Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer

Recently I was privileged to hear Francis Sullivan (Chief Executive Officer, Catholic Health Australia) debate with the Honourable (Bob) Robert John Carr on the topic of stem cell research.

If possible, I encourage you to source a recording or webcast of the debate and listen to it in its entirety for yourself.

When it was Mr Sullivan’s turn to speak, he clarified that the debate is not about embryonic stem cell research; the debate is about human cloning and he noted that the future of human cloning in Australia was not decided on by the community of 2002.

Meaning no disrespect to Mr Sullivan, I have tried to summarise the essence of his concerns and have responded to them in italics.

Adult stem cell research is already producing the goods.
You must have research on every front. One stimulates the other.

Of the nine [applications for a license to engage in embryonic stem cell research] over half have to do with training, not therapy research.
Training today builds competencies for research in the future.

The only gain is commercial.
The hope of commercial gain is intrinsically tied to the cost of research.

Why would we consider putting public monies in this area?
This contradicts Mr Sullivan’s concern about commercial gain. Additionally, Mr Sullivan is asking the State to spend something much more important than money. That is, Mr Sullivan is asking the State to spend its authority in banning Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer research, also known as therapeutic cloning or human cloning.

Let us not confuse social aspirations with ethical duty.
This is a complex topic, but when I asked Mr Sullivan if therapeutic benefits from human cloning were realised in other countries, such as China, would our ethical duty forbid us from importing these benefits into Australia, his response was that it would be like importing products made in sweat shops. That is, just because we do it, it doesn’t make it right.

Inconsistencies in when the Church has chosen to be vocal about the “sanctity of life”, from the destruction of properly fertilised embryos associated with the process of IVF, to the State’s idolisation of people who influence the young to take unnecessary risks with life and disregard their own mortality, to the situation where the Church has been mute while hundreds have died from intentional State sanctioned killings has led me to read, or perhaps misread that Mr Sullivan's true concerns lay with something that has not been discussed. That is, what would happen if a human clone were developed to full term?

I postulate that the enormity of this scenario is one of the greatest threats to the "fabric of society" that we face today, on scale with atomic research before the development of “the bomb”, and it is this risk that we must ask our politicians to focus on and manage.

What would be the long term effect on society if a zealous scientist [improperly] created life [to term] in his or her own image?

In conclusion I would like to finish with a quote from the night …

"I urge you as thoughtful members of the Labor party to continue to support the position taken by every Labor government in Australia, that is support for embryonic stem cell research, put in the statue books in 2002, subject to all the safeguards and all the ethical protections any reasonable person would want, it is a position that we should continue to take. Those people with diseases and with injuries who look to us for some hope, for some support would expect nothing else. Thank you."

[The Honorable (Bob) Robert John Carr, Monday 25 September 2006]