|
Highlights
from the bio-innovation conference
Maine Science and Technology Foundation
July 15, 2002
DAY
TWO
Issues
in Bioethics: Gene Patents, Human Cloning and Stem Cell
Research
Dr.
Julien Murphy, Ph.D., University of Southern Maine Bioethics
Project, Portland, ME
Dr.
Karen Rasmussen, Ph.D., Maine Center for Cancer Medicine,
Scarborough, ME
Moderator:
Robert Stier, Esq., Pierce Atwood, Portland, ME
Sorting
out ethical and moral questions underlying medical decisions
has become more difficult as scientific research moves
to the molecular level, investigating treatments like
gene therapy and human cloning, which could create custom-made
embryonic stem cells to replace damaged body tissues.
As citizens and lawmakers attempt to understand stem
cells and cloning, many wrestle with the question whether
the potential ends justify the means of achieving them.
One
key to gaining public acceptance of scientific methods,
said bioethicist Julien Murphy, is to demonstrate that
the procedures are thoroughly tested.
"Before
an innovation is tried in a human being there has to
be enough of the prior science done to make people feel
that it is not reckless science," Dr. Murphy stated.
Animal
research is one way to establish that practices are
responsible. In the case of in vitro fertilization,
scientists honed their methods in animals for decades
before transferring them to humans.
Likewise,
creating Dolly, the first cloned mammal, was important
because "if there are negative mutations in clones of
animals," said Murphy, "that's still saying that it's
scientifically reckless."
Murphy's
offered a list of ethical values for medicine and the
life sciences. They included autonomy for decision-making
among patients, research subjects and health care providers,
plus protection of human dignity, confidentiality, beneficence
and the principle that medicine "do no harm."
Murphy
said the challenge to doctors of minimizing harm can
be complicated because duration can vary, depending
on the consequences – intended or unintended – of treatments.
Safety
is a paramount concern when it comes to human cloning.
"The
do no harm issue is the biggest objection to reproductive
cloning" since harm could come to the child or the mother,
he said.
Murphy
also outlined social concerns about medical research,
including resource allocation, and noted that conflicts
of interest can arise when researchers, investors, patients,
stockholders, doctors and health care providers interact
in clinical and research settings.
Genetic
counselor Karen Rasmussen agreed that ethical considerations
are critically important.
"Certainly
in the clinic the ethical issues with regard to genetic
testing are a major area of bioethics concern these
days." With genetic testing, individuals "want to find
out if they carry a mutation that predisposes them to
a particular condition," meaning "there are a number
of issues there with regard to who has access to that
genetic information," Dr. Rasmussen stated.
Clinical
situations become more complicated when private companies
develop genetic testing technologies. On the research
side, she said difficulties can arise in determining
who controls information, what databases can hold it
and who can access the records.
Discussing
human cloning, Rasmussen said, "if you do surveys of
the general public, most people do not have a problem
with somatic cell gene therapy [conducted on] someone
who has a horrible disease that we can cure by modifying
the genetic material of some tissue in their body."
Maine
patients undergo somatic cell gene therapy, she said,
as cancer treatment.
But
Rasmussen emphasized differences between gene therapy
on somatic cells, which compose tissues and organs,
and germ-line cells, which carry hereditary material.
"There's
a distinction between modifying the body tissue of the
individual versus modifying the germ-line, and not just
the issue of are you doing harm then... but modifying
the gene pool," she said.
|
