AMA: Cloning Decision Good for Physicians

But pro-life groups bitterly disagree

(HealthDay is the new name for HealthScoutNews.)

WEDNESDAY, June 18, 2003 (HealthDayNews) -- The American Medical Association's decision to endorse cloning to produce stem cells for research purposes will benefit physicians on both sides of the emotionally charged issue.

That's the contention of Dr. Michael S. Goldrich, the incoming chairman of the AMA committee that drafted the new recommendations.

But those opposed to cloning, including pro-life groups, bitterly disagree, and took issue with the recommendations soon after they were announced Tuesday.

The guidelines, approved during the AMA's annual meeting in Chicago, set out specific recommendations for biomedical research using stem cells derived from embryos cloned through a technique known as therapeutic cloning or somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT).

Stem cells, which are "unspecialized" cells that can be coaxed to differentiate into many specialized cells, hold hope for the treatment of a variety of disorders, from Parkinson's to strokes and other ailments, and for gene therapy.

The cells renew themselves for long periods through cell division. Under certain physiologic or experimental conditions, they can be "induced to become cells with special functions such as the beating cells of the heart muscle or the insulin-producing cells of the pancreas," according to the National Institutes of Health.

Goldrich said the AMA guidelines "will be helpful for those physicians already doing [stem cell] research," as well as those who have thus far only contemplated it. "There may be some physicians who sat on the sidelines awaiting some sort of guidelines from their professional organization," he said.

Under the guidelines, physicians are free to decide whether to participate in stem cell research or to use products that result from this type of research. This allows physicians uncomfortable with the process the freedom not to participate, Goldrich said.

It's appropriate, he added, for a physician uncomfortable with stem cell research or the products it yields not to treat patients with those therapies. "But of course he [the doctor] must alert them [patients] to the availability," he said.

The AMA's approval of using stem cells for biomedical research drew outrage from some quarters.

"To get to those stem cells in the embryo, you eventually need to destroy the embryo," said Sherry Smith, director of education at the Right to Life League of Southern California. "We would definitely be opposed to that."

Reached in his Chicago office on Tuesday, Joe Scheidler, national director of the Pro-Life Action League, said he had not yet heard about the AMA decision but added that he wasn't surprised.

"I'm never surprised at the AMA," he said.

The contention that the guidelines will help physicians on all sides of the issue doesn't set well with Scheidler. "What about the needs of the child who exists?" he asks. "We all started out as embryos and we weren't experimented with."

"They are making guidelines that say a physician can destroy life and some don't have to," Scheidler says. "Isn't that nice?"

Rather than issue a statement of protest, Scheidler said he's inclined to picket the next AMA meeting.

The AMA emphasized that its approval of cloning for biomedical research did not change its opposition to cloning to produce a copy of a human being.

According to an AMA news release announcing the guidelines, "human embryonic stem cells are commonly obtained from unused fertilized eggs donated by in vitro fertilization clinics with informed consent of the donor. Alternatively, stem cells have also been obtained from embryos generated from unfertilized eggs using a technique called SCNT."

In the SCNT technique, stem cells are obtained from embryos generated from unfertilized eggs. The technique was designed, according to the AMA, to produce embryos from which stem cells that are immunologically compatible could be harvested for use in treating human diseases.

In 2002, a National Academy of Sciences panel proposed a ban on cloning to produce humans but supported the use of cloning for research.

Earlier this year, the U.S. House of Representatives backed a White House effort to ban both types of cloning. The Senate has yet to act on the proposal.

More Information

For a primer on stem cells, visit the National Institutes of Health. To view the announcement by the AMA on using stem cells for research, click here.

Related Stories

No stories found.
logo
www.healthday.com