.
Human reproductive cloning:
why now? why at all?
reflections of a biologist and gene therapist
Human cloning has little ot nothing to do with gene
therapy. In strict sense it is not even a genetic
manipulation, if at all it is just its contrary , its
antihesis.
So, why should a molecular biologist with interests in gene
therapy write a comment on the recent claims on human
cloning?
To make the waters even more turbid?
To celebrate some obscure characters in search of fame or
money?
No, just to make the point about how absurd and pathetic all
this story is, both scientifically and morally, no matter
the claim being true or a hoax....
It had to happen... The technology of reproducing the genetically identical copy of a
living organism starting with a nucleus of a somatic cell had
attained the world's attention after the spectacular announcement of
the cloned sheep Dolly. Since then, we have seen one reckless
scientist after the other appearing on the international scene with
claims of intending to clone human beings. Obviously, this had to
happen, in spite of the technical hurdles that we painstakingly
learned from animal experimentation (where cloning is still an
erratic process with an extremely low success rate and lots of
unpredictable misdevelopments.)
Therefore, the stubborness of some cloning fanatics has brought all
of us very close from having to deal with the materialisation of this
process. Be true or false what the Clonaid's officials have been
claiming these weeks, one of the trials will sooner or later give
birth to a human being generated with cloning techniques. We have
been learning immense amounts of things from the cloning of mammals
and now we are burning this precious knowledge into a socially futile
application that will make some few people very rich and other very
few people supposedly happy. Why? and with which consequences?
Not so impressive, after all...
Personally I am not much impressed by this achievement because I do
not believe it will ever become a mass procedure; let's say until our
society will maintain its solid heritage of ol' good common sense. If
human cloning will become a serious issue, then we should not worry
because of the cloning itself, but since we would have let slip away
our judgement on the collective way we understand scientific and
technological progress and the delicate balance between individual
and societal needs. We should not fear misuses or abuses from human
cloning if we are confident to be able to maintain our societal
values. If we cannot guarantee that, then human cloning is just one
of the many plagues that expect us, and probably not the major
one.
No justifications for human reproductive cloning Obviously I cannot buy any of the current justifications for
human reproductive cloning (couple's sterility, making loved ones
revive, serving the obsessions of some freaky sectarian movement
etcetera...). Even with the best of my imagination I cannot figure
out any solid objective argument in favour. Taken apart the obvious
dangers of generating defective human beings, due to poorly
controllable nucleus reprogramming, there is a major argument that
speaks against this approach. Biologically it is a genuine nonsense
because it goes straight counter-current with the principles of
natural evolution. Only the ultimate arrogance of humans who believe
to have achieved perfection could become a sort of grotesque
justification for the perpetuation of their genetic setup. I am sure
that my view is shared by essentially the entire scientific
community. If not, I would not understand the scientific community
any more.
We have heard many scandalised and counterarguments, certainly
inspired by good will, but mostly rather awkward such as 'it is
dangerous for the child' (which indirectly implies that if it would
be not dangerous then it would be acceptable?); or 'it is morally
unacceptable' (this very statement from world leading politicians who
yet propose as morally acceptable the bombing of innocent people?);
or 'it anyway does not work in their hands' (meager consolation
generously given to us by other equally suspicious characters such as
prospected cloner Antinori?).
What the heck! The only ever valid argument against human
reproductive cloning remains the intrinsic anti-evolutionary nature
of this procedure. Surprisingly, I found this reasoning only in one
out of almost 100 commentaries (see the inspiring title from '24
heures' ( 75.
Cloner l'homme est surtout biologiquement stupide ...(04.01.2003
).
This is only one of the challenges for our democratic society,
and perhaps not even the most important Thus, I tend to consider this technological perversion just as
one of the many recents tests for the stability of what we call a
'democratic societal system'. It will not have more impact that
internet, mobile phones, prozac, organ transplants, low fare airplane
traveling, viagra, market globalisation, pollution, global warming or
any other recent gadgets and challenges that we have been and are
currently facing.
I dont think we must particularly 'fear' the cloners or the clones,
but rather those who want to make money with human suffering and
stupidity. I see only three ways to fight againsts those people: a)
make it impossible to make such easy money, (b) reduce human
suffering. or (c) diminish human stupidity. Neither of the three is
an easy job, but let's hope many of us keep trying.
THE WORLD This story is from our news.com.au network Source:
AFP
'Cloned baby' parents refuse tests From correspondents in
Washington 08jan03
THE parents of a baby said to be the world's first human clone are
refusing to allow genetic tests to verify the claim. US company
Clonaid - which claims to have created the child, named Eve, and is
linked to the Raelian sect - issued a statement on the issue
today."Eve's parents have decided to postpone their decision to grant
access to an independent expert," it said."They will allow the test
to be performed only when they have the absolute guarantee that the
baby will not be taken from them."
The human cloning company Clonaid, with offices in Las Vegas,
Nevada, was founded by the Raelian sect, which believes humans were
cloned from aliens who landed on Earth 25,000 years ago. Clonaid's
president Brigitte Boisselier announced on December 26 the birth of
what she claimed to be the world's first human baby clone.She later
said a second cloned baby had been born to a lesbian couple in the
Netherlands.Neither birth has been confirmed by independent
scientists, and the Raelians have provided no proof to support their
claims.US journalist Michael Guillen yesterday said he had suspended
his effort to use DNA testing to verify the claims and said it could
all be an "elaborate hoax".
The journalist charged with verifying the human cloning claims of
the cult-linked company Clonaid has now reached the same conclusion
Latest Articles: as many observers - the claims could well be "an
elaborate hoax". Michael Guillen, former science editor of ABC News,
said he has Cloning may be 'elaborate suspended the independent
review process that would have hoax' says monitor genetically tested
the first-born baby to prove that its DNA was 7 Jan 03 indeed
identical to that of another person.
Dutch clone claimed - but "The team of scientists has had no
access to the alleged family no proof and, therefore, cannot verify
firsthand the claim that a human baby 6 Jan 03 has been cloned,"
Guillen said in a statement on Monday. "In other words, it's still
entirely possible that Clonaid's announcement is Second cloned baby
claim part of an elaborate hoax intended to bring publicity to the 3
Jan 03 Raelian movement."
Recent Articles: Clonaid says the first cloned baby was born on 26
December. The company claims a second was born in the Netherlands on
Saturday, First cloned baby "born and that three more are due by the
end of January. The company was on 26 December" set up by the Raelian
religious cult, which believes that humans 27 Dec 02 were cloned from
aliens who landed on the earth 25,000 years ago.
Australia OKs human embryo research Avoiding bias 5 Dec 02
Revelations on Sunday that Guillen had tried to sell exclusive First
cloned baby 'due in coverage of the first child's birth several
months ago had January' increased scepticism about his independence
from the Raelians. 27 Nov 02 However, in the statement he added that
he wanted to remove himself from the testing procedure in order to
avoid possibility of bias. Cloned stem cells may give new lease of
life Clonaid's spokesperson Nadine Gary said she was surprised by 8
Nov 02 Guillen's announcement and was "not aware" of any
suspension.
Michael Guillen has been fascinated by cloning ever since 1997,
when Dolly the sheep was cloned and he covered the story as a science
editor for ABC's Good Morning America.
"He was extremely enthusiastic and did some very strong
reporting," says GMA producer Shelly Ross. "He was determined to stay
in the forefront of the story."
On Dec. 27, when the Montreal-based Clonaid claimed that a 7-pound
cloned baby had been born, Guillen, now a freelance reporter,
announced that he would oversee independent DNA tests on the baby to
prove &emdash; or disprove &emdash; the group's claim.But Monday,
after Clonaid continued to refuse to offer the baby for tests,
Guillen withdrew from the project, saying it might be "an elaborate
hoax." Tuesday, Clonaid said the parents wouldn't allow testing
unless they are assured the baby wouldn't be taken from them &emdash;
an issue since a Florida lawyer has filed such a lawsuit.
Now, Clonaid's questionable reputation may tarnish Guillen, a
former Harvard professor who left ABC last fall after 14 years.After
ducking reporters for two weeks, Guillen is trying to salvage his
reputation. He talks to Charles Gibson on GMA this morning, and CNN's
Connie Chung tonight.
Guillen, who refuses to give his age, says that Clonaid's refusal
to agree to testing has rightly drawn criticism. "I'm tearing my hair
out in frustration. I stuck my neck out and they knew it. "I'm like
Joe Friday in Dragnet. 'Just the facts, ma'am.' All I want are some
samples (from the baby) so we can find the truth."But Guillen, son of
a Hispanic Pentacostal minister, wants to believe the group's claim:
his initial skepticism of Clonaid officials in 1997 vanished after
their science credentials checked out. "It would be unwise to dismiss
these people offhand."
Clonaid was founded by a religious sect called Raelians. Founder
Claude Vorilhon, 56, a former pop singer and French auto racing
journalist, says extraterrestrials created humans and gave him the
name Rael, meaning messenger.London's Daily Mail calls him "a master
of media manipulation" and describes the movement's beliefs as "a mix
of Sixties style free love and conviction that science holds the keys
to humanity's problems."
Sunday, The New York Times reported that Guillen tried months ago
to sell exclusive coverage of Clonaid's first baby to the major
broadcast networks."That's what freelance reporters do every day of
the week," says Guillen. "I have to earn a living. What's wrong with
that?"
Guillen said that after Dolly was cloned, he knew it would be only
a matter of time before someone cloned a human being. Shortly after
the Dolly announcement, he did a quick Internet search on the subject
and "out popped the Raelians. I said, 'This can't be real.' "On Dec.
27, Guillen says, "I watched the world have the same reaction to them
(the Raelians) that I had six years earlier."The British Broadcasting
Corporation reported the next day that the news was "greeted with a
mixture of astonishment, revulsion and deep skepticism."
One Week, No Proof Despite Earlier Promise, Raelians Have Not
Offered Proof of Clone
By Malcolm Ritter The Associated Press
N E W Y O R K, Jan. 7 &emdash; A self-imposed deadline on a
genetic testing decision has passed for a company that claims to have
produced the first human clone. Still, there's been no DNA proof, and
no baby is forthcoming.
The journalist who said he would oversee DNA testing to verify the
company's claim said Monday he has abandoned the effort and could not
rule out the possibility of "an elaborate hoax."Officials with
Clonaid, the company that announced the birth of the world's first
clone on Dec. 27, first promised DNA testing, then backed off.
Clonaid said the parents of the 7-pound baby girl have refused to
allow it."The team of scientists has had no access to the alleged
family and, therefore, cannot verify firsthand the claim that a human
baby has been cloned," said Michael Guillen, a former ABC science
editor who had offered to arrange the testing.
Experts Not Surprised
Experts who had been demanding independent verification said
Clonaid has never had credibility with the scientific community."We
don't find it surprising that they are not in a position to offer any
data," said Sean Tipton, spokesman for the American Society of
Reproductive Medicine in Washington, D.C."We have been ignoring it
because we don't view it as a scientifically valid statement," said
Natalie Dewitt, an editor at Nature, the British science journal that
published the milestone data in 1997 on Dolly the cloned sheep.
Clonaid was founded by the Raelian religious sect, which believes
space aliens created life on Earth. Clonaid chief executive Brigitte
Boisselier acknowledges outside DNA testing would be needed to make
the claim credible.In a statement, Guillen said he had assembled
experts to do the work but suspended the effort Monday. "It's still
entirely possible Clonaid's announcement is part of an elaborate hoax
intended to bring publicity to the Raelian movement," he said.Guillen
indicated he was still willing to proceed. "When and if an
opportunity to collect DNA samples as promised does arise, however,
the team stands fully prepared to remobilize and conduct the
necessary tests."
Journalist Wanted Exclusive
The freelance journalist has said previously he had no connection
to Clonaid. But he said in his statement Monday he has been
interested in doing a documentary on human cloning that would involve
Clonaid's work. He said he has covered the "principal players" in
human cloning since the cloning of Dolly the sheep was announced.The
New York Times reported Sunday that Guillen tried months ago to sell
exclusive coverage of Clonaid's first baby to the major broadcast
networks.On Saturday, Boisselier said the baby's parents had promised
to give her a final answer Monday about whether they would allow DNA
tests. A spokesman for Guillen said his statement was not connected
to that decision.
Clonaid did not immediately return phone calls requesting a
response Monday.
Some scientists said Clonaid's two weeks of notoriety probably
won't do lasting damage to legitimate reproductive research.Indeed,
some believe it may have begun to educate the public on the
differences between the cloning of stem cells and other therapeutic
agents, and cloning to reproduce a baby.Others said it was a "big
mistake" for policy-makers to have included Clonaid with legitimate
scientists in congressional hearings and other science policy forums
during the past year."By association, they have done some damage,"
Dewitt said. "But they are so far removed from legitimate science
that I don't think it will cause a huge problem."
Journalist, wary of hoax, drops offer to verify 'clone'
By Malcolm Ritter, Associated Press, 1/7/2003
NEW YORK - Michael Guillen, the journalist who had said he would
oversee DNA testing of a supposed cloned baby, dropped out yesterday.
He said he had given up because of a lack of cooperation from the
religiously inspired company which claimed to have produced the
clone, and the possibility of ''an elaborate hoax.''
Officials of Clonaid, the company that on Dec. 27 announced the
birth of the world's first clone, first promised DNA testing and then
backed off. Clonaid said the parents of the purported clone have
refused to allow testing.''The team of scientists has had no access
to the alleged family and, therefore, cannot verify firsthand the
claim that a human baby has been cloned,'' said Guillen, a former ABC
science editor who had offered to arrange the testing.
Clonaid was founded by the Raelian religious sect, which believes
space aliens created life on Earth. Brigitte Boisselier, the group's
chief executive, admits that outside DNA testing would be needed to
make the claim credible.In a statement, Guillen said he had assembled
specialists to do the work, but had suspended the effort yesterday
morning. ''It's still entirely possible Clonaid's announcement is
part of an elaborate hoax intended to bring publicity to the Raelian
movement,'' he said.
Guillen indicated he was still willing to proceed. ''When and if
an opportunity to collect DNA samples as promised does arise,
however, the team stands fully prepared to re-mobilize and conduct
the necessary tests,'' he said.The freelance journalist has said
previously that he had no connection to Clonaid. But he said in his
statement yesterday that he has been interested in doing a
documentary on human cloning that would involve Clonaid's work. He
said he has covered the ''principal players'' in human cloning since
the cloning of Dolly the sheep was announced in 1997.
The New York Times reported Sunday that Guillen tried months ago
to sell exclusive coverage of Clonaid's first baby to the major
broadcast networks.He pitched to Fox Entertainment a proposal for a
reality-based show, offering to produce and host the program that he
proposed would begin before the births of the clones and continue
into the future, the executive told the Times.
Joe Earley, a Fox spokesman, said, ''We were pitched the project,
but we thought it was more appropriate for our news department and we
referred it to them.'' Fox News also turned down the offer. A CNN
executive said that the company listened to Guillen's proposal, but
did not make an offer, saying that they were interested in ''the
bigger story'' but would not pay for Guillen's program because they
wanted to cover it themselves.
Guillen approched the Times unsuccessfully in May, offering an
exclusive article about a couple trying to have a child through
cloning. He said he was the only reporter allowed to follow the
couple.In his proposal to the Times, Guillen wrote: ''During the
better part of the past five years, I've cultivated close
relationships with all the major human cloning scientists worldwide.
In fact, I know more about what's going on than any of the individual
players; that's because they all confide in me.''
The Mother Of All Questions On Cloning How far will people go
to have a baby?
By Bryn Nelson STAFF WRITER January 7, 2003
Amid the flurry of news releases and quotes from dubious
scientists, the unsubstantiated claims that a cloning group has
produced the first human clones pose an important question in this
era of rapidly expanding medical technology: How far are parents
willing to go to have a baby?
The individual answers, shaped by religious beliefs, the strong
desire to produce a genetic heir, and a varied understanding of what
medical science can or cannot do, say as much about the range of
human motivation as they do about the public's ambivalence and
expectations toward the unprecedented power of science.
"There's really not quite a parallel to this in the past history
of genetics, which is the ability to clone yourself," says Garland
Allen, a professor of the history and philosophy of genetics at
Washington University in St. Louis. "It's a new technology and has
brought a whole new concept."
In-vitro fertilization provides some parallels, of course, both in
terms of motivation and ethical concerns, and some advocates argue
that reproductive cloning will be as widely accepted in a
quarter-century as the fertilization technology that produced Louise
Brown 24 years ago and the hundreds of thousands of babies since
then.But cloning promises that an individual's DNA can yield a
virtually identical genetic copy under the appropriate conditions, a
latter-born twin of sorts. Hollywood has generated visions of clone
armies, while religious objectors liken reproductive cloning to
"playing God." The technology is additionally burdened with the
so-called "yuck factor" - a visceral reaction often visited upon
unfamiliar medical techniques - plus a host of misleading claims and
unrealistic expectations.
"In America, I think that people have false expectations and hopes
about what science can do and what science can bring," says Dr. Paul
Kettl, a professor of psychiatry at Penn State Medical Center. "And
while we discover amazing things daily, we still don't know
enough."Clonaid, a company formed in 1997 under the auspices of a
self-proclaimed prophet convinced that humans were created by
extraterrestrial scientists, claims it has maximized existing
knowledge by creating two human clones. The group, like its
competitors, boasts a long list of couples desperate to take part in
the risky venture. But Clonaid has yet to provide any evidence of its
touted successes.
Besides considerable outreach to infertile or homosexual couples,
some reproductive cloning advocates have advanced the claims that
cloning technology could replace a lost child or eventually grant
immortality. The latter claims, Allen says, are based on complete
misunderstandings about genetics and the nature of human
development.
"I hate to say it, but people are totally in the dark about this,"
Allen says. "You also get that idea with people wanting their pets
back, that you're going to get Fido back. Obviously it doesn't
happen."Researchers at Texas A&M University, armed with millions
from a philanthropist hoping to obtain a clone of his beloved
mixed-breed dog Missy, toiled for several years under a program
dubbed "Missyplicity." Last year they announced an unexpected
success: the creation, instead, of a kitten clone named CC, for
CopyCat. Even then, the kitten differed significantly in its coat
pattern from its cat DNA donor.
In August 2001 a Charleston lawyer and former West Virginia state
legislator named Mark Hunt revealed he had invested nearly $500,000
in another venture, a secret cloning laboratory on the second floor
of a converted high school in the small town of Nitro, W.Va. Hunt and
his wife had hoped to replace the 10-month-old son they lost to a
heart defect in 1999 and enlisted the help of Clonaid before parting
ways."It's incredibly difficult to lose someone that you're close to
and even more difficult to lose a child," Kettl says. The combination
of intense grief and guilt over the perception that the parent
somehow failed to protect the child can be "devastating."
Denial also plays a major role in the normal grieving process, he
says, and through this potent mixture of emotions, it's not difficult
to envision parents bent on reclaiming a lost child through any
means, even if it requires a significant amount of self-deception."I
can't help but think that the denial that folks feel would lead them
to say, 'OK, Johnny's not gone, we just have a new version,'" Kettl
says.
Difficulty in becoming pregnant also can place considerable stress
upon a couple's relationship, Kettl says. Embracing cloning as a
potential solution, may also reflect a desire to relieve the mounting
stress.Another motivation can come as an outgrowth of the unrealistic
expectations parents routinely place on their children, often with
the hope that their children will carry on family traditions. "If
you've ever been to a Little League baseball game, you know what I
mean," Kettl says. "An exaggeration of that would be to have a child
that is 'just like me' or 'just like my wife.'"Alternatively, parents
may look to their children to succeed where they failed."Children,
unfortunately, are saddled with the burden at times of doing things
better than their parents ever did," Kettl says, "when the facts are,
of course, that all people are different."
Identical twins are the current benchmark for genetic sameness,
but researchers stress that even a perfect genetic match between a
parent and a latter- born "twin" would not offer an identical match
of personalities, abilities or disease susceptibilities.Apart from
the unique environmental conditions encountered during embryonic
development, genetic mutations accumulated in DNA from the donor's
mature cells and even subtle changes induced by the cloning process
itself could combine to create a child who is very different from the
parent. An individual's accumulated life history further defines
distinctions."It's very clear that experiences help to mold who we
are," Kettl said.
Officially, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine is
"opposed to any attempt at human reproductive cloning." But Dr.
Sandra Carson, president of the society and a professor of obstetrics
and gynecology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, admits that
attitudes are more mixed among the society's 8,500 fertility experts.
Rather than push for a complete ban or complete acceptance, Carson
says, society should engage in an open-minded, tempered discussion of
risks, benefits, and medical alternatives, so a conclusion can be
reached that's best for everyone.
Even so, the desire for a genetic twin to replace a dead child is
"probably the only motivation that we don't have a good alternative
to right now," she says. But whatever caused the initial problem
would likely be passed on to the clone offspring, "so I'm not sure
that it's a very responsible thing to do."Adoption can also provide a
solution, but the strong natural desire to produce a genetic heir
often prevails."You want to be able to say your baby has your dad's
gestures or your wife's eyes. I think it's a natural thing," Carson
says. "I don't think it necessarily has to do with ego or a desire
for immortality."Others aren't so sure.
Washington University biologist Ursula Goodenough says human
cloning technology - if successful - would be available only to those
with the means to pay for it. As a commodity, cloning may reflect
ego, status or even the ultimate ego trip of immortality, or "faux
immortality" as she calls it."That's faux in the sense that the
person isn't really you at all," she says.
And while people may be reluctant to express such fantasies in
public, Goodenough says she's heard plenty who privately whisper of
their naive wish for immortality via cloning."They say, 'Well, gosh,
you know, I'd still be here.' So it's tricky," she says.
Clonaid's scientific director, Brigitte Boisselier, has reinforced
such notions by publicly reiterating the ultimate goal of the group's
founder, former French journalist and racecar driver Claude Vorilhon,
who calls himself Rael: the downloading of thoughts and emotions of
an individual - the life history, if you will - into the body of his
or her clone, a process by which the spiritual leader hopes to
achieve immortality. The claim has done little to boost Clonaid's
credibility.
"Of course, we have Ted Williams in an ice box," Goodenough says.
"So people have been bilking people in the name of immortality for a
long time, not to mention pharaohs and mummies."Dr. Jack Coulehan, a
professor of preventive medicine and head of the medical ethics
division at Stony Brook University Hospital, says the real issue in
cloning, from an ethical perspective, comes down to motivation. As a
technology, he believes, there is nothing intrinsically unethical or
contradictory about pursuing therapeutic cloning (somatic cell
nuclear transfer) and reproductive cloning.
In public, however, most scientists and the medical community have
embraced therapeutic cloning technology for its promise in curing
disease through the procurement of stem cells, while lambasting
reproductive cloning. Coulehan says it's understandable that
animosity would arise from scientists who perceive reproductive
cloning as a lightning rod for controversy and thus a threat to their
own work.Even then, however, a clearer look at the potential value of
reproductive cloning may not be possible without "dissecting away the
much more questionable areas," Coulehan says. In a culture where
elective cosmetic surgery is increasingly looked upon as a means to
improve a laundry list of physical features, for example,
reproductive cloning may reflect the desire to perpetuate some
physical feature or to create "designer children."
But while such reasons may invoke serious ethical concerns when
they are applied to reproductive cloning, what about the subset of
parents who have exhausted all other options in their attempts to
produce biologically related children? "Getting rid of all that other
stuff makes that small group clear," Coulehan says. "And even with
that small group, you still need to ask the question, 'Should we
really be putting our resources here?' But it at least focuses the
question more."
I was shocked by Bill McKibben's Jan. 6 op-ed article, "A Threat
to Our Coherent Human Future." He wrote: "Robert Lanza . . . called
the Raelian announcement 'appalling,' 'irresponsible' and 'a sad day
for science.' Yet Lanza, two years ago, predicted that soon we would
not just be cloning children but genetically souping them up: 'We're
close to being able to add 20 or 30 IQ points, and an equivalent
boost of their muscle mass,' to embryos, he said, adding, 'Who among
us wouldn't say "yes"?' "
This misrepresents what I said at the State of the World Forum in
2000.
I did say that technology already existed to genetically increase
muscle mass in animals by knocking out a gene known as myostatin and
that someday scientists might figure out how to increase human
intelligence. I also posed the question "What parent would not want
to increase their child's IQ 20 or 30 points?" But I used this to
illustrate the strong pressure that will develop to use cloning and
genetic engineering to tamper with the human genome. I stated
repeatedly that this "crossed the line" and was wrong.
Human evolution has taken millions of years, and it would be
arrogant and foolhardy for us to think we can design a better person
through science.
ROBERT P. LANZA
Vice President Medical and Scientific Development Advanced Cell
Technology Inc. Worcester, Mass
The cult-linked company Clonaid has made yet more claims about its
human cloning programme and, once again, has failed to substantiate
Latest Articles: them with any evidence.
Cloning may be 'elaborate The company, set up by the Raelian
religious cult, says a second hoax' says monitor cloned baby was born
on Friday night, to a Dutch lesbian couple. 7 Jan 03 But in the
absence of any information about the babies and any scientific proof
that they were cloned, the claims are increasingly Dutch clone
claimed - but being dismissed as a lengthy publicity stunt. no proof
6 Jan 03 The affair is "totally ridiculous", says cloning expert
Rudolph Jaenisch at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "In
the Second cloned baby claim absence of any scientific evidence, I
have to believe that it's not 3 Jan 03 true," he says. "They are
extreme nuts."
Recent Articles: The birth of the second cloned baby took place in
the Netherlands, according to Bart Overvliet, president of the Dutch
chapter of the First cloned baby "born Raelians. The baby girl is
allegedly a clone of her birth mother. on 26 December" 27 Dec 02
However, Brigitte Boisselier, the president of Clonaid, again refused
to identify the location of the birth or the mother. Australia OKs
human Planned genetic tests to verify that the first baby, born 26
embryo research December, is indeed a clone are still on hold. 5 Dec
02
First cloned baby 'due in Implantation experiments January' 27 Nov
02 Boisselier did reveal some details of Clonaid's cloning programme
on Sunday. She told the BBC that her medical team had created Cloned
stem cells may several hundred cloned embryos before conducting 10
implantation give new lease of life experiments. Two of these have
lead to live births, she says, with 8 Nov 02 three more expected by
the end of January.
Editorial: But Harry Griffin, head of the UK Roslin Institute and
part of the team who cloned Dolly the sheep in 1997, told New
Scientist that Brave new medicine such figures were "one of the more
unbelievable aspects of the 1 Dec 01 story".
Not now, Dr Miracle "I believe Ms Boisselier has claimed five
miscarriages, which [with 17 Mar 01 five successful
implantations] gives a 100 per cent implantation rate," he says.
"This is biologically possible, but IVF clinics Cloning FAQ only
manage an implantation rate of about 20 per cent and that's with
healthy embryos and implanting two embryos per woman." Do clones have
shorter lifespans or greater He added that in animals only between
one and two per cent of all susceptibility to cloned embryos make it
to a live birth, although this can be higher disease? Your questions
in some species. In cattle for example, if the cloned embryos can
answered be persuaded to divide until they have 120 cells, then 20
per cent go on to produce live calves. Archived Cloning Articles
"Clonaid have no track record but claim to have cloned hundreds of
embryos - it just doesn't ring true," says Griffin.
Korean investigation
While Clonaid has yet to support its claims with any evidence,
other agencies have begun investigations. The US Food and Drug
Administration is reported to have visited the company's Las Vegas
headquarters. Human cloning is not illegal in the US but any human
experiments would have required FDA approval.
In South Korea, a police raid has taken place on the offices of
BioFusion Tech Inc. - allegedly a subsidiary of Clonaid. BioFusion
has been under investigation since July when it claimed that three
Korean women were involved in a human cloning experiment and that one
was pregnant.A Korean investigator told the Yonhap news agency that
they could share information with the FDA, and that the FDA had said
it would launch a full-fledged investigation if the Korean evidence
provided any clues.
Exclusive coverage
It has also emerged that the journalist appointed by Clonaid to
organise independent genetic tests attempted to sell exclusive
coverage of the first child's cloning several months ago.According to
the New York Times, the former ABC News science editor Michael
Guillen approached CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, HBO and Fox Entertainment. He
offered a reality-based TV show, starting before the births, a Fox
spokesman said.The revelations have increased scepticism about
Guillen's independence from the Raelians. But Guillen has said that
he is not being paid by Clonaid.
By Howard Kurtz Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, January 6,
2003; Page C01
Does the Clonaid crowd deserve any coverage?
That's the question reverberating in media circles in the wake of
the group's spectacular -- and totally unproven -- claim of having
cloned two baby girls.
Why, you might wonder, did the cable networks give live coverage
to a wacky bunch who believe the human race was cloned by space
aliens? Why did the nation's newspapers give substantial space to the
followers of Rael, a former race car driver who says he was taken
aboard a spaceship and entertained by voluptuous female robots?
The cloniacs and their space-cadet spokeswoman, Brigitte
Boisselier, brought zero evidence to the table, even though they knew
their claim would be greeted with fierce skepticism. No picture of
the baby. No names for the parents. No DNA samples, no medical
records, no nothing. Just the promise of some evidence down the road,
to be validated by a former ABC newsman who once did a series that
took seriously claims for astrology, ESP and moving objects through
thought. And even as television shows have rushed to interview Rael
-- who insisted that CNN's Connie Chung call him "Your Holiness" --
the group keeps making excuses for why the promised DNA tests haven't
materialized.
Why not just ignore these characters?
The truth is it's not so easy.
Once the Raelians were on TV, lots of folks started buzzing about
their claim. At that point, the media have some responsibility to
shed light on the subject -- such as the fact that five successful
pregnancies in 10 attempts (as the group claims) is the longest of
long shots, based on past animal attempts.
Still, human cloning is hardly a scientific impossibility and, in
the wake of Dolly the sheep and all the other animal clones, is
probably inevitable.
And if the Raelians are just pulling off a spectacular hoax, well,
that's a pretty interesting yarn, too. (What do they hope to get out
of it? A movie deal?)
The initial coverage erred on the side of skepticism:
New York Times: "A sect that believes space travelers created the
human race by cloning said today that it had produced the first human
clone. . . . But the group's chief scientist gave few details and
offered no proof of the claim, which some cloning experts greeted
with skepticism."
The Washington Post: "The scientific director of a religious sect
that believes humans are clones of extraterrestrials today claimed
that the first human clone, a seven-pound baby girl nicknamed 'Eve,'
has been born at a secret location outside the United States."
Los Angeles Times: "A member of a religious movement that claims
space aliens created life on Earth announced Friday that her company
had produced the first human clone, but provided no scientific
proof."
None quite matched this New York Post headline: "CLONE KOOKS CLAIM
SUCCESS." Subsequent critical pieces -- the New York Times has run
several -- helped poke holes in the thin fabric of the Clonaid
claims. But some media watchers are still upset.
"The newspapers of America owe an apology to anybody who has ever
seen Big Foot tromp through the woods," wrote St. Paul Pioneer Press
columnist Joe Soucheray. "We also owe apologies to people who claim
to have seen images of the Blessed Virgin that show up on the sides
of mailboxes and UFOs."
Los Angeles Times columnist Tim Rutten derided "a crackpot cult"
-- consisting of "a bunch of kooks who operate a Canadian theme park
called UFOland" -- producing "an international media frenzy. And
while the majority of serious newspapers in the United States,
including the Los Angeles Times and New York Times, kept the story
off their front pages, dozens of others did not."
By Malcolm Ritter AP Science Writer Monday, January 6, 2003; 7:09
PM
NEW YORK &endash;&endash; The journalist who said he would oversee
DNA testing to verify a company's claims it had produced a human
clone said Monday he had dropped his efforts for lack of cooperation
and could not rule out the possibility of "an elaborate hoax."
Officials with Clonaid, the company that announced Dec. 27 the
birth of the world's first clone, initially promised DNA testing but
later backed off. Clonaid said the parents of the 7-pound baby girl
have refused to allow it."The team of scientists has had no access to
the alleged family and, therefore, cannot verify firsthand the claim
that a human baby has been cloned," said Michael Guillen, a former
ABC science editor who had offered to arrange the testing.Experts who
had been demanding independent verification said Clonaid has never
had credibility with the scientific community.
"We don't find it surprising that they are not in a position to
offer any data," said Sean Tipton, spokesman for the American Society
of Reproductive Medicine in Washington, D.C.
"We have been ignoring it because we don't view it as a
scientifically valid statement," said Natalie Dewitt, an editor at
Nature, the British science journal which published the milestone
data in 1997 on Dolly the cloned sheep.Clonaid was founded by the
Raelian religious sect that believes space aliens created life on
Earth, and chief executive Brigitte Boisselier acknowledges that
outside DNA testing would be needed to make the claim credible.
In a statement, Guillen said he had assembled experts to do the
work but suspended the effort Monday. "It's still entirely possible
Clonaid's announcement is part of an elaborate hoax intended to bring
publicity to the Raelian movement," he said.Guillen indicated he was
still willing to proceed. "When and if an opportunity to collect DNA
samples as promised does arise, however, the team stands fully
prepared to re-mobilize and conduct the necessary tests."
The freelance journalist has said previously he had no connection
to Clonaid. But he said in his statement Monday he has been
interested in doing a documentary on human cloning that would involve
Clonaid's work. He said he has covered the "principal players" in
human cloning since the cloning of Dolly the sheep was announced.The
New York Times reported Sunday that Guillen tried months ago to sell
exclusive coverage of Clonaid's first baby to the major broadcast
networks.
On Saturday, Boisselier said the baby's parents had promised to
give her a final answer Monday about whether they would allow DNA
tests. A spokesman for Guillen said his statement was not connected
to that decision.Clonaid did not return phone calls requesting a
response Monday.
Some scientists said Clonaid's two weeks of notoriety probably
won't do lasting damage to legitimate reproductive research. Indeed,
some believe it may have begun to educate the public on the
differences between the cloning of stem cells and other therapeutic
agents, and cloning to reproduce a baby.Others said it was a "big
mistake" for policy-makers to have included Clonaid with legitimate
scientists in congressional hearings and other science policy forums
during the past year."By association, they have done some damage,"
Dewitt said. "But they are so far removed from legitimate science
that I don't think it will cause a huge problem."
It is the 30th anniversary month of the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe
vs. Wade decision, which, along with subsequent rulings, allows
abortion on demand at any time and for any reason. Having already
decided, with the support of academics, clergy and journalists, that
certain categories and stages of life are not entitled to the
protection of law, why are so many appalled, outraged and surprised
when cloning arrives at the door?
Cloning is the unnatural fruit -- there will be many more --
produced when the root of the tree of life has been pulled out of its
nurturing soil and replanted into a soil of situational ethics that
serve the temporal interests and feelings of humanity. What was it a
few people said in 1973 about a slippery slope? We have slid a long
way since then, and cloning is but a way station where the rest of
humanity indulges itself in a slight gasp before resuming the
downward spiral.
Whether or not "doctor" and cultist Brigitte Boisselier and her
Clonaid operation have, in fact, cloned a girl named "Eve," the
horror expressed in some quarters is a little late.
Ross Clark, a father of two, wrote a column in the London Times
this week, asking why it's fine to "kill babies" in an abortion, but
not to create them through cloning, "Our fear of clinicians in white
coats is much greater when they are creating human life than when
they are destroying it," he noted. Clark thinks the population growth
fanatics don't mind when science kills, but they oppose anything that
would add to our numbers. "We are more inclined to support science
when it stops births than when it enables them," he said.
This is why pro-lifers favor returning to a uniform life ethic,
covering the unborn, the handicapped, the elderly, racial and
religious minorities, in short, all human life. Once one category of
humanity is declared unfit to live -- regardless of the reason -- all
others become at risk to the whims of society at a given moment. We
still recoil at what Hitler did to the Jews, gypsies, homosexuals and
the sick, but he was simply ahead of his time. Today, he might be
invited to speak at Princeton about his unique form of eugenics. Why
Princeton? It is the home of Dr. Peter Singer, the Australian
philosopher who believes human life is not sacred and can and should
be manipulated for whatever end the "healthy" and "fit" determine
would serve their current interests. In fact, Hitler might be a
candidate for cloning among those who believe his "work" should
continue.
Cloning might produce large armies, such as those bred for war by
the evil Saruman in "The Lord of the Rings." Clone wars might remove
any sense of morality or immorality about war since those who are
killing, or being killed, would be the fruits of soulless technology
and of no greater value (but less expense) than an airplane or
tank.
Some members of Congress, including many who have lost any moral
standing on this issue because of their support of abortion through
all nine months and even during delivery (known as "partial birth
abortion"), now express shock and outrage over the latest cloning
news. They are too late to be taken seriously. Having allowed the
process to begin and failed to do anything to stop it, they may pass
a law in hopes of slowing down the inevitable, but they will not
succeed.
Western culture has told God that we don't need or want Him. It
has told history that we will neither learn from it nor care. It
worships at the shrine of The Self, and in so doing it has produced a
type of "Rosemary's baby" that will be impossible to control absent a
revival of the things that once mattered most about life.
After 40 million (and counting) aborted babies in the United
States, who, or what, is going to stop cloning? And on what
grounds?
Cal Thomas hosts "After Hours " on Fox News Channel Saturdays at
11 p.m. ET. Direct all mail for Cal Thomas to: Tribune Media
Services, 435 N. Michigan Ave, Suite 1500, Chicago, Ill. 60611.
Readers may also send e-mail to: www.calthomas.com.
Surprisingly diverse rabbinical views cut across movement
lines.
Shelli Liebman Dorfman / Staff Writer
The claim by French bio-chemist Dr. Brigitte Boisselier that a
human infant has been cloned stirred reaction from Detroit's rabbis
that might be considered diverse &emdash; or even unexpected. At
issue are two distinct aspects of the cloning controversy: •
"medical cloning" &emdash; for medical research or repair of the
body; "reproductive cloning" &emdash; to create a genetic-replica
human being.
While many rabbis from divergent streams of Judaism are in
agreement that cloning to benefit medical research would be
acceptable, there is disagreement over the ethical and halachic
(Jewish legal) fine points of reproductive cloning. "The use of
cloning technology to help save diseased organs and repair cells
should be considered permitted, and even obligatory, under the
heading of saving a life," said Rabbi Daniel Nevins of the
Conservative Adat Shalom Synagogue.
But to reproduce a human being from the genetic material of
another human being, as opposed to a combination of two people's
genetic material, goes against what Judaism believes about the
creation of life." Orthodox Rabbi Herschel Finman, however,
challenges this negative view of reproductive cloning. "The creation
of life doesn't have to come from two people and still be
halachically and ethically acceptable," said Rabbi Finman of Oak
Park, who studied legal, medical and business ethics according to
Halachah, at Yeshiva College in Melbourne, Australia. He responded to
a statement by Israel's Chief Ashkenazic Rabbi Israel Meir Lau as
reported by the Associated Press. Orthodox Rabbi Lau said Judaism
favors technological developments and medical progress that can help
save a life or solve infertility problems &emdash; but rejects the
artificial creation of life.
Rabbi Finman disagrees. "The cloning of a human being is not
artificial," he said. "It's just shuffling around what already
exists. "The Talmud said, 'If all the scientists in the world got
together, they could not create the wing of the mosquito and put life
into it. That would be artificial.'" A statement from Chief Rabbi
Lau's office said, "The moment medical science tries to take upon
itself duties and areas which are not its responsibility &emdash;
such as shortening life, cloning or creating life in an unnatural way
&emdash; we must set down borders in order not to harm the Jewish
basic belief that there is a creator of the universe in Community
whose hands life and death are placed." Rabbi Finman said, "My fence
is just moved a little While I agree we must not shorten life, the
Torah says, 'HaShem will heal you,' and that healing comes through
doctors. The tools or wisdom given to scientists to discover
fertility techniques as solutions come from the Almighty."
Protecting Life One thing most rabbis agree on is the requirement
that any procedure be protective of the life and well-being of those
involved. "To me, cloning raises terrible fears of what illnesses
could be introduced," Rabbi Nevins said. "It is not only very unwise
but also an unethical policy to expose human beings to danger."
Rabbi Finman agrees that reproductive cloning may only be
permissible if "no side effects" were presented. He also says the
procedure must be performed only to help infertile couples and only
when it does not involve a donor uterus or donor DNA. In
acknowledging the varied interpretations of Halachah, Rabbi Finman
says, "A very good thing about Judaism is that there is no absolute
in determining Jewish law."
Reform Rabbi Paul Yedwab of Temple Israel is opposed to
reproductive cloning. "Every morning a Jew prays, 'Oh God, the soul
you have given me is a pure one,'" he said. "I interpret that to mean
each soul is a unique one. "Creating a human being goes against that
&emdash; as does the idea of reincarnation for the same reason
&emdash; and both, in my opinion, go against Jewish law," Rabbi
Yedwab says.
The Raelian sect believes humans were cloned by aliens An American
journalist appointed to verify claims that a US-based company linked
to the Raelian sect produced the first ever human clone has suspended
his investigation. Michael Guillen said it was "entirely possible"
that Clonaid's claims could be "an elaborate hoax". His announcement
comes after reports that he tried unsuccessfully to sell TV
programmes on the topic last year. Clonaid has refused offers from
leading US scientists to perform tests on the mother and infant, who
the group says was born on 26 December.
'Speculation'
"The team of scientists has had no access to the alleged family
and, therefore, cannot verify firsthand the claim that a human baby
has been cloned," said a statement from Mr Guillen. "It's still
entirely possible Clonaid's announcement is part of an elaborate hoax
intended to bring publicity to the Raelian movement," he added.
However, he said his team was prepared to conduct the tests if the
opportunity to collect DNA from the alleged clones became available.
Without independent tests, he said, "all we'll be left with is what
we have now - opinion and speculation being passed off as fact".
However, Clonaid says that the parents of baby Eve are reluctant to
have the DNA tests as they could be obliged by law to reveal their
identity.
Clonaid's claims have been met with widespread scepticism in the
scientific community. Dr Brigitte Boisselier, Clonaid's chief
executive, says she has implanted five cloned embryos, two of which
have already been born.
'Sympathetic'Mr Guillen says that when he learned that Clonaid
would be announcing cloned births, he proposed to put the claim of
successful cloning to the test. The leader of the Raelian cult, which
believes aliens created mankind, said they chose Mr Guillen to
conduct the tests because he was "sympathetic".
Before Clonaid's announcement, Mr Guillen offered networks a
reality-based show on the cloning process, which he would produce and
present for around $100,000, the New York Times reported. The paper
also said that it had been offered an article on the topic in May,
which had been turned down.
Mr Guillen has a PhD from Cornell University and taught physics at
Harvard before he moved into TV journalism. Correspondents say he has
a history of TV reports examining scientifically questionable
subjects like psychokinesis, astrology, auras, precognition and cold
fusion. Several years ago he was given a spoof award by the sceptics'
group the James Randi Foundation for what it called "promoting
pseudoscience and quackery".
Court case could overturn controls on human cloning
Gaby Hinsliff, chief political correspondent Sunday January 5,
2003 The Observer
Controls on human cloning in Britain could be overturned by a new
legal challenge from anti-abortion activists. The move comes amid
worldwide controversy over claims from an American religious sect to
have engineered the birth of the world's first cloned human
babies.
The Raelian cult, who believe in extra-terrestrial life, announced
yesterday that a second cloned baby has been born following the first
birth on Boxing Day, the latest to a lesbian mother in the
Netherlands. But the company has refused to provide proof of the
supposed births, which have been greeted with widespread scepticism.
The court case - which has led to calls to clarify the powers of the
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority - centres on the
creation of human embryos using cloning techniques which could
provide cures for diseases or 'spare part' transplant organs.
Anti-abortion campaigners object because it involves the creation
and then destruction of life. The Pro-Life Alliance will argue in the
House of Lords next month that since techniques such as those used to
create Dolly the sheep did not exist when the 1990 law was drawn up,
embryos created in such ways are not covered by it and therefore not
controlled by the HFEA. If the action succeeds, the case would not
only halt therapeutic cloning but leave the HFEA powerless to
regulate cloning for whatever purpose - although the law would still
ban the implanting of clones into a woman in Britain. The threat
highlights the HFEA's concerns that its powers are too loosely
defined to resist sophisticated court challenges.
'The HFEA has too much power, and it is power they have not
actually been given by Parliament,' said Josephine Quintavalle of
Comment on Reproductive Ethics, which is linked to the case.
Pro-lifers were encouraged by a surprise victory before Christmas,
when the High Court ruled that the HFEA had overstepped its powers in
giving the go-ahead for 'designer baby' techniques to be used to
allow the parents of toddler Zain Hashmi, who has a rare blood
disorder, to try for a second genetically matching baby who could
supply stem cells to help treat Zain. The Hashmis must wait while the
wrangle continues.
Yesterday, as the Department of Health said it was 'keeping under
review' the need to tighten the 12-year-old Human Fertilisation and
Embryology Act governing both developments, MPs called for
action.
'The law has to be revisited, or it's going to happen anyway
through the courts,' said Dr Ian Gibson, chairman of the Commons
science and technology committee. 'The whole definition of life is up
for grabs in a way it wasn't when the Act was written.' Although
implanting a clone into a woman is illegal under British law, the
fear is that a successful attack on the Act would destroy safeguards
ensuring that cloned embryos created for genuine research cannot find
their way into the hands of less scrupulous scientists.
Currently, anyone wanting to research 'therapeutic cloning' -
duplicating human embryos for research or treatments - must be
licensed and destroy the embryos at an early stage. The HFEA, under
new chairwoman, Suzi Leather, is pushing privately for its powers to
be clarified by Ministers to prevent more drawn-out court cases
affecting families.
'There are aspects of the Act that are difficult because we are
talking about an Act that was defined when infertility treatment was
regarded as something that would be rare,' said an HFEA spokeswoman.
The Pro-Life Alliance began its court battle last year with a victory
in the High Court, which ruled that cloned embryos were not covered
by the law. The Health Secretary, Alan Milburn, overturned that
verdict on appeal. The Alliance is now taking its case to the House
of Lords.
Scientists Dismiss Second Human Cloning Claim VOA News 05
Jan 2003, 14:29 UTC
Scientists are dismissing as a publicity stunt a second claim that
a cloned baby has been born. Scientists say members of the Raelian
movement, who claim a Dutch lesbian gave birth to a cloned baby on
Friday, have given no evidence, pictures or details of the birth.
Experts who are working on other human or animal cloning projects say
they believe the claim is as fake as the first one. The
Raelian-linked Clonaid company said last month a cloned girl
nicknamed Eve had been born to an American mother. The controversial
Italian embryologist Severino Antinori, who is working on his own
human cloning projects, called the claims false and depressing for
people doing serious research. He said announcements without
scientific proof only create confusion.
Harry Griffin, the British scientist who lead the cloning of Dolly
the sheep in 1996, says Clonaid is leading the media into a long
drawn-out publicity stunt. The New York Times is reporting in its
Sunday edition that the investigative journalist enlisted by Clonaid
to verify the authenticity of its claims tried to sell the story for
thousands of dollars to American media earlier this year. The report
says the journalist Michael Guillen proposed a reality-based
television program on the cloning effort to Fox Entertainment, but
that the idea was rejected.
Clonaid says it has given little information on the births out of
concern for the privacy of those involved. The company has also
declined to say where the embryos were fertilized and implanted in
the mothers and where the births took place, due to legal concerns.
Raelians believe humans were cloned from aliens 25,000 years ago. The
head of the Raelian movement, known as Rael, says he is striving for
eternal life through cloning.Clonaid says three more cloned babies
are due to be born before the end of the month. The first two claims
brought worldwide media attention and condemnation by religious
leaders.
The Associated Press Sunday, January 5, 2003; 9:17 AM
NEW YORK &endash;&endash; The former ABC News science editor who
said he would verify claims that the first human clone had been born
tried months ago to sell exclusive coverage of the cloning to the
major broadcast networks, according to a report published Sunday.
CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, HBO and Fox Entertainment all were approached by
freelance television journalist Michael Guillen, The New York Times
reported. At Fox, Guillen proposed a reality-based show on the
cloning process, starting before the births, the Times said. He even
offered to produce it and be the on-air host, but Fox rejected the
proposal. "We thought it was more appropriate for our news department
and we referred it to them," Joe Earley, a Fox spokesman, told the
Times.
Another network executive, who the Times did not identify, said
Guillen proposed an exclusive documentary on the cloning at a price
of more than $100,000. The executive said the offer would have given
the network too little editorial control. Guillen stepped into the
cloning spotlight a week ago when he announced he would organize
experts to independently test the claims of Clonaid, a company linked
to a religious sect that believes life on Earth was created by
extraterrestrials. The group claimed it had created the first cloned
human, a girl it said was born to an American mother Dec. 26, but no
DNA tests have yet verified the claim.
Brigitte Boisselier, Clonaid's chief executive, said Saturday that
the DNA testing on the child had been delayed because the child's
parents were concerned about legal ramifications if they came
forward. She said they promised to tell her Monday whether they would
allow the testing. Boisselier also announced Saturday that a second
child cloned by the group had been born to Dutch parents, though no
tests have verified that. Guillen, who said he was not being paid by
Clonaid to arrange the testing, also pitched a story on the cloning
process to the Times in May, saying he was the only reporter allowed
to follow a couple trying to have a baby through cloning involving a
Kentucky fertility specialist, the newspaper reported.
"During the better part of the past five years, I've cultivated
close relationships with all the major human cloning scientists
worldwide," Guillen wrote in his proposal, the Times said. "In fact,
I know more about what's going on than any of the individual players;
that's because they all confide in me." Editors of the Times refused
Guillen's offer, the newspaper said. Guillen holds a Ph.D. from
Cornell University and taught physics at Harvard before going into
television journalism. He worked at ABC News from 1988 until last
year. He has a written a few books, including "Five Equations That
Changed the World: The Power and Poetry of Mathematics," which was
named a book of the year by Publishers Weekly.
The controversial company Clonaid expects to unveil three more
cloned babies over the coming weeks, after recently claiming a Dutch
lesbian had given birth to the world's second cloned baby. But the
company, funded by the Raelian movement which believes the human race
was created by aliens, has so far refused to have their claims
independently verified.
Clonaid chief executive Brigitte Boisselier claims the company's
implantation program has produced a strong success rate."Before doing
implantation we produced several hundreds of embyos just for testing,
genetic tests and so on," Dr Boisselier told BBC television."But we
did 10 implantations and of the ten implantations, five of them were
successful."So two babies are born now and we're expecting the three
other ones by the end of January, beginning of February."Dr
Boisselier did not say where the three babies were due to be
born.
The first baby, Eve, was born on December 26 to a US couple in an
undisclosed location, followed by the second child, born to a Dutch
lesbian couple.The claim comes as scepticism mounts among the
scientific community.The credibility of the US journalist Clonaid has
enlisted to authenticate its claims with DNA tests has been called
into question. Reports have emerged that he tried to sell the story
months before the first births.Michael Guillen, a former science
editor at ABC television, had approached several broadcasters
offering exclusive coverage for more than $US100,000.
Raelian sect founder Claude Vorilhon earlier called a halt to
planned DNA tests after a Florida court summmoned him to a hearing to
decide whether to place Eve - supposedly a clone of her American
mother - under court protection."If there is any risk that this baby
is taken away from the family, it is better to lose your credibility
and not do the testing," Mr Vorilhon, who also also calls himself
Rael, said."Cloning is the first step to achieving eternal life," he
said.
The Canada-based Raelians believe humans were cloned from aliens
who landed on Earth 25,000 years ago. Dr Boisselier says Eve's
"parents" will authorise DNA tests to prove she was cloned only "when
they are ready". Legal problems could also complicate the testing,
she says."It's true that by having an independent expert going to
their place, or even to a secret location, the expert would have the
knowledge of who they are," she said. "And if the independent expert
is asked by a judge to reveal who they are, he will have to do
it."
LONDON, January 5 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - Clonaid, the
company that claims to have successfully cloned two human beings,
said on Sunday, January 5, that three more cloned babies were due to
be born in coming weeks, as skepticism mounted among the scientific
community.
Clonaid head Brigitte Boisselier, whose firm has links with the
Raelian sect, was speaking to BBC television after a second
purportedly cloned child was born on Friday, January 3. "We produced
several hundreds of embryos just for testing," said Boisselier,
herself a member of the Raelians.
"Among them five were successful. Two babies are born now and
we're expecting the three others by the end of January or beginning
of February." Boisselier did not say where the three babies were due
to be born. The first baby, Eve, was born on December 26 to a U.S.
couple in an undisclosed location, followed by the second child, born
to a Dutch lesbian couple. Meanwhile, the credibility of the U.S.
journalist enlisted by Clonaid to authenticate its claims with DNA
tests has been called into question, after reports emerged that he
tried to sell the story months before the first births.
Michael Guillen, a former science editor at ABC television, had
approached several broadcasters offering exclusive coverage for over
100,000 thousand dollars (euros). Raelian sect founder Claude
Vorilhon had earlier called a halt to planned DNA tests after a
Florida court summoned him to a hearing to decide whether to place
Eve -- supposedly a clone of her American "mother" -- under court
protection. "If there is any risk that this baby is taken away from
the family, it is better to lose your credibility and not do the
testing," said Vorilhon, who also calls himself "Rael". "Cloning is
the first step to achieving eternal life," he said. The Canada-based
Raelians believe humans were cloned from aliens who landed on Earth
25,000 years ago.
Boisselier said on Sunday that Eve's "parents" would authorize DNA
tests to prove that Eve was cloned only "when they are ready". Legal
problems could also complicate the testing, she said. "It's true that
by having an independent expert going to their place, or even to a
secret location, the expert would have the knowledge of who they are.
And if the independent expert is asked by a judge to reveal who they
are, he will have to do it."
On Saturday, January 4, the head of Russia's Molecular Genetics
Institute, Vyacheslav Tarantul, responding to the announcement of the
first birth of a human clone, warned that nearly all cloning efforts
have led to horrific biological deformations. "It is theoretically
possible to clone a human being, but who will take responsibility if
a monster is born? This risk exists in 99 percent of the cases,"
ITAR-TASS reported him as saying. "During cloning experiments on
animals, we have found anomalies in most cases - cancer, in
particular," Tarantul added. Islam & Cloning The permissibility
of the experiment in Islam sparked different viewpoints from
prominent Muslim scholars.
Al-Azhar, the highest religious reference in the Sunni world,
issued a fatwa ruling that human cloning is Haram (prohibited) and
must be stopped. On the same line, prominent Muslim scholar Sheikh
Yusuf Al-Qaradawi asserted that "viewed from the Islamic general
objectives, rulings, and texts, human cloning is completely
prohibited." However, Lebanon's top Shiite scholar Ayatollah Mohammad
Hussein Fadlallah endorsed a different viewpoint, allowing human
cloning if its positive aspects overweight negative ones. He
stressed, however, that it is prohibited to use the organs of a
cloned baby as "spare parts" in organs transplant operation.
In an interview with Tehran Radio on Tuesday, December 31,
Fadlallah argued that cloning does not contradict with the question
of creation or turns man into a creator. "Those who recently carried
out the cloning operation were guided by the divine law in
pollination and delivery," he said. "They did not get the elements of
their experiment from nowhere and therefore cloning is not about a
new law of creation but rather being guided by the divine law," added
the Shiite scholar. "Cloning is a great scientific event which
indicates man's genius in discovering the laws and systems created by
Allah and his attempt to capitalize on them in his practical and
scientific experiments," he said.
JUST CLONING AROUND Jack Knox Victoria Times Colonist Sunday,
January 05, 2003
Is it too late for Y2K?
I mean, three years ago the prospect got our knickers in a twist,
but today it seems a nice, total systemic meltdown could be the best
option for a planet suddenly sent spinning by technology that has not
only run amok, but has sprinted into the wrong hands.
The ship of discovery, once piloted by those with the wisdom to
match their newfound knowledge, has become the Exxon Valdez, six beer
and one bad decision away from the rocks. Examples of misapplied
science abound: North Korea has the bomb. Saddam may have one, too.
Osama has a video camera. The Raelians claim to have cloned a human
being. Diana Ross has a car. Your grandma has a DVD.
A few years ago, if someone suggested your granny had DVD, you
would have popped him in the mouth. Then you would have given her de
penicillin.No more. Now she's downloading pirated episodes of Murder
She Wrote and burning them to disc, auctioning off grandpa's Viagra
on eBay. It's unnerving. She's within three keystrokes and an
unintentional password of disabling the power grid for southern
Saskatchewan.
We're not terribly thrilled about North Korea having nukes,
either. Kind of like looking in the rear-view mirror and seeing Ozzie
Osbourne at the wheel of a school bus. It used to be that the nuclear
club was exclusive. Now it's easier to join than Costco.But it's the
Raelians who really grabbed our attention. According to their Web
site, the Raelian Movement began after a French sportswriter was
contacted by a being from another planet in 1973.
Rael, as the Frenchman is now known, describes the alien as being
about four feet in height, with dark hair, almond-shaped eyes, olive
skin and exuding harmony and humour. Apparently Rael was contacted by
Tattoo from Fantasy Island.Anyway, Rael says he was told that human
extraterrestrials, known as the Elohim, created man in their own
image, using DNA and genetic engineering. The Raelians are now trying
something similar, having founded Clonaid, a company which claims to
have cloned a baby girl named Eve, born on Boxing Day.
The scientific community is skeptical about this claim, but hey,
if we can celebrate a virgin birth on Dec. 25, we can suspend our
doubts about a cloned baby on Dec. 26. Rael says the next step will
be to clone an adult, without having to go through the growth
process, and to transfer memory and personality into this person. (It
would certainly save on the food bills, not to mention orthodontics,
T-ball fees and Eminem recordings.)
Not sure about Rael being the one in charge of all this, though.
It isn't the UFO stuff that's unsettling. Nor is it the fact that
Rael dresses like Hugh Hefner on the Starship Enterprise. No, what's
worrisome is Rael's past as a sportswriter. I've worked with a lot of
sportswriters and, frankly, I don't think they should be allowed to
breed, let alone be trusted with any form of reproductive
technology.
Put conventional scientists in charge of cloning, and they'll
build a new Einstein. But sportswriters? All you'll get is longer
line-ups at the press box buffet. That, and 700,000 women who look
just like Anna Kournikova. (Hmm, maybe this isn't such a bad idea
...)
Sorry. Sorry. No fair making fun of other people's beliefs,
particularly when they may be more widely held than you think. The
Raelians aren't the only ones looking to the stars: An Ipsos-Reid
poll released last week found 22 per cent of Canadians believe life
on other planets will be discovered in their lifetime. (A further 17
per cent believe life will be discovered in Toronto.)
Still, don't hold your breath. Raelian revelations aside, there's
something to be said about the conceit of people who think that after
all these millions of years, the great, once-in-an-eternity events --
Armageddon, an Earth-ending comet strike, contact with aliens, the
Vancouver Canucks winning the Cup -- will occur during their own
lifespan.
But I digress. We're supposed to be talking about applied science
ending up in the hands of people without the brains to use it. Thank
heavens most of the power still rests with rational leaders like
George W. Bush. We used to worry about the president until Jean
Chretien assured us that Bush is not -- repeat, not -- a moron, and
certainly not a man just itching for an excuse, as opposed to a
reason, to turn Baghdad into a parking lot.
Memo to Rael: Beam me up.
Jack Knox is a columnist with the Victoria Times Colonist
The sanctuary of the church was still decorated for Christmas. The
whiff of pine in the air came from a tree, not from cleaning
solution. The organist was the real thing, too. A pro. She never hit
a sour note, and we'd have known. The hymns all were old family
favorites.
As the music swelled and crested, the pastor stood with impeccable
timing and a nice sense of drama. He looked toward the closed coffin
in the aisle. And at us. At our red-rimmed eyes. At our obvious
anguish.
He shook his head and smiled."He was ornery," he said of the
deceased. It would not be one of "those" funerals, the kind where it
appears that simply leading a good life is not good enough. The kind
with so many embellishments that you finally wonder what saint they
are talking about, surely not the real person you came to mourn. But
this preacher never hit a sour note either. And we'd have known. Like
the music, Uncle Dick was an old family favorite. A Dutch uncle
If you're lucky, your family has one of these guys. For one thing,
he always showed up. At every holiday. At every birthday party. At
every wedding and funeral. Not just for his kids, but for nieces and
nephews. "My dad wasn't around much," one of my cousins said. But
Uncle Dick danced at her wedding. Once he told me - a typical Uncle
Dick kind of observation - that my brother's hair was too long and my
skirt was too short. College students home for the holidays, Steve
and I were reassured that we must look just the way we'd hoped.
Mildly scandalous.
Most people edit themselves when they're around their pastor. "But
Dick never did," the preacher said, miming perfectly our Aunt Peggy
putting her hands over her face and saying through the lattice of
fingers, "Oh, Diiiiiicckk." Making two syllables of his name. For 52
years. Uncle Dick would look a little shocked. "What? What? What'd I
say?"
He was not conflicted about modern life. A man's job was to take
care of his family. A man didn't "talk dirty" in front of women. A
man disciplines his children and spoils his grandchildren. A man
serves his country. A man goes to church on Sunday. Before the
football game.
A carpenter, he sent his boys to college - making their lives
easier, better than his had been. After retirement, he fixed
everything that sagged or creaked in their houses. His sons are good
men, a family trait owed not to genetics but to the power of
observation.
One of the most offensive questions in the reliably offensive
debate about human cloning is whether men now are unnecessary. As if
all we expect of them is a dose of their DNA. We joke about cloning
the good ones, as if we could find them in a petri dish. The ones who
take the training wheels off your bike and help you balance the rest
of your life. The ones who dance at your wedding. The men who build
things and fix things.
Necessary men. No eloquent pretense. Just a lifetime of being
real. And real good.
Sun January 5, 2003 10:37 AM ET By Katherine Baldwin
LONDON (Reuters) - A cloning firm founded by a UFO sect defended
Sunday its claim to have produced the world's first two cloned babies
and said it would not pressure the parents to undergo DNA tests to
silence skeptics.The Dutch branch of the Raelian movement, which
believes the human race was created by aliens, said Saturday that a
Dutch lesbian had given birth to a cloned baby.
That claim comes after the sect and cloning firm Clonaid said in
December that a 31-year-old American had given birth to the first
human clone, named Eve. No scientific evidence has been
provided.Scientists have branded the claims as a baseless publicity
stunt.In the Netherlands, where human cloning is banned, the
government said it was investigating the second birth but pointed out
there was no proof to support the sect's claim.Clonaid Chief
Executive Brigitte Boisselier told BBC television Sunday she wanted
DNA testing to happen as soon as possible but said she would not rush
the parents. She acknowledged the public would remain incredulous
even with DNA.
In the meantime, another three cloned babies should be born by
late January or early February after five out of 10 embryo
implantations proved successful, Boisselier said."Even if we have a
legal contract saying they (the parents) should do it (DNA
testing)...I have no heart to push them in that direction and I
prefer to say let's wait until they are really ready to do it,"
Boisselier told the BBC's Breakfast with Frost from Canada.The
parents are wary of undergoing DNA tests since experts could be
obliged by law to reveal their identity, she said.A Florida attorney
has asked a U.S. state court to appoint a legal guardian for baby
Eve. Clonaid has refused to present the child publicly, say where it
is or show medical evidence of the cloning.
CLOSE ENCOUNTER
Boisselier would not disclose where the second baby had been born.
"The parents are a lesbian couple from Holland, and from what I heard
from their voices, they are very happy," she said.The Raelian
movement's profile has fed skepticism over their claims. The French
founder of the movement, Claude Vorilhon, who calls himself Rael,
defended his cult's theory Sunday that cloning was the first step
toward attaining eternal life.Vorilhon told the BBC he had an
encounter with extra-terrestrials in 1973 when he was a racecar
magazine journalist.
"Through DNA and genetic engineering they created our life on
Earth, they created synthetic life from scratch, from dust," he
said.In an interview with Germany's Der Spiegel magazine, Vorilhon
said he had discouraged Boisselier from presenting proof that baby
Eve had been cloned because of the pending court case."I have advised
Dr Boisselier to put her scientific reputation at stake rather than
have the child taken from the mother. Now the child must be
protected. That is more important than anything else," he told the
magazine.
In cloning, the nucleus is removed from an egg cell and replaced
with a nucleus from a cell of the animal to be cloned. It this is
done at just the right time and in the right way, the egg cell starts
to divide as if it had been fertilized by sperm. The resulting embryo
is only an exact genetic duplicate of the mother if the mother's own
egg cell was used
By Toby Sterling Associated Press Writer Saturday, January 4,
2003; 9:59 PM
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands &endash;&endash; Clonaid, the company that
claims to have produced the first human clone, said Saturday it has
produced a second one &endash; a girl born to a Dutch lesbian.
Neither baby has been confirmed to be a clone by genetic testing,
and mainstream scientists are skeptical of the company's claims.
Clonaid spokeswoman Nadine Gary said in a telephone interview the
child was born Friday night, but declined to say where. Clonaid vice
president, Thomas Kaenzig, said the baby is a girl whose parents are
two Dutch women. "It's a homosexual couple, a lesbian couple from
Holland. The baby's doing fine. They're very happy and excited about
it, and so are we," he told Associated Press Radio, speaking from an
undisclosed location in the Dominican Republic.
Gary said she expects the second baby will undergo genetic testing
to show it is a clone, with DNA identical to that of its mother. The
group made a similar promise about Eve, a cloned girl purportedly
born to U.S. parents on Dec. 26. But Clonaid now says the parents of
that baby are balking at testing.
Brigitte Boisselier, Clonaid's chief executive and top scientist,
told The Associated Press Television News on Saturday that the
parents have promised to tell her Monday whether they will allow DNA
testing to confirm the claim. The second baby's name had not been
revealed. In television interviews, Boisselier has said the parents
of the second baby want to remain anonymous.
Spokeswoman Gary said that, while the parents are Dutch, the birth
did not take place in the Netherlands, where cloning is illegal. "The
parents have Dutch nationality, but they are not in Holland," Gary
said.
Clonaid was founded by the leader of the Raelians, a sect that
believes aliens created life on Earth. Clonaid sells "cloning"
services and products, and may benefit from the publicity around its
claims, whether they are true or false. Scientists have successfully
cloned mammals such as pigs and sheep, but the technology is not
reliable and most scientists say it is difficult, unethical and risky
to attempt to clone humans.
LONDON, England (Reuters) - A religious cult that believes mankind
was created by aliens has announced the world's second cloned baby
has been born to a Dutch woman.
Clonaid, a cloning firm linked to the Raelian cult, claims to have
engineered the birth. It announced last month that it had produced
the first human clone, born to a 31-year-old American woman on
December 26.
Cloning sidesteps the traditional process of reproduction, in
which the male sperm fertilises the female egg. Instead, human
cloning creates a person from an embryo by transplanting the
DNA-containing nucleus of a person's cell into a woman's egg whose
nucleus has been removed.
Here are key facts about the chronology of cloning:
February 24, 1997: Scientists at Scotland's Roslin Institute
announce successful reproduction of a sheep named Dolly using DNA
from a single adult sheep cell. The team took a normal embryo cell
from an adult sheep and removed its nucleus. They then took a cell
from another sheep's mammary gland and used an electric current to
fuse it into the emptied cell.
March 4, 1997: U.S. President Bill Clinton issues an executive
order prohibiting the use of federal funds for human cloning, citing
"profound ethical issues."
July 1997: The British scientists who made Dolly clone Polly the
lamb, who carries human genes. They hope to clone herds of identical
sheep that can produce human proteins for medical use.
December 1997: Science magazine proclaims the cloning of Dolly the
leading scientific advance of the year.
May 1999: The Roslin Institute is bought by U.S. biotechnology
Company Geron Corporation. Shortly afterwards, Japan, India and most
European countries ban cloning or impose laws supervising
research.
February 2002: Japanese researchers who cloned a dozen mice report
that virtually all the animals died early, casting doubts on the
safety of cloning. The same month, scientists report that cloned mice
have become obese.
February 2002: Scientists at Texas A&M University say they
cloned a house cat and present a two-month-old kitten they call cc,
short for carbon copy.
May 2002: A Lexington, Kentucky fertility expert, Panayiotis
Zavos, tells a congressional panel "2002 will be the year of the
clones" and says he is working to clone a human later in the year. He
urges Congress to keep cloning legal so it can be regulated.
November 2002: Dr Severino Antinori, an Italian fertility expert,
says he expects a patient to deliver a healthy cloned baby in January
2003 and that two other women are carrying cloned embryos.
December 27, 2002: Clonaid, a company associated with a group that
believes mankind was created by aliens, announces first human clone,
a baby girl weighing 7 pounds (3.1 kg) and delivered by Caesarean
section, was born December 26.
January 4, 2003: The head of the Raelian movement in the
Netherlands says a second cloned baby girl was born on January 3.
Both child and mother are declared healthy.
LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Human clones are likely to be
unhealthy and such experiments should be banned, the head of the
institute that created Dolly the sheep said on Saturday, hours after
a cult said it had produced the second cloned baby.
Harry Griffin of the Roslin Institute in Scotland, which made
history by cloning Dolly from an adult sheep in 1996, told Reuters
the claims by Clonaid, a group linked to the UFO-obsessed Raelian
religious sect, were probably bogus. "Clonaid have made claims of two
births, but of yet provided no evidence that either baby exists, no
evidence from DNA tests, and as yet, therefore, there is no reason to
believe this is anything other than a long, drawn out publicity
stunt." But if cloned babies have been produced, the experiments
should be stopped, Griffin said. "I think its entirely unacceptable
for groups like Clonaid to be gambling with the health of children,"
he said.
Griffin said Clonaid's claim of a high success rate in its human
cloning experiment flew in the face of years of research into cloning
in other species. "There is a lot about this story that doesn't ring
true. Success rates in every other species that have been cloned have
been low, with lots of problems for the fetus and newborn clone," he
said. "Attempts to clone monkeys have been entirely unsuccessful and
the sort of successes claimed by Clonaid are totally at odds with all
past history of cloning other species."
Dolly the sheep is still alive but suffers from severe arthritis.
Griffin said scientists are unsure whether her health problems are a
result of her being a clone, but countless other experiments have
shown that clones are often unhealthy. "There is a whole raft of
serious physiological deformities reported in clones, and even in
entirely healthy animals its not entirely clear they are normal," he
said.
The process of cloning involves taking the genes of an adult --
the instructions for life that make every organism unique -- and
transferring them into an embryo, turning it into a genetic twin of
the original. But Griffin said that although the clone has the same
genes as the adult, there can be differences between the way genes
behave, which often means the embryos of clones cannot grow to term,
die shortly after birth or live crippled by disease. "You've got to
persuade the 40,000 genes in that cell to stop beha ving as if they
are in a mammary gland cell, or a skin cell or whatever, and start
behaving as if they are in an embryo," he said. "We don't know how
this reprogramming takes place. One, several or more of the genes can
be inappropriately expressed."
Often cloned embryos do not survive to produce a live birth.
Sometimes clones die shortly after birth, and other times they
develop serious health problems later in life, he said. "All these
things have been reported in the clones of cattle, sheep, pigs,
goats, mice, rabbits. And there's no reason to believe that similar
problems will not arise in the cloning of a child," he said
It is illegal in the United States to buy or sell human body
parts&endash;but an exception has slipped through some legal cracks:
eggs. In ads placed in campus newspapers, so-called egg brokers
dangle riches of tens of thousands of dollars before young women with
the right pedigree of looks, talent, and SAT scores. Their eggs,
carrying that pedigree, are wanted by infertile women. To the donor
it might sound like a deal; in fact it's an ordeal.
For about a month, the donor actually turns her body over to the
process. She must inject herself daily with hormones that stimulate
her ovaries to produce up to several dozen ripened eggs rather than
the usual one. These mature eggs are sucked out of her swollen
ovaries with needles inserted through the vaginal wall. That is not
especially pleasant. But the major risks relate to the heavy-duty
drug treatments. In about 1 in every 100 women a "hyperstimulation"
condition balloons the ovaries to the size of grapefruits and the
belly fills with fluid, requiring hospitalization. There is a real
but rare danger that an ovary will rupture or be irreversibly
damaged, or even that a heart attack or stroke will occur. Brokers
that solicit donors don't have to talk about this.
Safety warning. One Stanford student had a stroke while being
treated for egg donation. Faced with student loans, she was one of
many girls attracted by a broker's ad in the Stanford Daily offering
$50,000 for the right eggs. A year ago, she told Stanford Magazine,
"I wish I had been better warned." Warning patients of risks is a
basic commandment in medicine. The American Society for Reproductive
Medicine has developed guidelines that call for independent medical
and psychological counseling about these risks. It also recommends a
cap of $5,000 on donor compensation. The group is concerned that
heftier payments might tempt donors to downplay risks. Jeffrey
Goldberg, the head of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility at
the Cleveland Clinic, believes the guidelines are on target, but "not
all centers adhere to them." Unless the profession finds ways to
enforce its standards, Goldberg believes, the government will step
in. But even if standards are forced on the clinics, egg brokers and
their anonymous clients are not subject to any of these professional
constraints.
The use of egg donors is increasing at nearly 20 percent annually,
as more women delay childbearing to the point where their own eggs
are in trouble. (If human cloning, which relies on ripe eggs, becomes
a reality, it will call for even more donors.) Though some years off,
new technology might help. Scientists are finding ways to ripen eggs
in test tubes rather than in women's bodies, eliminating the risk of
ovary-stimulating drugs. And frozen egg technology will enable women
to store their own eggs for later use&endash;rather than look to
vulnerable students in search of tuition payments. &endash; Bernadine
Healy, M.D.
It's all downhill from here Saturday January 04, 2003;
10:07 AM
My shoelaces tell me we've reached the pinnacle of human
existence. Mine won't stay tied.
You know you're pretty far along in the evolutionary process when
your inventions are designed to not actually function. I'll tell you
one thing: You never see a squid walking around with his shoestrings
undone. My laces slip apart moments after I tie them. It's
embarrassing. This is a skill I learned in kindergarten, and now I
can't do it successfully. Thankfully, all that investment in toilet
training still is working out pretty well.
The laces are just rebellious. They like doing their own thing.
They've tasted freedom, and it's for them. They enjoy
flip-flip-flipping every time I take a step. They get a jolt out of
dragging through puddles. Seriously: If YOU were a shoelace, how
would you get your thrills?
It's our fault. We did it. We've engineered them this way. They're
round. They're polyester. They aren't meant to lace. What is wrong
with us?
The whole thing lends credence to the theory by that cloning group
that we, as a species, were cultivated by aliens. Here's what they
aren't telling us, though: Once we've rendered ourselves completely
helpless, the aliens intend to eat us. If you think about it, all of
our apparel is moving toward dysfunction. Pants. No longer meant to
stay up. They're not even meant to cover your lower torso any more.
Teenage boys, who represent our FUTURE, just put 'em on and let 'em
drop to the ground.
Contact lenses. Not meant to make you see better. Again, it's the
teenagers. They're buying contact lenses with wild tiger patterns or
deep pools of blue. These lenses actually blind you. Teenagers don't
bump into things, though. They can't walk around. They've already got
the whole problem with the droopy pants.
What's next? Belts that don't buckle. Watches that don't tell
time. Sweaters that make you shiver. One day, when evolution has run
its course, we will be a species of 8-foot-tall beings with useless,
spindly arms and rotund tummies. But our noses will be very tough
after centuries of falling on them.
Ottawa should not let the Raelians scare it into an inappropriate
cloning law, says health policy researcher TIMOTHY CAULFIELD
Saturday, January 4, 2003
If you believe the reports coming from the religious cult known as
the Raelians, the first human clone was recently born.
Though I remain skeptical about the truth of this claim --
especially because the Raelians are balking on whether to allow
genetic testing to confirm that the infant is, indeed, a clone --
such stories once again highlight the need to pass laws that govern
the entire area of reproductive genetics. And, in fact, Canada is in
the midst of just such a policymaking exercise. Parliament will be
debating Bill C-13, the Assisted Human Reproduction Act, in the very
near future.
Legislators, however, need to be careful not to let these
spectacular (and grossly unethical) actions deflect from rational
policy development. They need to be careful not to conflate the
issues associated with reproductive cloning with those associated
with the use of cloning technology in other contexts. Reproductive
cloning, in general, is condemned by both ethicists and those in the
scientific community. There is, however, much less social consensus
about "therapeutic cloning" -- that is, the use of cloning technology
for research purposes, such as the creation of cloned stem-cell lines
or, perhaps, human tissue for transplantation.
Taken as a whole, few countries have specific cloning laws. Those
that have regulated the area have chosen to ban reproductive cloning.
There is, however, a great deal of variation in how countries deal
with therapeutic cloning. For example, California, Britain, Singapore
and Israel allow therapeutic cloning.
A number of countries, such as Ireland and Germany, have long
banned all research involving human embryos; these prohibitive laws
seem closely tied to a specific cultural or historic context, such as
Ireland's strong Catholic tradition or the memory in Germany of the
Nazis' eugenic policies. Other countries, such as Australia and
France, have taken a middle-ground approach, allowing some forms of
embryonic stem-cell research but banning therapeutic cloning; if Bill
C-13 is passed as is, Canada will adopt such an approach.
Why the great diversity in approaches in such culturally similar
countries? Do Canadians really feel so differently about therapeutic
cloning as compared to Californians or Britons that a criminal
sanction with a heavy prison sentence is required? Indeed, there are
few other human activities that have met such different regulatory
responses from such similar nations.
Available evidence indicates that most of the public supports the
use of cloning technology for research purposes.
A 2002 Ipsos-Reid poll found that six in 10 Canadians approve of
the creation of cloned human embryos for collecting stem cells. This
seems a significant amount of support given that the controversial
terms "embryo" and "cloning" are used and that the survey question
makes no mention of potential therapeutic benefit. A study by
PricewaterhouseCoopers did relate the technique to potential
treatments, specifically to the cloning of human organs for
transplant, and found that three-quarters of respondents said it was
either very or somewhat acceptable. These findings are consistent
with opinion research done in other countries, including the United
States and Britain.
Despite such support, a sector of the public -- about 10 per cent
to 20 per cent in Canada -- is steadfastly opposed to these
activities. For this sector, no amount of scientific or potential
therapeutic benefit can justify the research. As such, policymakers
are left without a clear public mandate. In July, the U.S.
President's Council on Bioethics explicitly noted this lack of
consensus; it concluded that a ban on all forms of human cloning was
not justified and that a moratorium should be imposed to give time
"to seek moral consensus" -- a surprising result given the
conservative position of the Bush administration.
I believe the international variation in cloning laws is a symptom
of the deep moral ambiguity that surrounds reproductive genetics.
With so much disagreement about the risks and benefits of cloning
technologies, some countries have chosen to simply ban all forms of
cloning involving human tissue. This is a mistake. Policymakers need
to recognize that this is an area that will remain clouded by social
uncertainty. All laws, especially criminal bans, need clear
justifications. As noted in a 1982 federal report, The Criminal Law
in Canadian Society, criminal law should be an instrument of "last
resort" and should only be used to respond to "conduct which is
culpable, seriously harmful, and generally conceived of as deserving
of punishment." None of these elements are satisfied in the context
of therapeutic cloning.
The Canadian government should not let the Raelians scare it
into an inappropriate cloning law. Instead, it should amend Bill C-13
to make therapeutic cloning a carefully regulated, rather than
banned, activity. Such an approach seems a much better way to
recognize and respect the broad diversity of views relevant to this
complex area. As recently argued by Australian scholars Brendan
Gogerty and Dianne Nicol, "the public tends to demand prohibition of
conduct that is universally opposed, but expects issues of moral
ambiguity to be regulated." Timothy Caulfield holds the Canada
research chair in health law and policy at the University of
Alberta.zzz
Back to page
top
Fantasy of cloning more fearsome than its reality The truth is,
we can't handle two of any of us
PHILIP MARCHAND BOOKS COLUMNIST, Jan. 4, 2003. 10:05 AM
It doesn't matter that the French journalist and cult leader who
calls himself "Rael" is a charlatan on the order of L. Ron Hubbard,
the late founder of Scientology. When he announced the other day that
his "scientists" had brought to birth the world's first human clone,
it jolted us. We know that if his announcement turns out to be a
fraud &emdash; as it probably will &emdash; there are still lots of
people in white lab coats who are dying to do something like this,
and they will succeed, sooner or later.
I hate the idea of human cloning, but then I'm by temperament one
of those peasants who march with torches and pitchforks on Dr.
Frankenstein's Castle. Cease these unholy doings! Don't ask me to
debate the issue.
It's an intuitive thing, partly. I like the human race as it is. I
don't want it tampered with by Raelians, or by more respectable
scientific minds, who dream of a post-human era in which we fiddle
with genes all we want.
Perhaps, these people speculate, we'll create a super-race of
human beings who can solve quadratic equations in a second. Perhaps
we'll foster a much nicer species by removing our warlike and
belligerent genes and replacing them with genes that encourage us to
obey pedestrian signals even when there's not a car in sight. With
luck, the entire human race will end up just like people who live in
Ottawa.
Chalk up another triumph for the progress of science.
Actually, people who experiment with cloning are not so much
scientists as the kind of scientific "projectors" satirized by
Jonathan Swift in Gulliver's Travels. In that book, projectors
conduct experiments to extract sunbeams out of cucumbers, breed naked
sheep, and produce a race of mathematical geniuses via edible wafers
on which mathematical propositions are written with a special
tincture. "This the student was to swallow upon a fasting stomach,
and for three days following eat nothing but bread and water. As the
wafer digested, the tincture mounted to his brain, bearing the
proposition along with it."
This kind of scientific project has a long history in the West,
dating back to the alchemists of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance
who thought they could transform things employing a species of
scientific magic. It's the kind of thinking that Rael, whose cult is
based on a worship of scientific technology, demonstrates when he
proclaims, "Once we can clone exact replicas of ourselves, the next
step will be to transfer our memory and personality into our newly
cloned brains, which will allow us to live forever."
Or live long enough to see the Liberals lose a federal election,
anyway. Reality has a way of thwarting scientific magic,
unfortunately &emdash; or fortunately. In last Sunday's Star, a
writer named Ronald Bailey pointed out a few such realities about
cloning. He mentioned that a human clone "would be a complete human
being who happens to share the same set of genes with another person.
Today, we call such people identical twins."
He further observed that even identical twins are far from "exact
replicas" of each other, and so nobody's going to produce an exact
replica of himself or herself through cloning, or bring back dead
children. Finally, he pointed out that animal cloning so far has
produced dismal results, with only a tiny percentage of such clones
surviving for any length of time.
Bailey's sobering words will probably have little effect on public
consciousness, because "cloning" is much more a construct of the
emotions and the imagination than an actual technical procedure. It's
a dream or nightmare. Some people, for example, really would like
exact replicas of themselves. You see it in fathers who bully their
sons into choosing their occupations, cultivating their personal
habits, and adopting their opinions. Ralph Waldo Emerson, when he saw
this thing going on, protested eloquently: "You are trying to make
that child another you. One's enough."
I love that "One's enough." One's enough of me, and one's enough
of you, gentle reader. Nobody's yearning for the day when they can
clone us.
The normal person shudders at the thought of an exact replica of
himself or herself, anyway. I remember years ago when, in my circle
of acquaintances, I was sometimes confused with another man with the
same first name and a slightly similar appearance. He would sometimes
be confused with me, likewise. Relations between us were distinctly
cool.
Fraternal or identical twins may like each other or not &emdash;
it depends on a lot of things &emdash; but for the rest of us, our
natural response to a double is hostility. That's why we sometimes
joke about our "evil twin," when referring to a person who is our
double in some respect. It's like Edgar Allen Poe's story, "William
Wilson," where the narrator is driven crazy by a man with an eerie
similarity to him, a man who seems to be his alter ego.
"The feeling of vexation," the narrator recalls, "grew stronger
with every circumstance tending to show resemblance, moral or
physical, between my rival and myself." In a frenzy of rage, he
carves up his double with a sword.
Can you imagine what would happen if Rael's vision came true?
Here you have your exact replica, with his newly cloned body and
his newly cloned brain.
You're waiting for the moment, just before you die, when you can
conveniently transfer your memory and personality into this waiting
vessel and so gain a new lease on life. But he doesn't want your
memory and personality. In fact, he'd willingly carve you up with a
sword to prevent your dumping that memory and personality on his
perfectly nice, unsullied brain.
The news columns are semi-agog with the latest announcement that
still another species has been cloned, this time the most dangerous
of all: homo supposedly sapiens. It doesn't exactly add to the
credibility of this latest, oh-so-scientific announcement &emdash; A
Clone is born &emdash; that it should come from someone who (a)
believes human life was brought to Earth by extraterrestrials and (b)
is French. The quality of French science has been deteriorating
steadily since Madame Curie, till now it begins to approach the level
of French politics.
The trend is personified by Dr. Brigitte Boisselier, the head of
something called Clonaid, which sounds like a corporation out of
Woody Allen's "Sleeper." On the whole, I'd put more stock in Steven
Spielberg's E.T., who at least wasn't trying to start up his own
religion, clone farm or IPO. Dr. Boisselier is also Bishop Boisselier
of the International Raelian Movement, which isn't easy to describe.
Think of Amos 'n' Andy's Mystic Knights of the Sea conflated with a
UFO fan club. The only surprising thing about Dr. Boisselier's
announcement was that it wasn't made in Roswell, N.M. (The Raelians
preferred Hollywood, Fla.)
But the good doctor and right reverend bishop promises that more
clones are in utero and ready to pop, so there's still time for her
to make it to Roswell and Area 51 for the next more or less blessed
event. It would be the perfect locale. Everything in this scenario
was perfectly predictable, right down to the nickname of the new baby
&emdash; Eve. Or as I've often thought while relishing really bad
sci-fi flicks, "Who writes this stuff?" It isn't the nutcases that
scare me, any more than the B movies did. And for the same reason:
All the special effects seem so phony. They don't seem to have
changed basically since the days of "Flash Gordon" and "Ming the
Merciless." The sheer commercialism of it all is as transparent as
ever. Much like the special decoder ring that, after considerable
effort on our young part, decoded only the name of a breakfast
cereal. Talk about anticlimax. One suspects that all this
hyperventilation over the First Human Clone will lead to a similar
letdown. And that all these great scientists behind Cloning for Fun
and Profit will turn out to be more Inspector Clouseau than Louis
Pasteur.
What worries me are the quite respectable advocates of cloning.
They come in an impressive number of models: The guys in suits and
ties who appear before congressional committees and look, talk and
act as if they were clones, all duly outfitted with the same
techno-condescending vocabulary. The celebrity victims who seek only
the good of mankind by duplicating it (mankind) for research
purposes. The university administrators who explain why cloning isn't
cloning when it's Therapeutic instead of Reproductive, lest we be
confused on noticing that in both cases the technique is exactly the
same. Then there are the politicians who think they are striking some
sort of Solomonic compromise by proposing to create life with the
assurance that it will soon be destroyed which is supposed to be
comforting instead of doubly frightening.
Scary, too, are the entrepreneurs who have no doubt that, once
this profitable little genie is out of the bottle, it'll be a cinch
to get him/her/it/them back in once they've cashed in their stock
options. On balance, I would prefer the old-fashioned Vincent Price
of the drive-in movies &emdash; somebody chortling and frothing at
the mouth as he tries to outfit a fly with a human head and
vice-versa. Or a vampiric Bela Lugosi rubbing his hands with glee at
the prospect of draining the fresh blood he desperately needs from
some photogenic babe. The mad scientists in the movies didn't prepare
us for the real ones, who appear so sane. They may think themselves
in quite a different category from the Dr. Boisseliers and Raelian
company, but they're up to the same thing.
They, too, are talking about moving beyond outdated ethical limits
and becoming our own Creators, but their vocabulary is scientific and
their euphemisms practiced as they calmly explain the benefits of
putting these clusters of embryonic cells to good use at last. Hey,
youth is wasted on the youngest of us, and they were going to be
destroyed, anyway .
When Goethe said that nothing was so frightening as ignorance in
action, he may not have considered the results of knowledge in
action, especially when divorced from wisdom. Allow me to put in a
word for the zanies. However dubious their claims, however full of
hubris their aims, their objective is the most marvelous thing in the
world: a human baby. And while they're trying to produce somebody's
identical twin instead of child, at least they don't propose to
sacrifice it in order to extend the lifespan of the rest of us. Their
baby isn't just a means to our end. It is its own reason for being.
Immanuel Kant, who had a thing about using persons as things, would
be pleased.
But what is one to say of the eminent scientists, the sympathetic
actors and the oh-so-moderate and reasonable political figures who
explain that, while nobody in his right mind would be in favor of
allowing a human clone be born, there's nothing wrong with creating
one to serve our own purposes &emdash; so long as we kill it at a
very early age. Maybe after just a few days in vitro, or a week, or a
month, or three, or . There's the real horror.
Paul Greenberg is a nationally syndicated columnist.
The announcement of the possible first live-born human clone came
as a shock to many. And it should.
However, what the Raelians claim to have done is at its most basic
level no different from what numerous biotech companies in this
country, and elsewhere, are attempting to do. As observers of this
issue know, there are several biotech companies and university
research labs engaged -- or soon will be -- in the mass production of
human embryos for research purposes. The human embryos will be
harvested for their material, then destroyed.
This grisly prospect -- creating human life merely to conduct
research on it -- must be outlawed.
Some proponents of human cloning would have society believe that
there are two different types of cloning: so-called reproductive and
so-called therapeutic. Science, however, tells us that there are not
two types of cloning -- there is only one, and it always results in
the creation of a new human embryo.
The essential point: Cloning is cloning is cloning, and all
cloning is the same.
Whether the embryo created through the process of nuclear
somatic-cell transfer (the technical name for cloning) is destined
for implantation or for destructive research that ultimately kills
him or her -- it is the same, and it should be banned.
Some Congress members who favor cloning in certain circumstances
are offering a bill that bans the implantation of clonal human
embryos while at the same time authorizing biotech companies to
create thousands of human embryos.
Let us be clear: This proposal is not in any way a ban on human
cloning. It is an endorsement of human cloning that attempts to
restrict some of the ways the human clones may be used.If we do not
ban the cloning of human embryos now, we will quickly find ourselves
unable to put the genie back in the bottle.The only solution to the
problem now facing humanity is to act quickly and to ban all human
cloning now.
Along with Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., I have authored a bipartisan
bill that bans all human cloning. The House has passed such a bill,
and the president has indicated his strong support for this measure.
Congress and the country can afford to wait no longer.
Sen. Sam Brownback is a Republican senator from Kansas.
Reuters Friday, January 3, 2003; 7:11 PM Includes material from
HEALTH-CLONE-DUTCH
By Frances Kerry
MIAMI (Reuters) - A Florida attorney who asked a state court this
week to appoint a legal guardian for the baby girl purported to be
the first human clone said on Friday that the court had set a hearing
in the case for later this month.
Clonaid, set up by a cult that believes aliens created mankind,
said in Florida a week ago that it had produced the first cloned
baby. It refused to present the child publicly, say where it was or
show medical evidence of the cloning. The company, whose claim drew
widespread skepticism among scientific experts, said on Friday that a
second cloned child was due to be born this weekend in Europe to a
lesbian couple.
Attorney Bernard Siegel filed a petition with the state juvenile
court in Fort Lauderdale on Tuesday aiming to protect the first
purported human clone, saying the child was being exploited and may
have suffered birth defects. He said on Friday that at the
arraignment hearing in court on Jan. 22, the parties in the case
would be expected to appear before the judge and the alleged parent
or legal guardian would have to admit, deny or consent to the
petition he filed.
"If they are served and fail to appear that could constitute
consent to an adjudication of the child being a dependent child, and
could ultimately result in loss of custody," Siegel told Reuters. He
added however that his intention was not to get the child removed
from the mother, but to have a court guardian appointed. Siegel has
also acknowledged that the court would probably have no jurisdiction
unless the child is in Florida.
'ALIENS STARTED HUMAN RACE'
Clonaid was set up by the Raelian Movement, a religious cult that
claims 55,000 followers around the world and believes aliens landed
on Earth 25,000 years ago and started the human race through cloning.
The Belgian television channel, VTM, which interviewed Clonaid chief
executive Brigitte Boisselier on Friday, said she confirmed to them
that the birth of the baby girl would take place in the
Netherlands.
Clonaid has yet to provide DNA samples or any other evidence to
back up its assertions that it produced the first cloned human, a
girl named Eve born to a still anonymous 31-year-old American woman.
Since Siegel's court filing, which he undertook as a private citizen,
Clonaid has suggested it might delay DNA testing that would prove its
claim.
On Thursday, Boisselier said in interviews with France 2
television and BBC Two in Britain that DNA tests on the baby had been
put off because the parents were anxious about keeping their identity
secret. She said the baby's parents felt under pressure after the
legal petition in Florida. "I can see why they might want to back off
a DNA test," Siegel said on Friday of the delays. "Either the test
will show this child is a clone and therefore has risk of a serious
medical future and they inflicted it on her, or if the child is not a
clone then they are part of an exploitative scheme."
Officials of Clonaid in the United States did not reply to a call
seeking comment. Siegel asked in the dependency petition for a judge
to appoint a legal guardian for the child and, if necessary, place
her in state protective custody. Florida law allows anyone to file
such a petition for court protection of a child if they have
information that the child is in danger.
Siegel filed the petition in Florida because Clonaid chose Broward
County to make its announcement a week ago, although there was no
indication the child was in the state. "I am more and more skeptical
that there is a child out there," Siegel said. "But the medical
science exists for this to have happened, so if a child exists, and
we ignore it we could be abandoning this child to this company."
Alleged clone must pass rigorous tests, experts assert. By Emma
Hitt, January 3, 2003
It's been one week since the Bahamas-based company Clonaid
announced the birth of the alleged world's first human clone, a baby
named Eve. The claim immediately met with widespread skepticism among
scientists for several reasons: reproductive cloning has yet to be
achieved in primates, the birth was announced at a press conference
rather than in a peer-reviewed publication, and the company has yet
to provide so much as photographic evidence of a baby.
Not strengthening its case, Clonaid is affiliated with the
Raˆ´lian sect, whose founding tenet is that humans were cloned
from extraterrestrials. In light of past fraudulent claims to have
cloned humans, this latest – if it's to be taken
seriously – will have to be verified independently
and thoroughly.
In an attempt to do just that, Clonaid has agreed to allow
freelance science reporter Michael Guillen to orchestrate independent
genetic testing of the baby. A science correspondent for ABC News for
14 years, Guillen has a doctorate in physics, mathematics, and
astronomy from Cornell University. At a press conference held
December 27 with Clonaid's CEO, Brigitte Boisselier, Guillen outlined
a proposed testing schedule. Blood samples were to be taken from
mother and child this week, tested at two labs to verify a genetic
match, and the results would be available sometime next week.
Guillen has not identified the labs performing the testing, nor
precisely what kinds of tests will be performed. Since last week's
press conference he has refused further public comment, and his
agent's office told The Scientist that Guillen will continue a "no
comment" policy until the test results become available.
Until that time, scientists can only speculate about the truth of
the claim that the baby is a clone of her birth mother. While not
probable at this stage, successful human reproductive cloning is
certainly possible. "Many physicians have the skills to collect human
ova and transfer human embryos, and many technicians could perform
the nuclear transfer procedure," said Mark Westhusin associate
professor with the College of Veterinary Medicine of Texas A&M
University, College Station.
According to Westhusin, who heads a lab that last year produced
the world's first cloned cat, analysis of DNA short tandem repeats
(STRs) from the mother and baby's nuclear DNA could prove whether the
child is indeed a clone. STRs are highly polymorphic among
individuals, and if enough markers are analyzed, compared and found
to be identical, then statistics can predict the probability of the
mother and child being genetically identical, Westhusin told The
Scientist.
Bruce Weir, professor of statistics and genetics at North Carolina
State University and a DNA forensics expert who testified in OJ
Simpson's trial, concurs that a standard 13-locus microsatellite
(STR) forensic profile should be identical for the mother and child.
He also pointed out that the mitochondrial DNA of the baby should be
identical to that of the donor from which the oocyte was derived.
Perhaps the biggest issue in establishing the truth of the claim
will be verifying the chain of custody of the samples. Tests must be
conducted in duplicate by separate laboratories, noted Sir Alec
Jeffreys, the inventor of DNA fingerprinting and professor of
genetics at Leicester University, UK, in a written statement issued
by the Royal Society on December 31.
According to Jeffreys, independent experts would also have to
witness every step of the procedure for collecting the tissue samples
of mother and baby so that they could vouch for the authenticity of
the samples.
Beyond establishing the baby's identity, further testing would be
needed to determine its health. Rudolf Jaenisch professor of biology
at the Whitehead Institute claims that even if DNA evidence verifies
that the infant is a clone, it's unlikely to be healthy or stay
healthy. Animal experiments predict that the baby would have "all
kinds of problems," he told The Scientist. The few clones that
survive birth tend to have abnormal fetal development called large
offspring syndrome. "So the ones that survive the perinatal period
appear normal afterwards, but they are not."
Jaenisch and colleagues have studied gene expression in cloned
mice, and have found hundreds of genes to be incorrectly expressed.
"There's no reason to assume that what we see in mice would be
different for humans," he said.
He also pointed out that brain function is a concern, and "of
course, none of these brain effects have been tested in animals,
because they are not suitable for that," he said. "One would predict
that any clone that ages would have more and more of these
problems."
Jaenisch, like many, is skeptical. "If these people supply any
results, I wouldn't believe them," he said. "You need credible people
doing this, not some charlatans."
Links for this article Clonaid http://www.clonaid.com
R. Weiss, "Cloning a previous hoax?" The Washington Post, December
31, 2002.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56233-2002Dec30.
html
J. Weitzman, "Copy cat," The Scientist, February 22, 2002.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20020222/01/
"Royal Society checklist to assess claims about human reproductive
cloning," December 31, 2002.
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/templates/press/showpresspage.cfm?fil
e=425.txt
A. Legge, "Nuclear transfer results in inherently unstable
offspring," The Scientist, July 12, 2001.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20010712/03/
N. Johnston, "Widespread dysregulation in clones," The Scientist,
September 13, 2002.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20020913/07/
The cult-linked company Clonaid, which claims to have cloned the
world's first baby, now say a second cloned child will be born in
Latest Articles: Europe by Sunday.
Cloning may be 'elaborate But scepticism is increasing as efforts
to substantiate the claim hoax' says monitor of the first cloned
birth on 26 December with DNA tests appear to 7 Jan 03 be
unravelling.
Dutch clone claimed - but Clonaid was set up by the Raelian cult,
which believes people are no proof clones of extraterrestrial aliens.
It had promised to allow DNA 6 Jan 03 samples to be taken on 31
December from baby and mother for independent testing. Only if the
baby's DNA can be proved to be Second cloned baby claim identical to
that of another person will the baby be accepted as a 3 Jan 03
clone.
Recent Articles: But Clonaid president Brigitte Boisselier said on
Thursday that the tests had been postponed in order to protect the
parents' First cloned baby "born identities. This follows a Florida
lawyer asking a state court to on 26 December" appoint a legal
guardian for the baby girl, nicknamed Eve. 27 Dec 02 Boisselier
claims the parents are concerned that the person appointed to carry
out the DNA tests may have to reveal their Australia OKs human
identity to the court. embryo research 5 Dec 02 48 hours First cloned
baby 'due in January' "The parents told me they are giving themselves
another 48 hours to 27 Nov 02 decide whether or not they will do the
tests," she told the France 2 television station. She added that
tests might instead be Cloned stem cells may performed on the second
child: "Perhaps the second child will be give new lease of life more
accessible because it is in Europe and the country in which he 8 Nov
02 or she will be born may be less sensitive."
Editorial: Clonaid's attempts to prove their claim has also been
undermined by criticism of the journalist they have asked to oversee
the Brave new medicine verification process. Michael Guillen was
formerly science editor 1 Dec 01 at US television station ABC.
Not now, Dr Miracle But Robert Park, a physicist at the University
of Maryland and 17 Mar 01 prominent critic of pseudo-science, says
Guillen has covered topics such as astrology and psychokinesis with a
high degree of Cloning FAQ credulity. Of Guillen's doctorate, gained
at Cornell University, Park says: "A PhD in physics is not an
inoculation against Do clones have shorter foolishness." lifespans or
greater susceptibility to disease? Your questions Abused child
answered Lawyer Bernard Siegal says he filed his petition to the Fort
Archived Cloning Articles Lauderdale court because, if true, the
cloned baby was an "abused child that was being exploited by Clonaid"
and needed court protection. The petition alleges that, if the child
is cloned, it "is at risk of having permanent genetic defects,
imperfections and mutations".
He says a hearing has been scheduled for 22 January should reveal
the parent's identity. "Their failure to appear amounts to giving
consent of an adjudication of the child to a guardian. They have to
appear," says Siegel.
Clonaid's claims have provoked harsh criticism around the world
and renewed calls for a global ban on reproductive cloning. But
negotiations at the United Nations have been deadlocked over whether
to include in the ban therapeutic cloning, in which early cloned
embryos are used to provide stem cells for medical treatments.
Mainstream cloning scientists have consistently stated that
attempting to clone a baby would be irresponsible and repugnant,
given the high rates of deaths and defects seen in the seven
mammalian species cloned so far. Many groups also oppose cloning
babies as ethically unacceptable.
The world's first cloned baby was born on 26 December, claims the
Bahamas-based cloning company Clonaid. But there has been no Latest
Articles: independent confirmation of the claim.
Cloning may be 'elaborate The girl, named Eve by the cloning team,
was said to have been born hoax' says monitor by Caesarean section at
1155 EST. The birth at an undisclosed 7 Jan 03 location went "very
well", said Brigitte Boisselier, president of Clonaid. The company
was formed in 1997 by the Raelian cult, which Dutch clone claimed -
but believes people are clones of aliens. no proof 6 Jan 03 "The baby
is very healthy. She is doing fine," Roisselier told a press
conference in Hollywood, Florida, on Friday. The seven-pound Second
cloned baby claim baby is a clone of a 31-year-old American woman,
whose partner is 3 Jan 03 infertile, she said.
Recent Articles: Proving that the baby is a clone of another
person would be possible by showing that their DNA is identical.
Genetic tests on First cloned baby "born the baby and "mother" will
now be carried out and the results will on 26 December" be available
"in eight or nine days", Boisselier said. 27 Dec 02 She told
reporters: "You can still go back to your office and treat Australia
OKs human me as a fraud. You have one week to do that." Boisselier
added that embryo research Michael Guillen, science editor at ABC
News and a former Harvard 5 Dec 02 University mathematician, will
carry out the genetic tests.
First cloned baby 'due in January' Necessary expertise 27 Nov 02
Many scientists are sceptical of Boisselier's claim. Alan Trounson
Cloned stem cells may of Monash University in Melbourne, Australia,
says he does not give new lease of life believe the group has the
necessary expertise to clone a person. 8 Nov 02 "And nearly
everything they have said in the past has never been confirmed by
scientific investigation," he told the Sydney Morning Editorial:
Herald.
Brave new medicine Maverick fertility scientist Severino Antinori,
who claimed earlier 1 Dec 01 in December that the first cloned baby
would be born in January 2003, is also critical. "An announcement of
this type has no Not now, Dr Miracle scientific corroboration and
risks creating confusion," he said. 17 Mar 01 "We keep up our
scientific work without making announcements. I don't take part in
this ... race." Cloning FAQ Opponents of human cloning point to the
high rate of miscarriages Do clones have shorter of cloned animal
fetuses, and the high rate of defects in live lifespans or greater
births. Boisselier has claimed that the large number of female cult
susceptibility to members willing to act as surrogate mothers
increased their chances disease? Your questions of success.
answered
Archived Cloning Articles "Irresponsible and repugnant"
Attempting to clone humans is "irresponsible and repugnant and
ignores the overwhelming scientific evidence from seven mammalian
species cloned so far," Rudolph Jaenisch, a cloning expert at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology told New Scientist
previously.
In May, US-based fertility scientist Panos Zavos told the US
Congress that five groups of scientists were rushing to be the first
to produce the first cloned human baby.
Reproductive cloning - creating a baby rather than a cloned
early embryo - is illegal in many countries. But in November, talks
on a global ban were suspended, following a series of deadlocked
United Nations meetings.
Back to page
top
World's first human clone born'
A sect claims the world's first cloned human - a girl - has been
born. http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_733350.html
The child was born by caesarean section and the birth "went very
well," said Brigitte Boisselier, a French chemist and member of the
Raelian sect. Boisselier has called a news conference in Florida to
make the announcement and a spokesman said she would have an
"independent inspector" take DNA evidence from the baby and her
30-year-old-mother.
If the baby is a clone of the mother, the two will be genetically
identical. The Raelians, who claim 55,000 followers worldwide,
believe that life on Earth was established by extra-terrestrials who
arrived in flying saucers 25,000 years ago, and that humans
themselves were created by cloning. The movement's founder, Rael -
the former French journalist Claude Vorilhon - lives in Canada. He
describes himself as a prophet and claims that cloning will enable
humanity to attain eternal life.
The sect formed the company Clonaid in 1997 to produce cloned
humans but many scientists are sceptical about its ability to
accomplish the feat. Cloning produces a new individual using only one
person's DNA. The process is technically difficult but conceptually
simple. Boisselier, who says she has two chemistry degrees and was
previously marketing director for a chemical company in France,
identifies herself as a Raelian "bishop" and said Clonaid retained
philosophical but not economic links to the Raelians. She is not a
specialist in reproductive medicine.
A chemist who said last week that her company would soon produce
the world's first human clone - a baby girl genetically identical to
her 30-year-old mother - has promised an announcement today.
Nadine Gary, a spokeswoman for Brigitte Boisselier and the
company, Clonaid, declined to answer directly when asked if they will
claim to have produced the world's first cloned baby. However, Gary
said yesterday that Boisselier intends to have video equipment at a
news briefing in Florida and would have an "independent inspector"
take DNA evidence from baby and mother. If the baby was a clone of
the mother, the two would be genetically identical.
Many scientists are skeptical about Clonaid's ability to
accomplish the feat. The cloning process is technically difficult but
conceptually simple. Scientists remove the genetic material from an
unfertilized egg, then introduce new DNA from a cell of the animal to
be cloned. Under the proper conditions, the egg begins dividing into
new cells according to the instructions in the introduced DNA. So far
scientists have succeeded in cloning sheep, mice, cows, pigs, goats
and cats. Last year, scientists in Massachusetts produced cloned
human embryos with the intention of using them as a source of stem
cells, but the cloned embryos never grew bigger than six cells.
There is no specific law against human cloning for reproductive
purposes in the United States, but the Food and Drug Administration
contends it must approve any human experiments in this country.
Boisselier has refused to say where Clonaid has been carrying out its
experiments. Bush administration officials said yesterday they were
aware of rumors of an announcement but had no plans to comment until
after the details were known.
Boisselier, who has said she has two chemistry degrees and
previously was marketing director for a chemical company in France,
identifies herself as a "bishop" of a group called the Raelians and
has said Clonaid retains philosophical but not economic links to the
group. Clonaid was founded in the Bahamas in 1997 by Claude Vorilhon,
a former French journalist and leader of the Raelians. Vorilhon and
his followers claim aliens visiting him in the 1970s revealed they
had created all life on Earth through genetic engineering.
Several weeks ago Italian fertility doctor Severino Antinori said
he had engineered a cloned baby boy who would be born in January.
Clonaid Plans Human Cloning Announcement Company Schedules
Announcement on Controversial Human Cloning Effort
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20021227_88.html
NEW YORK Dec. 27 &emdash; NEW YORK (AP) A chemist who said last
week her company would soon produce the first human clone an infant
girl genetically identical to her 30-year-old mother prepared an
announcement on the effort even as scientists remain skeptical about
the feat.
A spokeswoman for Brigitte Boisselier and the company, Clonaid,
declined to answer directly when asked if they will claim at a
briefing Friday to have produced the world's first cloned baby. But
the spokeswoman, Nadine Gary, said Thursday that Boisselier intends
to have video equipment at the news conference in Florida, and would
have an "independent inspector" take DNA evidence from baby and
mother. If the baby was a clone of the mother, the two would be
genetically identical.
Many scientists are skeptical about Clonaid's ability to
accomplish the cloning. The company was founded in the Bahamas in
1997 by Claude Vorilhon, a former French journalist and leader of a
group called the Raelians. Vorilhon and his followers claim aliens
visiting him in the 1970s revealed they had created all life on Earth
through genetic engineering.
Cloning produces a new individual using only one person's DNA. The
process is technically difficult but conceptually simple. Scientists
remove the genetic material from an unfertilized egg, then introduce
new DNA from a cell of the animal to be cloned. Under the proper
conditions, the egg begins dividing into new cells according to the
instructions in the introduced DNA.
Boisselier, who claims two chemistry degrees and previously was
marketing director for a chemical company in France, identifies
herself as a Raelian "bishop" and said Clonaid retains philosophical
but not economic links to the Raelians. She is not a specialist in
reproductive medicine.
Human cloning for reproductive purposes is banned in several
countries. There is no specific law against it in the United States,
but the Food and Drug Administration contends it must approve any
human experiments in this country. Boisselier would not say where
Clonaid has been carrying out its experiments. Bush administration
officials said in Washington on Thursday they were aware of rumors of
an announcement but had no plans to comment on the matter until after
the details were known.
Boisselier's comments last week came several weeks after Italian
fertility doctor Severino Antinori said a cloned baby boy would be
born in January. So far scientists have succeeded in cloning sheep,
mice, cows, pigs, goats and cats. Last year, scientists in
Massachusetts produced cloned human embryos with the intention of
using them as a source of stem cells, but the cloned embryos never
grew bigger than six cells.
Many scientists oppose cloning to produce humans, saying it's too
risky because of abnormalities seen in cloned animals.
Cloning group to make 'major announcement'
From Miriam Falco CNN Friday, December 27, 2002 Posted: 3:37 PM HKT
(0737 GMT) http://asia.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/12/27/human.cloning/
HOLLYWOOD, Florida (CNN) -- A controversial group that has
claimed to be able and willing to clone a human has scheduled a news
conference for Friday to make a "major announcement," according to
the group's spokesperson.
Brigitte Boisselier, the scientific director of Clonaid, is
scheduled to make the announcement Friday at 9 a.m. Last week,
Boisselier told some news organizations that the birth of a cloned
baby girl is imminent. Boisselier has told CNN in the past that she
will not make an announcement until a healthy baby is born. She told
a congressional committee last year that she believed she had the
knowledge to produce a human clone in the near future.
Clonaid, which calls itself the "first human cloning company," was
founded by a religious group called the Raelians in 1997. Boisselier
is a bishop in the Raelian movement, which professes that life on
Earth was created through genetic engineering by
extraterrestrials.
The Raelians believe their spiritual leader Rael is a direct
descendant of these aliens. Rael told CNN in July 2001 that the
long-term goal for human cloning is to live forever. Rael says
cloning a baby is only the first step: Eventually the group wants to
learn how to clone an adult, then "transfer the brain to the clone."
Boisselier says the immediate purpose for cloning is to help
infertile couples. Last November, she told CNN she was "indeed doing
human cloned embryos and we have many cell divisions," but she
wouldn't confirm any pregnancies.
Group has not released any data on research
To make a clone, scientists first take an egg and remove all of
its genetic material. Then the nucleus of a cell -- any cell in the
body -- is taken from the individual to be cloned and inserted into
the hollowed-out egg. The cell is then given a jolt of electricity or
put in a chemical bath to activate cell division -- essentially
tricking the cell into doing what a fertilized egg would normally do.
Then the embryo is implanted into a woman's uterus to be carried to
term. It is unknown which exact procedure Clonaid is using, because
it has not published or released any data about its research.
Boisselier has not revealed the location of her current lab, only to
say it is no longer in the United States. She used to have a lab in
West Virginia, but the U.S. Food and Drug Administration visited the
lab and shut it down. Scientists so far have successfully cloned
sheep, cows, goats, mice, pigs and a rare wild ox. But human cloning
is controversial, because the experience with animal cloning has
shown a lot of potential for things to go wrong.
'One shouldn't do this,' biologist says of human
cloning
Many animal cloners -- including Ian Wilmut, the Scottish
researcher who successfully cloned the first animal, Dolly the sheep,
in 1997 -- disapprove of human cloning. Wilmut has said it took 276
failed attempts before Dolly was successfully cloned. "It is not
responsible at this stage to even consider the cloning of humans, "
said Rudolf Jaenisch, a biologist at MIT's Whitehead Institute for
Biological Research, which clones mice. Janeisch said that even if a
human clone appears healthy, it may not be once it gets older.
Cloning a human at this point, he said, without knowing more about
why things go wrong, is "essentially using humans as guinea pigs, and
one shouldn't do this." According to Dr. Jon Hill, a veterinarian who
successfully cloned cows at Texas A&M University, even clones who
appear normal at birth often develop problems afterward. "Their
livers, their lungs, their heart, their blood vessels are often
abnormal after birth," Hill said.
Few legal prohibitions on human cloning
The Raelians are not the only group claiming to actively try to
clone a human. Italian doctor Severino Antinori made several
announcements in recent months, claiming that a woman was carrying a
human clone that would be born in January 2003. And former University
of Kentucky professor Panos Zavos has also announced plans to clone a
human, but he told CNN earlier this year he had not successfully
created an embryo yet.
Scientists and bioethicists have questioned whether any of these
groups have the ability to clone a human. Art Caplan, director of the
Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, has said in
the past that "we don't know how" to accomplish human cloning.
Legally, there's very little to stop scientists from cloning. In
January, the National Academy of Sciences recommended a ban on human
cloning, but only four states -- California, Michigan, Louisiana and
Rhode Island -- ban any type of cloning research. The FDA claims it
has jurisdiction over human cloning based on the Public Health
Service and Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. It says it would regulate
the cloning process like a drug.
