Two Human Cloning "Bans" in Louisiana Would Allow Extensive Human Cloning and Human Genetic Engineering

Dianne Irving Comments
Copyright May 16, 2004
Reproduced with Permission

[Note: The latest Louisiana Senate cloning "ban" (SB 782) by Lentini (http://www.legis.state.la.us/leg_docs/04RS/CVT8/OUT/0000LD1W.PDF), which passed a Senate Judiciary Committee by voice vote Tuesday, May 17, also contains the same problematic definition of "cloning" as House Bill 557 (Beard) does below. By definition this definition would allow all "therapeutic" cloning (aka, "stem cell research"), especially because the only "cloning" prohibited is that performed "for the purpose of or to implant".]

Two different human cloning "bans" currently pending in the State of Louisiana would unfortunately allow extensive human cloning and genetic engineering of human beings.

For an analysis of the original State of Louisiana human cloning "ban" (2003), please see D. N. Irving, at http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irvi/irvi_07louisianabill.html.ÊFor scientific references documenting comments on the current bills below, please see D. N. Irving, "Playing God by Manipulating Man:ÊFacts and Frauds of Human Cloning", (October 4, 2003), at:Êhttp://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_22manipulatingman1.html;ÊÊat http://www.mocatholic.org/uploads/IrvingCloning3.pdf;Êand athttp://www.uffl.org/irving/irvplayinggo.pdfÊand http://www.uffl.org/irving/irvplayinggoappen.pdf.

For examples and suggestions of accurate scientific definitions that could be used in this and related bills, please see D. N. Irving, "How to Build a Better Human Cloning Bill or Treaty"(March 18, 2004), at:Êhttp://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_24buildcloningbill.html.ÊÊFor extensive explanations of how such deficient language in these and related bills can consequently promote much unethical human genetic engineering research, please see D. N. Irving, "State of Delaware human cloning ÔbanÕ: Loopholes Form Blueprints for Human Genetic Engineering" (April 14, 2004), at:Êhttp://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irvi/irvi_30delawarecloningban1.html.

COMMENTARIES ON BOTH CURRENT (2004) LOUISIANA HUMAN CLONING "BANS":

http://www.legis.state.la.us/leg_docs/04RS/CVT9/OUT/0000L1XQ.PDF
Assigned to House Criminal Justice Committee
HB-557 (Beard)

C. Based on the above findings, it is the purpose of this Part to prohibit both cloning to produce children and cloning for biomedical research.

§1299.36 1. Definitions:ÊAs used in this Part, "clone" means the practice of creating or attempting to create a human being by transferring the nucleus from a human cell from whatever source into a human egg cell from which the nucleus has been removed for the purpose of or to implant the resulting product to initiate a pregnancy that could result in the birth of a human being.

This bill appears to apply to the use of both state and private funds.
Note how the formal definitions usedÊpreclude this bill fromÊprohibiting cloning for biomedical purposes.ÊAnd all cloning and genetic engineering research that slips through these legislative cracks could be used for both cloning to produce children as well as for cloning for biomedical research.
The creation of human chimeras or transgenic animals is not prohibited by this bill.
As detailed below, there are many different kinds of cloning and genetic engineering techniques that could reproduced new living human beings - not just the SCNT technique.ÊTherefore all such research that is not specifically articulated in this bill would not be prohibited by this bill -- for both research and reproductive purposes.ÊAlso, since the SCNT itself is misdefined, this bill would not prohibit the use of even that kind of cloning technique -- for both research and reproductive purposes.
The language here is restrictive to only the transfer of a nucleus into a "human egg cell" "from which the nucleus has been removed."ÊHowever, much cloning involves the transfer of a nucleus into cells other than human egg cells, e.g., the use of the single-cell human zygote (which is no longer an "egg" cell, but an embryo), as well as separated early embryonic blastomeres, and early primitive germ line cells --Êboth of which are totipotent.ÊSometimes the nuclei of these cells are removed, sometimes not.ÊThus such research is notÊbanned by this bill -- for both research and reproductive purposes
By using the restrictive language,"for the purpose of or to implant", this bill allows for research if it is not "intended", or not "for the purpose of", implanting. Therefore, this bill allows for virtually all human cloning and human genetic engineering research as long as the embryo is not intended to be implanted.

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.

Note that the term "asexual production" encompasses dozens of scientific techniques that could asexually reproduce new living human embryos, e.g.:Ênuclear transfer (including somatic and germ line cell), "twinning" (i.e., blastomere separation, blastocyst splitting, embryo splitting, embryo multiplication, etc.), parthenogenesis,pronuclei transfer, mitochondrial transfer, DNA-recombinant gene transfer, the use of artificially constructed chromosomes, sperms, oocytes, embryos, etc.ÊMost of these techniques have been used in animal work for the last 25 years, and in human work for the last 10 years.ÊAll of them are currently being used in research around the world (see PubMed for citations to studies).

(2) "Human cloning" means asexual production, by somatic cell nuclear transfer, of a new human organism or partial human organism that is, at all stages of development, genetically virtually identical to a currently existing or previously existing human being.

Defines "human cloning" ONLY in terms of SCNT.ÊThere are dozens of other human cloning techniques.ÊSince the bill does not address them, then they are not banned.
Misdefines the SCNT cloning technique.Ê(1) Because of differences in mitochondrial DNA, the product is NOT "genetically virtually identical";Ê(2) Because the product is genetically UNIQUE, it is NOT identical to ANY "currently existing or previously existing human being".ÊSince the bill misdefines SCNT, even THAT human cloning technique is not banned.
Therefore, even the production of "partial human organisms" - i.e., human/animal chimeras?? - would not be banned.

Even with just these deficiencies, this bill does NOT ban ANY human cloning.

(3) "Oocyte" means the human female germ cell (the ovum).

Note, for purposes below:Ê(1) there is no such thing scientifically as an "ovum";Ê(2)Êmature oocytes are DIPLOID - until and unless they are fertilized by a sperm -- and therefore they too can be cloned by nuclear transfer (GLCNT);Ê(3)Êprimitive germ line cells are also DIPLOID, and therefore they too can be cloned by GLCNT;Êthey are also TOTIPOTENT, and therefore can be cloned by "twinning";Ê(4)Êonce the mature oocyte is fertilized, it is no longer an oocyte, it is AN EMBRYO.

(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.

There are two kinds of DIPLOID cells in a human being:Êsomatic and germ line.ÊBecause diploid germ line cells are not addressed, then cloning them by nuclear transfer or by "twinning"is not banned by this bill.
Since human chromosomes, pronuclei, nuclei, sperm and oocytes could be (and many already are) artificially constructed, they would not have been "derived from a living or deceased human being", and therefore cloning by means of artificially constructed human molecules and cells would not be banned by this bill.

(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.

Defines "human cloning" ONLY in terms of SCNT.ÊThere are dozens of other human cloning techniques.ÊSince the bill does not address them, then they are not banned.
Human cloning by means of nuclear transfer can be accomplished using either diploid somatic or diploid germ line cells.ÊSince this bill defines only the use of diploid somatic cells, cloning by means of using germ line cells is not banned by this bill.
Note that the "genome" is not defined just in terms of the nuclear DNA, but also in terms of the mitochondrial and other DNA in the cytoplasm (outside the nucleus).ÊThat is, the "human genome" is properly defined in terms of the TOTAL DNA in the human cell.ÊTherefore, the "genetic constitution" would have to be defined in terms of both nuclear DNA and cytoplasmic DNA.
Misdefines the SCNT cloning technique.Ê(1) Because of differences in mitochondrial DNA, the product is NOT "genetically virtually identical";Ê(2) Because the product is genetically UNIQUE, it is NOT identical to ANY "currently existing or previously existing human being".ÊSince the bill misdefines SCNT, even THAT human cloning technique is not banned.

C. This Section does not prohibit scientific research or a cell-based therapy not specifically prohibited elsewhere by this Part, including in vitro fertilization, the administration of fertility enhancing drugs, research in the use of nuclear transfer or other cloning techniques to produce molecules, DNA, tissues, organs, plants, or animals other than human organisms.

This is often seemingly the most innocuous part of these bills, yet allows extensive human cloning and human genetic engineering to go forward.ÊAs it states, this section makes it clear that if research is not specifically articulated by this bill then the bill does not apply to it - hence, it is allowed.
Note that extensive human genetic engineering and cloning is being performed in IVF facilities using private funds.Ê"IVF research" IS human embryo research (as is cloning, genetic engineering, stem cell research, etc.).Ê"IVF research" was inadvertently allowed with the passage of the 1993 NIH Revitalization Act, as was "fetal tissue transplant research" - note that totipotent and/or diploid germ line cells are considered "fetal tissue", and these cells can thus be used in both human cloning and genetic engineering research.ÊThis "exception" thus allows extensive human cloning.
Much of the research involving human genetic research involves human cloning.ÊSuch research does not involve whole human cells, but rather PARTS of human cells, or "molecules" - either natural or artificially reproduced.ÊThus the phrase "to produce molecules, DNA, tissues, organs" can be used to sanction such research.
It would also not apply to the production of human/non-human chimeras, or to the production of transgenic animals.

http://www.legis.state.la.us/leg_docs/04RS/CVT3/OUT/0000L3QW.PDF

Assigned to House Criminal Justice Committee

HB 803: (Beard)

As used in this Part, the following words have the following meanings:

(1) "Asexual production" means human reproduction not initiated by the union of oocyte and sperm.

This bill appears to apply only to the use of state funds, not to the use of private or federal funds.
Note that the term "asexual production" encompasses dozens of scientific techniques that could asexually reproduce new living human embryos, e.g.:Ênuclear transfer (including somatic and germ line cell), "twinning" (i.e., blastomere separation, blastocyst splitting, embryo splitting, embryo multiplication, etc.), parthenogenesis, pronuclei transfer, mitochondrial transfer, DNA-recombinant gene transfer, the use of artificially constructed chromosomes, sperms, oocytes, embryos, etc.ÊMost of these techniques have been used in animal work for the last 25 years, and in human work for the last 10 years.ÊAll of them are currently being used in research around the world (see PubMed for citations to studies).

(2) "Human cloning" means human asexual production, by somatic cell nuclear transfer, to produce a living embryo with a human or predominantly human genetic constitution.

Defines "human cloning" ONLY in terms of SCNT.ÊThere are dozens of other human cloning techniques.ÊSince the bill does not address them, then they are not banned.
Human cloning by means of nuclear transfer can be accomplished using either diploid somatic or diploid germ line cells.ÊSince this bill defines only the use of diploid somatic cells, cloning by means of using germ line cells is not banned by this bill.
Note that the "genome" is not defined just in terms of the nuclear DNA, but also in terms of the mitochondrial and other DNA in the cytoplasm (outside the nucleus).ÊThat is, the "human genome" is properly defined in terms of the TOTAL DNA in the human cell.ÊTherefore, the "genetic constitution" would have to be defined in terms of both nuclear DNA and cytoplasmic DNA (including mitochondrial DNA).
In this definition, SCNT per se is not defined.ÊThe product is defined in terms of living embryos with "a human or predominantly human genetic constitution" - which contradicts definition (4) below.ÊThe phrase "predominantly human genetic constitution" would seem to ban the creation of human/non-human chimeras.

(3) "Oocyte" means the human female germ cell (the ovum). 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.

Note, for purposes below:Ê(1) there is no such thing scientifically as an "ovum";Ê(2)Êmature oocytes are DIPLOID - until and unless they are fertilized by a sperm -- and therefore they too can be cloned by nuclear transfer (GLCNT);Ê(3)Êprimitive germ line cells are also DIPLOID, and therefore they too can be cloned by GLCNT;Êthey are also TOTIPOTENT, and therefore can be cloned by "twinning";Ê(4)Êonce the mature oocyte is fertilized, it is no longer an oocyte, it is AN EMBRYO.
There are two kinds of DIPLOID cells in a human being:Êsomatic and germ line.ÊBecause diploid germ line cells are not addressed, then cloning them by nuclear transfer or by "twinning" is not banned by this bill.
Since human chromosomes, pronuclei, nuclei, sperm and oocytes could be (and many already are) artificially constructed, they would not have been "derived from a living or deceased human being", and therefore cloning by means of artificially constructed human molecules and cells would not be banned by this bill.

(4) "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.

Defines "human cloning" ONLY in terms of SCNT.ÊThere are dozens of other human cloning techniques.ÊSince the bill does not address them, then they are not banned.
Human cloning by means of nuclear transfer can be accomplished using either diploid somatic or diploid germ line cells.ÊSince this bill defines only the use of diploid somatic cells, cloning by means of using germ line cells is not banned by this bill.
Misdefines the SCNT cloning technique.Ê(1) Because of differences in mitochondrial DNA, the product is NOT "virtually identical to the donor"; (2) Because the product is genetically UNIQUE, it is NOT identical to ANY "donor".ÊSince the bill misdefines SCNT, even THAT human cloning technique is not banned.ÊConsequently the production of human/non-human chimeras is also not banned.
Note that the "genome" is not defined just in terms of the nuclear DNA, but also in terms of the mitochondrial and other DNA in the cytoplasm (outside the nucleus).ÊThat is, the "human genome" is properly defined in terms of the TOTAL DNA in the human cell.ÊTherefore, the "human genetic constitution" would have to be defined in terms of both nuclear DNA and cytoplasmic DNA (including mitochondrial DNA).

(5) "Embryo" means an organism of the species homo sapiens from the single cell stage to eight weeks development.

The real debate consists of when during the formation of "the single cell stage" (i.e., during the process of fertilization OR of cloning) a new human being begins to exist.ÊIf one argues that the embryo begins at syngamy, then almost all of the aforementioned asexual human reproduction techniques are not banned by this bill.ÊIf one argues - with both OÕRahilly and Carlson - that the embryo begins to exist with the mingling of the chromosomes from the pronuclei, then some but not all such research is not banned by this bill.ÊIf one argues that the embryo begins with the penetration of the oocyte by the sperm, then all of the aforementioned asexually human reproduction techniques are not banned by this bill.
Misdefines the end of the "embryonic period", which is at the END of 8 weeks.ÊTherefore, the use of human embryos during their 8th week of development are NOT covered by this bill.ÊThis observation needs to be understood in the context of many efforts to change the definitions of both the embryonic period and the fetal period.ÊE.g., the current OHRP federal regulations define "fetus" as beginning at implantation (5-7 days post fertilization/cloning) - which is absurd.ÊThe fetal period begins at the beginning of 9 weeks.ÊBy such a definition, there is NO EMBRYO - period.ÊSimilarly, the Delaware bill attempts to redefine the "fetus" as beginning to exist well into the embryonic period.ÊFrom the other end of development, false scientific terms such as "pre-embryo" (formally rejected by the International Nomina Embryologica Committee) hold that before implantation there is no "embryo", simply a "pre-embryo" or just "stem cells".ÊAnother effort (scientifically rejected for over 50 years) appeals to the defunct "biogenetics law", which claims that there is actually no HUMAN BEING there at all until some point late in fetal development.ÊAll such efforts at redefinitions in bills - which would have the legal effect of allowing all sorts of unethical research - need to be kept in mind.

(6) "Fetus" means an organism of the species homo sapiens from eight weeks development until complete expulsion or extraction from a woman's body, or removal from an artificial womb or other similar environment designed to nurture the development of such organism.

Scientifically misdefines the "fetal period" (see above definition of "embryo").ÊThe fetal period does not begin until the beginning of 9 weeks.ÊNote too the admission of the use of artificial wombs.ÊHopefully "other similar environments" would include gestation in the wombs (or body) of non-human animals (e.g., monkeys, apes, orangutans, etc.), but since these are not "artificially constructed", they probably would not.

Proposed law creates exceptions for in vitro fertilization, the administration of fertility enhancing drugs, research in the use of nuclear transfer or other cloning techniques to produce molecules, DNA, tissues, organs, plants, or animals other than humans, or cells.

This is seemingly the most innocuous part of these bills, yet allows extensive human cloning and human genetic engineering to go forward.ÊAs it states, this section makes it clear that if research is not specifically articulated by this bill then the bill does not apply to it - hence, it is allowed.
Note that extensive human genetic engineering and cloning is being performed in IVF facilities using private funds.Ê"IVF research" IS human embryo research (as is cloning, genetic engineering, stem cell research, etc.).Ê"IVF research" was inadvertently allowed with the passage of the 1993 NIH Revitalization Act, as was "fetal tissue transplant research" - note that totipotent and/or diploid germ line cells are considered "fetal tissue", and these cells can thus be used in both human cloning and genetic engineering research.ÊThis "exception" thus allows extensive human cloning.
Much of the research involving human genetic research involves human cloning.ÊSuch research does not involve whole human cells, but rather PARTS of human cells, or "molecules" - either natural or artificially reproduced.ÊThus the phrase "to produce molecules, DNA, tissues, organs" can be used to sanction such research.
It would also not apply to the production of human/non-human chimeras, or to the production of transgenic animals.

Top