SCNT technology. The procedure involves removing the genetic material of a somatic (body) cell, and inserting it into an unfertilised egg that has had its own DNA removed. The egg is then 'tricked' into dividing and multiplying, as though it has been fertilised, before being returned to the womb to continue developing
In his forthcoming book 'After Dolly', Wilmut argues that once the technology is shown to be safe, society should consider the use of cloning with genetic modification to tackle human hereditary diseases. He says that 'doctors should be able to offer at risk couples the opportunity to conceive with IVF methods, break down the resulting embryos into cells, correct any serious genetic defects in these cells then clone demonstrably healthy cells to create a new embryo that can be implanted to start a pregnancy'.
Wilmut stresses that he is 'extremely concerned' about the effects on a child of being the clone of another person, but argues that 'an early embryo is not a person and I see the use of nuclear transfer to prevent a child's having a dreadful disease as far less controversial'. After examining the ethical arguments, he concludes that the promise of this approach is so great that it would be immoral not to attempt the procedure. However, he says that it raises other ethical issues, such as unequal access to what would initially be an expensive new technique - resulting in 'genetic haves and have-nots'.
Wilmut's remarks have attracted criticism from pro-life groups, with Julia Millington, political director of the ProLife Alliance calling the proposal 'unethical' and 'utterly perverse'. Matthew O'Gorman, spokesman for LIFE, said that creating embryos 'simply to service another' was a 'shameful example of science without sense'. But Wilmut writes that people should be able to choose whether or not they use new technologies to help them have healthy children. 'The use of genetic and reproductive technologies is not a step backwards into the darkness but a step forwards into the light', he says. An accompanying editorial in the Daily Telegraph agrees, commenting that the law should override the public's distaste for human cloning, as 'there is a difference between disapproving of something and banning it'.
Sources and References
-
When cloning human tissue is a good thing
-
Cloning 'could beat gene disease'
-
Backing for baby cloning to beat disease
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.