Dolly's maker advises
on research use
By Kevin O'Sullivan
Society must ensure effective regulation of genetics and possible moves to clone humans, but should not restrict ambitious scientific research, according to Dr Ian Wilmut, leader of the team which cloned Dolly the sheep.
The technology that produced Dolly could be applied to humans, though he found the prospect of "genetically-engineered children" frightening. Applying cloning research in such a direction was equivalent to letting a small boy loose with a jet engine. "For quite a long time into the future, it would be dangerous, I believe."
Dr Wilmut favoured adventurous research and then extreme caution on how its outcomes were applied. There was no need for a panic introduction of human cloning regulations because it would not happen for some time. "It will be an issue of the next few decades."
He asked himself if his wife would like to live with him and a copy. "How would she react to a teenage copy physically like his father, with whom she fell in love a long time ago? Is this in the interest of the clone? I suggest it would not be."
The process of cloning or "nuclear transfer" had, however, many potential benefits, notably in facilitating organ transplantation, in treating genetic diseases, in developing therapeutic proteins and enhancing nutritional qualities. The option of enhancing intelligence was one society would have to confront.
Sir John Maddox, editor emeritus of Nature, said most species had disappeared over time due to catastrophic events or simply petered out, possibly because of having the wrong set of genes.
"What are the implications if the human genome is unstable? Gene therapy for every one? Whatever convenience there might be in doing away with some of this novel genetics, there is no alternative to finding out as much as we can, as quickly as we can about how we are constituted as people, so that we can defend ourselves, even against bad luck."
Crude eugenics was a failed pursuit; a facade for discrimination. Arranged marriages were no more successful in genetic terms than a lottery. Pre-natal diagnosis of genetic diseases followed by termination had no long-term effect on a population's genetic make-up because it only affected the birth of one child, and only applied to simple diseases.
While geneticists have said they would not interfere with human germlines, he said, they would always want to see if there were benefits from extended research. This meant bigger risks, bigger moral problems and would require careful assessment of advantages. Current regulations in most countries made gene technology "safe".
The philosopher Baroness Mary Warnock, who chaired the UK committee on human fertilisation and embryonic research, said the perceived threat from "new biology" was the belief that DNA intervention could change the way people are. There was a fear that "someone else is going to determine how we are, not ourselves".
But scientists were still tremendously ignorant of the genetic constituents of the individual; what makes them musical, intelligent, witty or bad-tempered. Some people were inclined to forget the enormous influences of environment on the way they develop and change. The introduction of invitro fertilisation was helped by permitting research to progress, while new possibilities of treatment for monogenetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis had been a driving influence.
Some in Ireland said they would permit IVF but declined to do the research. "That seems to me not a particularly honest or sensible suggestion. The fact is, research is necessary to improve the techniques."
Green Party MEP, Ms Nuala Ahern, said human cloning could result in genetically damaged and handicapped babies. "Dr Wilmut can confirm how many sheep experiments it took to achieve Dolly. We know we are getting handicapped animals from these experiments. It is inconceivable that we would allow this with humans.
"Nineteen European countries have signed up to a protocol banning human cloning but Ireland has refused. It allowed treatment on patients only if they receive a direct benefit and prohibits profits derived from use of any part of the human body and the creation/use of embryos for research."
Europe had been forced down the biotechnology road, she said. It was a "genetic assault on society" with patients exploited by pharmaceutical industry saying "no patents, no cure". Ireland was allowing companies to "bio-prospect on patients for profit", she claimed by facilitating secretive attempts to extract gene sequences.
|
