Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Senate Tackles Question of Cloning Today

Aired December 04, 2001 - 07:43   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: The Senate tackles the question of cloning in a hearing today. Polls show most people think that making a baby by cloning is a very bad idea, but others say there are some good reasons to clone human embryos. CNN medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen joins us now from the CNN center in Atlanta. Good morning Elizabeth. I would love for you to and you probably need six hours to do this, but in less than that explain the very complicated science that is expected to fuel this extremely hot debate on Capitol Hill today.

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: All right Paula, I'll give you the Readers Digest version because this science does get very confusing. So the first thing to remember about cloning is that there are two very different types of cloning and two very different reasons to clone. And the second thing to remember is that everything I'm about to explain to you is theoretical since scientists haven't finished their work yet.

Now having said that, the first kind of cloning is called therapeutic cloning and its purpose is to make medical treatment specifically tailored for individual patients. Let's say for example that John Doe had a heart attack and needed new heart muscle to replace the damaged muscle. Doctors would start by taking some DNA from his body - they could possibly get it from his skin, for example, then they take a human egg from any woman and remove the nucleus, which contains her DNA.

The scientist would then put John Doe's DNA inside the egg. Then a jolt of electricity or a bath in special chemicals would make the egg start to divide and become what could eventually be an embryo. It would never grow beyond a microscopic cluster of cells because after a few days scientists would remove the stem cells from inside. Now stem cells have the capacity to become any cell in the body. So in John Doe's case researchers would coax the stem cells to become heart cells, which would then be used to repair his heart theoretically with no fear of rejection because it was made from his own DNA.

Now Paula the second kind of cloning is called reproductive cloning and that's the one that gets people all excited - or I guess I should say all upset, and what it is, is it's the same science as I just described except the end instead of taking the stem cells out, you take the embryo and you put into a woman's uterus and theoretically nine months later you would have a baby who would be the exact clone of the person who donated the DNA in the first place - Paula. ZAHN: All right Elizabeth Cohen, we're going to have to leave it there because we have three of the scientists who have been involved in this research joining us now. Thank you so much Elizabeth. It is of course that second type of cloning - reproductive cloning that is raising the question is human cloning inevitable and is the fear of making a clone human being preventing important medical breakthroughs.

Joining me now from Washington Dr. Michael West, whose company Advanced Cell cloned the first human embryos. Dr. Ian Wilmut of the Roslin Institute, who cloned the sheep Dolly and Dr. William Haseltine who sets up the - or heads up the Society for Regenerative Medicine. Welcome gentlemen. Good to have all three with you - or with us this morning before you head off to Capitol Hill.

Dr. West, I'd like to start with you. In about an hour you are going to have to depend - or defend your position. You will be appearing before, among others Senator Brownback who has made it quite clear to the world how he feels about the science you've embarked on.

Let me quickly read one of his more recent comments. He says - quote - "this is an important issue. An issue that commands our attention in part because of the vast historical consequence and also because it is an issue that focuses attention on the meaning of life and whether or not we will, as a society, allow life to be created and destroyed at our whim. I urge the Senate to pass a complete ban on human cloning immediately".

Dr. West, how do you plan to counter those arguments today?

DR. MICHAEL WEST, ADVANCED CELL TECHNOLOGY: Well you know half of the argument you just laid out I actually agree with and that's that this issue is of extreme importance to not only us in the United States, the millions of people who face degenerative diseases that can not be treated today. These new technologies offer great promise in the future - (INAUDIBLE) years in the future for treating currently untreatable diseases like diabetes and stroke and it's a very long list of diseases.

Where I disagree is that this is not a debate about pro life, pro choice. We're talking about creating cellular life in a dish. We're not talking about making human beings. We're not talking about cloning babies and so that's the point in which we disagree in part fast (ph).

ZAHN: Because Senator Brownback's argument is of course you are creating these cells and that in essence is life and when you do your experiments on them, you kill the cells.

WEST: Yes, as you pointed out in your introduction, the pre implantation embryos are microscopic bottle (ph) cells. There are no body cells of any kind, and an important event has not occurred, which we call individuation where these cells have started down the path of becoming a human being. And so I think the majority of scientists - the National Academy of Sciences, for instance, in the United States has recommended that this limited use of cloning and a use of this miracle that created Dolly and these other cloned animals to allow this one use in medicine is a very important decision and literally millions of lives hang in the balance.

ZAHN: Dr. Wilmut ...

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: If the government - yes, allows for this kind of research to continue, where is it taking us? Go ahead Dr. Wilmut.

DR. IAN WILMUT, ROSLIN INSTITUTE: I'm sorry. I didn't realize you were addressing the question to me. I think that the image that you should have as Mike mentioned is that one day a person with one of these very unpleasant diseases like Parkinson's Disease, for example, will go to a clinic, the clinic will take a cell from him or her, and change it into the type of cell, which is needed to replace the damage - to repair the damaged tissue. And in the case of Parkinson's Disease, a special group of nerves in the brain. This is something, which simply can't be done at the present time. It will give a better quality of life for people who suffer from this very unpleasant degenerative disease and will have a very important impact on our medical treatments in the future.

ZAHN: I've heard what you just said, but Dr. Wilmut, of course there are still people out there that are quite concerned that someone could use the same science to create a human clone. Are you concerned about that and how doable is that at this point?

WILMUT: We have absolutely no idea. And of course I'm concerned and the reason is quite simple, that I don't think it would be very pleasant to be genetically so similar to somebody, perhaps your father, somebody who is - who is bringing you up. But I think we have to have this in some sort of context. This is - this is not really a night mercinario (ph). It's not a big public health issue. If it unfortunately happens, in some places, to a small number of children, it would be very unfortunate, and I think all three of us would hope that it doesn't happen.

What would be a far greater missed opportunity would be if in seeking to prevent the one thing, we deny ourselves the opportunity to develop these very important new treatments, and they are clearly different. It's very easy, surely, to write a law that says that it would be illegal to clone embryo into the womb of a woman. It's really very simple.

ZAHN: You could make that argument Dr. Haseltine, but the fact remains wouldn't that be all but impossible to regulate. I mean wouldn't you have labs across the country that would be willing and able to do this, no matter ...

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: ... no matter what regulations were in place.

DR. WILLIAM HASELTINE, PRESIDENT REGENERATIVE MEDICINE SOCIETY: We know that human lives do not control human activity precisely, but they do control responsible human activity. What we're talking about here is a very bright promise for the future of humanity, which may be truncated inappropriately by thoughtless action as soon as today. (INAUDIBLE) we are on the brink of, I think, a major medical catastrophe.

ZAHN: And ...

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: ... by that you mean - you mean if this type of research is banned by the government - that's what you mean?

HASELTINE: That's right. That's what I mean. This type of research is one of the brightest hopes we have to restore normal mental function that people with Alzheimer's, normal motion to people with Parkinson's, to restore normal heart function to millions of people with failing hearts, to have older people live healthy lives, and to rebuild organs and tissues in infants that are damaged at birth.

This is a tremendously important field. And to see it handled in this way is a near tragedy. I would say it is ....

(CROSSTALK)

HASELTINE: ... a pending tragedy.

ZAHN: Doctor, I need a yes or no, do you think ultimately the government will allow you to continue this research - and a quick yes or no from all three of you. Dr. Haseltine, you first.

HASELTINE: I think they will. I think we have a reasonable government and over time with reason debate, we will be allowed to go forward under careful circumstances.

ZAHN: Dr. Wilmut, you agree, yes?

WILMUT: I certainly hope they will allow this, yes.

ZAHN: Dr. West.

WEST: Well we have a case study here. About 20 years ago we took up this issue of test tube babies, then called - now called invitrofertilization and as a nation we debated it. There was a lot of concerns. We found a way to allow it to go forward, and I think we all agree it had a great benefit to medicine and to humanity in general.

ZAHN: All right Dr. West, Dr. Wilmut, Dr. Haseltine, thank you very much for your time. We will be following your testimony on the Hill today. Thank you again.

(CROSSTALK)

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com