[[Note: As I have recently indicated with an analysis of the recent Wisconsin human cloning "ban", a number of bills purporting to be "total bans" on human cloning have been appearing that are not really "total bans", despite their appearances. Below please find: (1) a recent news article which claims that the cloning bill just passed by the Louisiana legislature is such a "total ban"; and, (2) a copy of the current Louisiana cloning "ban", along with my own comments. I hope these can be of some small help to those interested and involved in these confusing and complicated legislative initiatives. -- DNI]]
Louisiana House Committee Approves Comprehensive Cloning Ban"
[May 28, 2003]
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=17935
The Louisiana House Criminal Justice Committee last week approved a bill (HB 1810) that would ban human cloning for both reproductive and research purposes in the state, the Baton Rouge Advocate reports (Barrouquere, Baton Rouge Advocate, 5/22). The current state law, which is set to expire on July 1, bans "the practice of creating or attempting to create a human being" through cloning technologies but does not ban cloning for research purposes. The Louisiana House Committee on Health and Welfare earlier this month approved 10-1 a bill (SB 298), sponsored by Sen. Donald Hines (D), that would extend that ban for an additional three years. The Louisiana Senate approved the measure last month. The total cloning bill, which is sponsored by Rep. Gary Beard (R), is supported by a coalition of groups, including the Catholic Church in Louisiana and several antiabortion groups, and was drafted with the help of Dorinda Bordlee, national legislative counsel for Americans United for Life. Hines, who is also a medical doctor, said he had not seen Beard's bill and could not comment on it but added that he was concerned that the measure could be an attempt to ban all stem cell research (Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, 5/21). Raymond Gasser, a professor at the Louisiana State University Health Science Center in New Orleans, said that the bill "shows respect for human life," adding, "We were all human embryos at one time." According to the Advocate, Gasser said that the measure would not affect adult stem cell research, adding, "Adult stem cell research has been so promising." The bill now goes to the full House (Baton Rouge Advocate, 5/22).
[[NOTE: The Louisiana human cloning bill as copied below bans NO human cloning, not even SCNT. For quick reference, please scroll down to the "definitions" section of the bill. -- DNI]]
http://www.legis.state.la.us/leg_docs/03RS/CVT5/OUT/0000K8X5.PDF
HLS 03-2467 ORIGINAL
Regular Session, 2003
HOUSE BILL NO. 1810
BY REPRESENTATIVES BEARD AND SHAW
CRIME:
Criminalizes human cloning
AN ACT
To amend and reenact R.S. 40:1299.36, 1299.36.1, and 1299.36.2 and to repeal Section 3 of Act No. 788 of the 1999 Regular Session of the Legislature, relative to human cloning; to prohibit human cloning; to provide for definitions; to provide for exceptions; to provide for criminal penalties; to repeal the termination date of provisions that prohibit human cloning; and to provide for related matters.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of Louisiana:
Section 1. R.S. 40:1299.36, 1299.36.1, and 1299.36.2 are hereby amended and reenacted to read as follows:
A. It is the intent of the legislature to protect the health and welfare of the citizens of this state through a ban on the cloning of human beings in light of the profound medical, ethical, and social concerns raised by the possibility of human cloning.
(1) At least one company has announced that they have successfully cloned a human being at the early embryonic state of life, and others have announced that they will attempt to clone a human being using the technique known as somatic cell nuclear transfer.
(2) Efforts to create human beings by cloning mark a new and decisive step toward turning human reproduction into a manufacturing process in which human beings are made in laboratories to preordained specifications and, potentially, in multiple copies.
(3) Creating cloned live-born children, "cloning to produce children", begins by creating cloned human beings at the embryonic stage of life, a process which some also propose as a way of creating human embryos for destructive research as sources of stem cells and tissues for possible treatment of other humans, "cloning for biomedical research".
(4) Many scientists agree that attempts at "cloning to produce children" pose a massive risk of either producing children who are stillborn, unhealthy, or severely disabled, and that attempts at "cloning for biomedical research" always results in the destruction of human beings at the embryonic stage of life when their stem cells are harvested.
(5) The prospect of manufacturing human life solely to be exploited or destroyed in these ways has been condemned on moral and ethical grounds by many as displaying a profound disrespect for human life.
(6) The distinction between "therapeutic cloning" and "reproductive cloning" is a false distinction scientifically because both begin with the reproduction of a human being at the embryonic stage of life, one destined for implantation in the womb, one destined for destructive farming of its stem cells.
(7) It would be impossible to enforce a ban on "reproductive cloning" if "therapeutic cloning" is allowed because any government effort to prevent the implantation of an existing cloned embryo, or to prevent birth once implantation has occurred would raise substantial moral, legal, and practical issues.
(8) Biomedical research and treatments do not require the cloning and subsequent destruction of cloned human organisms because such research can be ethically pursued in other ways, including stem cells from adult organs and tissues such as bone marrow, blood and nerve tissue, umbilical cord blood and placental tissue, and stem cells from cell lines approved for federal funding.
For purposes of this Part, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1) "Asexual production" means human reproduction not initiated by the union of oocyte and sperm.
(2) "Human cloning" means asexual production, by somatic cell nuclear transfer, of a new human organism that is, at all stages of development, genetically virtually identical to a currently existing or previously existing human being.
[[This definition of "human cloning" would not ban ANY human cloning, for the following reasons:
(1) The definition of human cloning in this bill applies only to one human cloning technique, i.e., SCNT. It does not refer to human cloning techniques using nuclear transfer with germ line cells; nor does it refer to human cloning by means of blastomere separation, blastocyst splitting, pronuclei transfer or any other human cloning techniques. Therefore, this bill does not ban any of these other human cloning techniques.
(2) The bill's definition of cloning in terms of SCNT is scientifically erroneous and therefore does not even ban human cloning using the SCNT technique. That is, the immediate product of SCNT is NOT accurately defined as "a living organism having genetic material that is virtually identical to the genetic material of an existing or previously existing human organism." This is because:
(a) the mitochondrial DNA (mDNA) of the donor cell is not transferred to the embryo; and,
(b) the mDNA of the enucleated oocyte used remains in the new embryo.
Therefore, the genome of the new embryo is different on these two counts, and thus is NOT "virtually identical to the genetic material of an existing or previously existing human organism." Since the bill would only apply to this scientifically erroneous form of human cloning, it would not ban the real SCNT human cloning technique.
Therefore, NO human cloning is prohibited by this bill.
3. The bill defines the use of only somatic cell nuclei for transfer in human cloning; it does not include the use of the nuclear transfer cloning technique in which the diploid nucleus of a germ line cell could be used to clone a human being. Therefore, this bill would allow human cloning by means of germ line cell nuclear transfer (GLCNT). - DNI]]
(3) "Oocyte" means the human female germ cell (the ovum).
[[This is a scientifically incorrect definition of "oocyte", since "the human female germ cell" would define more than just the "ovum"; it would define all of the different stages of maturation of the human female germ cell -- from the totipotent diploid primitive female germ cells first formed in the early human embryo as early as 2 1/2 - 3 weeks post fertilization through the mature female oocyte. Further, according to human embryology international nomenclature, there is no such thing as an "ovum". There is, rather, a diploid mature oocyte and then an embryo (if and only if the oocyte has been fertilized by a sperm). This erroneous definition of "oocyte" would not cover any real human female oocytes, thus they could all be used for human cloning using all human cloning techniques. - DNI]]
(4) "Somatic cell" means a diploid cell (having a complete set of chromosomes) obtained or derived from a living or deceased human being at any stage of development.
[[This is a scientifically incorrect and misleading definition of "somatic cell". There are two general categories of DIPLOID cells in the human body: somatic cells, and germ line cells. Both types of cells are diploid, having "a complete set of chromosomes". The bill's definition implies that all diploid human cells are somatic cells, thus leaving out of consideration all of the germ line cells of the human body. That would allow human cloning -- by means of any cloning technique -- using diploid germ line cells. -- DNI]]
(5) "Somatic cell nuclear transfer" means introducing the nuclear material of a human somatic cell (donor) into an oocyte (ovum) whose own nucleus has been removed or inactivated, yielding a product that has a human genetic constitution virtually identical to the donor of the somatic cell.
[[This erroneous definition of "somatic cell nuclear transfer", as explained above (with the erroneous definition of "human cloning"), would not apply to the real somatic cell nuclear transfer technique in which the human embryo produced does NOT have " a human genetic constitution virtually identical to the donor of the somatic cell." Therefore, this bill would NOT ban human cloning by means of using the real somatic cell nuclear transfer technique. -- DNI]]
(1) Perform or attempt to perform human cloning.
[[The term "human cloning" in this bill is scientifically misdefined, thus allowing human cloning using all human cloning techniques. Therefore, no "person or entity, public or private" could be prohibited from performing or attempting to perform any human cloning. Note too that here there is no legal distinction made between a "person" and an "individual", as is done below, thus calling into question as to whether or not only "persons" as institutions or entities can be held legally accountable or liable for performing human cloning, as distinct from individual human persons such as researchers, bioethicists, lawyers, legislators, members of Institutional Review Boards, etc., being held legally accountable or liable. - DNI]]
(2) Participate in an attempt to perform human cloning .
[[The term "human cloning" in this bill is scientifically misdefined, thus allowing human cloning using all human cloning techniques. Therefore, no "person or entity" who participates in an attempt to perform any kind of human cloning could be prohibited from attempting to perform any kind of human cloning. - DNI]]
(3) Transfer, ship, or receive for any purpose a human organism produced by human cloning, or any product derived from such human organism.
[[The term "human cloning" in this bill is scientifically misdefined, thus allowing human cloning using all human cloning techniques. Therefore, no "person or entity" could be prohibited from transferring, shipping, or receiving for any purpose a human organism, or any product derived from such an organism, produced by human cloning. - DNI]]
(4) Import for any purpose a human organism produced by human cloning, or any product derived from such human organism.
[[The term "human cloning" in this bill is scientifically misdefined, thus allowing human cloning using all human cloning techniques. Therefore, no "person or entity" could be prohibited from importing for any purpose a human organism, or any product derived from such human organism, produced by human cloning. - DNI]]
[[The term "human cloning" in this bill is scientifically misdefined, thus allowing human cloning using all human cloning techniques. Therefore, it would not prohibit any "person" from purchasing or selling an ovum, zygote, embryo, or fetus with the intent to perform or attempt to perform human cloning. And because the term "embryo" is scientifically misdefined in this bill, it would also specifically not prohibit any "person" from purchasing or selling human pronuclei or human germ line cells (including totipotent diploid human primitive germ line cells) with the intent to perform or attempt to perform any human cloning using any human cloning techniques. - DNI]]
[[As is standard in most legislation, this bill generally stipulates that if something is not specifically addressed by this bill then it is not covered (prohibited) by this bill. Additionally, as is usual in these bills addressing human cloning, human embryonic stem cell research, human embryo research, human fetal research, etc., this bill also stipulates certain specific activities that do not fall under the bill's prohibitions, and thus they are specifically allowed. Therefore, anything that is not included in this list is not covered by this bill; and, any items that are specified by this bill that are scientifically misdefined would not be covered by this bill.
Therefore, this bill acknowledges here that there are other cloning techniques that may be used to clone human beings. It specifically allows human cloning by means of nuclear transfer and other cloning techniques. But because "nuclear transfer" in this bill erroneously only applies to the use of somatic cells in somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), it does not cover human cloning by "nuclear transfer" by means of the use of germ line cells in germ line cell nuclear transfer (GLCNT), which thus would be allowed. And because "human cloning" is scientifically misdefined in this bill, germ line cells could be used to clone human beings using any human cloning technique. Note, e.g., because most germ line cells are diploid they can be cloned using nuclear transfer; because primitive germ line cells are totipotent they can be cloned by means of "twinning".
This section also specifically allows cloning by means of the use of "molecules". Human pronuclei are "molecules" - they are molecules of human DNA. Since cloning by means of the use of "molecules" is specifically allowed by this section, human cloning by means of pronuclei transfer is specifically allowed.
And since "human embryo" is scientifically misdefined in this bill as not beginning to exist until after syngamy and the formation of the zygote, "human organism" would likewise be misdefined - thus allowing human cloning by means of pronuclei transfer. Because of the same misdefinition, human/human chimeras and human animal chimeras produced by pronuclei transfer before syngamy would be specifically allowed by this section. - DNI]]
[[Since no human cloning using any human cloning technique is prohibited by this bill, no one would violate anything by cloning human beings using any human cloning techniques. Thus no one would be able to be fined anything or imprisoned for any time in any manner. - DNI]]
Section 2. Section 3 of Act No. 788 of the 1999 Regular Session of the Louisiana Legislature is hereby repealed in its entirety.
[[Therefore, now not even reproductive cloning, using any human cloning techniques, is prohibited in the State of Louisiana. - DNI]]
Section 3. This Act shall become effective upon signature by the governor or, if not signed by the governor, upon expiration of the time for bills to become law without signature by the governor, as provided by Article III, Section 18 of the Constitution of Louisiana. If vetoed by the governor and subsequently approved by the legislature, this Act shall become effective on the day following such approval.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving similar information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.