London, England - Britain's most prestigious scientific body has called for a worldwide ban on the cloning of human beings, saying attempts to make duplicate babies were both unethical and dangerous.
"We think that a ban on reproductive cloning would have public support and is currently justified on scientific grounds," the Royal Society said Wednesday. "It would also help to improve the public's confidence in science."
But the Society added that "therapeutic cloning" - the cloning of an early-stage human embryo for disease-research purposes - should not be jeopardized by such a ban.
Pro-lifers object to "therapeutic" as well as "reproductive" cloning, on the grounds the embryos created for research as identical copies of patients are destroyed once they have been harvested for stem cells.
British lawmakers earlier this year voted to authorize research on cloned human embryos. The move drew criticism from pro-life organizations. A House of Lords committee was then set up to investigate stem cell research.
After the vote, Italian infertility specialist Severino Antinori praised "Tony Blair's intelligent decision" to allow therapeutic cloning research, saying it would help his own attempt to clone a human being within two years in an unspecified Mediterranean country.
Antinori, who is working with an American colleague, Prof. Panos Zavos of Lexington, Kentucky, has helped childless couples have test-tube babies. His scientific standing has made his claims more plausible than those by others around the world, many of whom are not taken too seriously.
In its submission to the House of Lords committee Wednesday, the Royal Society conceded that research into therapeutic cloning in the UK "may lead to a significant increase in the likelihood that human reproductive cloning will be successfully carried out in other countries where it is not outlawed."
Oxford University professor Richard Gardner, who chaired the society's working group, was critical of scientists who promote the potential benefits of cloning a human being.
"When these scientists talk about the possible benefits of human reproductive cloning, such as replacing a beloved child or partner lost in an accident, they betray wholly unrealistic expectations about the outcome," he said in a statement.
"While a clone is likely to bear a striking physical resemblance to the original, the two will differ at least as much as identical twins in terms of personality and other higher mental attributes."
Cloning a baby would be both unethical and dangerous, he warned.
"There has been a lot of unchallenged publicity this year for groups who claim that they will clone human beings in the next few years," Gardner said in reference to Antinori and Zavos. "It is the Royal Society's view that this would be unethical and that responsible scientists across the world should not ignore the public's well-founded opposition to such research."
Among the hazards of cloning experiments was the likelihood of the cloned person suffering abnormalities. The report notes that there has been a success rate in animals of just one per cent, the rate of fetal deaths was high, and many cloned offspring show abnormalities.
Earlier this year the Scottish institute that created Dolly the sheep pointed out that it had failed 277 times before succeeding in cloning her, and warned that many cloned animals die late in pregnancy or soon after birth.
The Royal Society in its submission also commented on the embryonic vs. adult stem cell debate. Many scientists say stem cells from embryos are more promising, while others point to new research indicating the potential of adult cells - from bone marrow or umbilical cords, for example.
As adult stem cells can be obtained without the destruction of human life, pro-lifers tend to back their use. But the society said that adult cells were "small in number and often hard to access."
The British pro-life group Life said Wednesday that the Royal Society had conformed to the established pattern in the UK of "understating the amazing advances in adult stem cell technology, while exaggerating wildly the promise of embryonic stem cells."
Such an approach, said Life researcher Nick Harris, "does not stand up in the light of the latest scientific data."
"International observers are increasingly baffled by the UK's insistence on promoting embryonic cloning, and it is no wonder that the UK public have lost confidence in scientists."
Pro-lifers see little difference in ethical terms between reproductive and therapeutic cloning.
"The arguments supporting so-called therapeutic cloning do not differ essentially from reproductive cloning," said the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children in its own submission to the House of Lords committee earlier this month. It argued that "public policy in favor of the former will inexorably lead to the latter."
SPUC general secretary Paul Tully said the group's submission pointed out that "both UK public opinion and international political opinion is against the practice of human cloning, whether for therapeutic or reproductive purposes."
In Europe, the Council of Europe has introduced a measure called the Protocol on the Prohibition of Cloning Human Beings, which has been signed by more than half of its 43 members.
Pro-Life Infonet
21. juni 2001