A Twist on Creation.

Scientists are on the brink of finding ways to cure some of our nastiest diseases, but their research, though fascinating, is highly controversial

Dolly the sheep proved cloning to be possible in 1996. Many scientists were excited that their experiment worked. It wasn't the first time a mammal, including sheep and cows, had been cloned though. A decade earlier it was shown that it was possible to take a fertilized egg (an embryo), from cattle or sheep, allow it to divide a few times, and then remove individual cells from the embryo. Each cell could then be inserted into a host egg (one which had its nuclear DNA removed) and given a small electrical jolt to fuse the transplanted DNA into the host egg. Thus, the process of cell division can be started. The egg develops into an embryo, which is transferred into a surrogate mother. In Dolly's case, scientists took cells from the udder of a pregnant, six-year-old ewe to insert into unrelated host eggs that had their DNA removed: instead of creating exact copies of a single, fertilized egg, they created a close copy of an adult animal. It took about 400 tries, but finally Dolly developed into a clone of her mother, something that scientists had long thought was impossible.

Within a nanosecond of the announcement of the creation of Dolly came the question "Can we do the same for humans?" Probably yes, but a more important question is "Should we?"

In a 2000 survey, 80% of Canadians said cloning for organs such as skin, hearts, or livers is acceptable, as long as the cloned organs are for treating injuries such as severe burns, in the case of skin, or for transplants. But, while most Canadians don't have a problem with the idea of cloning human parts for medical emergencies, about 90% of those surveyed said they were opposed to scientists making a genetically identical copy of a human being. More than 80% also said genetic engineering to pre-select the sex of an unborn child was unacceptable. And, about 74% didn't like the idea of using genetic engineering to change the eye colour or other physical features of an unborn baby. But, the majority said it was okay for scientists to use biotechnology to cure an inherited medical condition, or to decrease the risk of illness.

A bill that would have banned cloning humans died before the 1997 election. However, by August 2000, the federal government had developed a plan to try to win public backing for new rules on genetic and reproductive technologies. The expected legislation is likely to reflect Canadians' wishes to ban human cloning and create a new national agency that would regulate the creation of test-tube babies and other reproductive practices.

The next question is, should we depend on government regulation to protect us? The European Patent Office granted a German patent for the production of genetically modified humans, and almost immediately had second thoughts. After some reflection, the Germans decided that not only was granting the patent a serious mistake, it was also contrary to German law: in February 2000, the office admitted to having regrets about the patent. Six months later, Britain's chief medical officer recommended that scientists be allowed to clone human embryos for medical research, which he called "therapeutic cloning."

Using fetal tissue for medical research with a possible view to using it to grow new organs makes a lot of people cringe; most of the fetal tissue comes from aborted fetuses. Anti-abortion groups are frantic about the development. In July 2000, U.S. groups condemned the American Heart Association's decision to invest heavily in research in human embryonic stem cells. This holds the promise of revolutionary treatments for countless conditions, including heart disease, Alzheimer's, and blindness. Basically, an embryo is a cluster of microscopic stem cells, formed shortly after conception, which grows into a fetus. At this point, the stem cells start specializing to create a nervous system, spine, and other features. U.S. biologists announced in 1998 that they had isolated human embryonic stem cells, explaining that they can multiply indefinitely before differentiating to form all the tissues and organs that make up the human body. By taking stem cells from the embryo before they start to specialize, scientists hope to direct them to become any desired cell or tissue type. So astounding was the discovery that the medical journal Science declared that stem-cell research was the most significant advance of 1999, which could dramatically change medical science.

Anti-abortionists, and others, are not impressed. They fear that scientists will not only use the stem cells of aborted fetuses but start to artificially create life only to destroy it for research purposes. Either way they see the process as grossly unethical. As far as Rev. Joseph Howard, director of a division of the American Life League, is concerned, "There is no ethical way to obtain stem cells from a human embryo -- and there are no exceptions to this statement."

However, at least one group sides with patients who might benefit from the research. The Patients Coalition for Urgent Research in the U.S. is lobbying Congress to allow fetal-tissue and stem-cell research to go ahead. Not everyone sees the use of fetal tissue for research as an ethical dilemma. Dr. Steven Bamforth, a geneticist at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, says fetal tissue is like any other kind of organ donation. "Using an organ from someone killed by a drunk driver does not condone drinking and driving," he says. "The fact that researchers use fetal tissue does not mean they condone abortion." Dr. Bamforth runs Canada's only fetal-tissue repository, which sends parts of aborted fetuses to a small number of scientists across the country. While he doesn't see this as a problem, he says if the majority of Canadians find it unacceptable, then the government should step in and end it.

The key to the dilemma might be within ourselves. In Canada, the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute has asked the federal government for up to $5 million to create a network of stem-cell researchers in Canada, according to a Globe and Mail article. The group says it plans to concentrate on the idea that everyone has a limited number of stem cells in different parts of the body that can regenerate, including muscle, blood, and the brain. If these could be made to behave like embryonic stem cells then our own bodies could provide cures for whatever ails us.

Using animal organs is another possibility researchers are looking into.

In March 2000, five cloned piglets were born in Virginia. Scientists saw the event as the first step in supplying identical pig organs that are genetically engineered to be compatible with human bodies. Some estimate there could be a $6 billion (U.S.) market for pig organs, including heart, lungs, and liver, in a world desperately short of organ donors. With government approval, clinical trials with pig organs could start in four years: researchers still have to work on manipulating various pig genes to prevent organ rejection in humans, and some experts are checking out whether or not animal viruses concealed in pig DNA could possibly spread to human recipients.

While the piglets were born in the United States, the idea for them came from PPL Therapeutics PLC, the commercial firm responsible for Dolly the sheep. The company is based at the Roslin Institute, near Edinburgh, Scotland.

PPL already has one flock of sheep producing a human protein used in treating cystic fibrosis. A second flock produces a protein that seals wounds and stops bleeding, and a third flock is making a human enzyme that breaks down fats needed by people with pancreatic damage. The enzyme is also produced in mother's milk, so it could also help premature babies that cannot be breast fed.

The University of Guelph in Ontario is among those breeding pigs with a difference: they have an inserted human gene to help safely transplant organs into people. The pigs were developed in Britain by Imutran Ltd., and first imported into Canada in 1998. But, there are still problems with our immune systems rejecting human organs, let alone those from another, even genetically engineered, species. There also are fears that pig organs may carry viruses (such as porcine endogenous retro-viruses (PERV), a leukemia-like disease found in pigs) that can't be treated in humans. There may also be a concern that such viruses might spread to other people. To many, crossing the species barrier is just plain wrong. But, that doesn't stop the research by scientists who see animal transplants - known as xenotransplantation - as the answer to a critical need for organs, especially kidneys.

And, this just in As we go to press, Italian scientists too have been looking for the answer from within. They now say they have found a way of isolating brain stem cells in adult rats. Potentially, these brain stem cells could be used to grow new lungs, or kidneys, or whatever tissue is needed. If the process can be transferred to humans, there may be no need to use fetal tissue at all, as those on both sides of the issue have hoped.

SUGGESTED ACTIVITIES:

1. The U.S. has legislated against producing human clones but Canada has not. Patricia Baird, a geneticist at the University of British Columbia and chairwoman of the 1993 Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies said in a Globe and Mail interview that if Canada did have legislation in place prohibiting human cloning "you would not be so worried about animal experimentation [leading to human cloning]." Do a report on what the Commission has been doing since its inception.

2. Ian Wilmut, one of the scientists who created Dolly the sheep at the Roslin Institute in Scotland, says the cells from which stem cells are derived are embryonic in nature, with no evidence of the formation of a nervous system.

In an article in The Globe and Mail in February 2000, he wrote that "the human nervous system will not begin to form until several weeks into a normal pregnancy. As the embryo is not yet aware, it is a potential person, but not yet a person in that critical sense. In these circumstances, I would consider using the cells of a human embryo."

Dr. Wilmut points out that, under British law, a human embryo has special status, but not that of a full human being. But, he adds that "any use of human embryos should be subject to ethical scrutiny, nationally or locally," and that the country's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority "scrutinizes everything done with a human embryo whether for clinical or research purposes." Discuss his view on using human embryos for research.

TWO VIEWS

In 1999, scientists reported that Dolly and two other clones of the Finn Dorset sheep she was cloned from had cellular traits suggesting they would be sicker, age faster, or die sooner than those conceived naturally. But a year later, in April 2000, scientists published the results of a project in which the cells of six cloned calves were actually "younger" than their age. The cloning procedure seems to have given the calves cells that are biologically younger than their chronological age. Scientists don't understand why this happened and they can't say how fast the cells were aging, so they won't know for years whether or not the calves will live longer than a cow's normal 25 years.

Researchers are hoping these developments will help them find ways of reversing degenerative conditions and cloning new human body parts - everything from lungs to livers - when the old ones fail.

CHILD SELECTION

It was reported in early October 2000 that an American couple chose to produce a child that could help save his older sister. The parents had several embryos created in a lab and selected the one that was free of a genetic disease that his sister has: he also was chosen because he was the best tissue match for his six-year-old sibling who needs a transplant to fight Fanconi anemia, a rare genetic disease that could be fatal because she cannot create her own bone marrow. In the first known case of its kind, doctors at the University of Minnesota infused blood from the umbilical cord of the five-week-old baby into his sister. At the time of writing, doctors didn't know if stem cells contained in the newborn's cord blood would help his sister develop healthy marrow cells.

FACT FILE

In 1998, doctors at a South Korean fertility clinic reported that they had taken the first step toward cloning a human; they said they made a four-celled embryo that was a clone of an infertile woman, but they didn't implant the embryo in a woman's uterus to see if it would grow.

A MONKEY, IS A MONKEY, IS A MONKEY IS A MONKEY.

In September 1999, researchers at the Oregon Regional Primate Research Center created a rhesus monkey in a lab using a technique called embryo splitting, in which cells are taken from a fertilized egg, split and transferred into surrogate mothers, producing animals that are genetic copies of the original embryo. The monkey, named Tetra, was the first cloned primate ever born, and scientists say that cloning monkeys will help them solve some of the mysteries of human disease.

FACT FILE

Using animals in the human health business has become known as "pharming."

FACT FILE

Jonas Salk relied on cells from an aborted fetus in the 1930s to develop the polio vaccine.

LEGISLATION PENDING

There is no federal government legislation banning cloning or genetic engineering. A bill that would have prohibited cloning of humans, commercialization of human eggs and embryos, as well as genetic alteration of embryos died just before the federal election of 1997. Health Minister Allan Rock reportedly planned to reintroduce similar legislation before the end of 2000.

Currently, there is only a voluntary moratorium to discourage biotechnology with human genes. Ottawa started to move toward legislation in 1989, when a royal commission was appointed headed by Dr. Patricia Baird.

FACT FILE

Given all the controversy, there are no known Canadian scientists working with human embryonic stem cells: researchers don't want to risk losing much-needed funding so they keep their experiments to animal embryonic stem cells.

ONLY IN CALIFORNIA

For $250,000 U.S., a Californian firm, Genetic Savings and Clone, plans to offer a cloning service to distraught dog-owners whose pets have died; another company, GeneDupe, plans to clone pet fish and create new strains in the process, including a goldfish that is genuinely gold-coloured, and ultimately any metallic shade.

FACT FILE

While most Canadians are against human cloning, they tend to look favourably on reproductive technologies such as egg and sperm donation and surrogacy arrangements.

Websites

PPL Therapeutics PLC http://www.ppl-therapeutics. com/

The Roslin Institute http://www.ri.bbsrc.ac.uk/

Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance http://www.religioustolerance. org/cloning.htm