It's time for scientists to stand up on cloning

Scientists need to stand up and be counted in the review of cloning legislation to be undertaken by the Lockhart Committee, writes the leader of the National Party in the Senate, Senator Ron Boswell.

Submissions are now being taken from individuals and groups interested in the review of cloning legislation. Any member of the public may make a submission, which can be a simple letter, setting out their views on cloning.

In the earlier debate on embryonic stem cell research, a lot of scientists, doctors and medical researchers were missing in action due to the research funding might of the embryo research lobby.

The time for ducking for cover is past. The embryo lobby is pressuring all governments, state and federal, to open up the laws to allow the creation and cloning of embryos for research. Our scientists must speak up now about the inherent flaws in embryo research theory and practice before it is too late.

Science should decide the debate, not ethical positions. I have always maintained that science must speak the loudest. Those specialists who know, for example, that Alzheimer's disease cannot be treated by stem cells, must speak up now before Justice Lockhart.

Those scientists who know that adult stem cells are the real future must not be afraid to speak for fear of losing their funding or position. If the current legislation is opened up, there is no telling where the rabbit eggs will end and the human clones begin.

The Lancet (June 18-24, 2005) featured an article questioning the progress of stem cell therapy. Author Neil Scolding said: "The technical difficulties and biological hazards inherent in cloning human embryos and developing treatments from their stem cells led Richard Gardner, Chairman of the Royal Society Working Group on Stem Cells and Therapeutic Cloning, to doubt whether this would ever be 'a procedure that becomes widely available... There are concerns about the efficiency and elaborateness of the procedure, and it's going to be very time consuming and very expensive'."

Scolding reported that the "natural propensity of embryonic stem cells to form teratomas, their exhibition of chromosomal abnormalities, and abnormalities in cloned mammals all present difficulties."

He stated that "the prospect of having to clone (to obtain embryonic stem cells) every patient requiring therapy is surely unrealistic (the Korean report of cloning human embryos for stem cells used almost 250 human eggs in generating a single stem-cell line). If cloning is unrealistic and/or too hazardous, the autologous advantage of (cloned) embryonic stem cells vanishes."

The Lockhart legislation review committee will examine the scope and operation of the laws on cloning and embryo research.

This is a very important review as it will recommend to the Council of Australian Governments and the federal Parliament whether Australia should go down the track of cloning embryos.

This would be a major step. At present, the law allows only excess IVF embryos to be used for research. The pro-cloning lobby wants to go further by specifically creating embryos to clone them before destroying them.

Do Australian scientists and medicos agree with The Lancet's declaration in 2001 that "the creation of embryos solely for the purpose of producing human stem cells is not only unnecessary but also a step too far"?

Submissions can be made to Justice Lockhart, Legislation Review Committee, PO Box 3318, Manuka ACT 2603. Tel 02 6295 8481, by fax 02 6295 9277 or email lockhartreview@secretariat.com.au