Permanent Monitoring Panel -
Biotechnology
Members of the Panel
Chairman:
Oleg Jardetzky (Structural Biology, Stanford, USA)
Members:
Adriano Aguzzi (Pathology, Zürich, Switzerland)
Giovanni Levi (Molecular Biology, Genova, Italy)
Benno Müller-Hill (Molecular Genetics, Köln, Germany)
David Schlessinger (Molecular Genetics, NIH, Baltimore, USA)
Associate Members:
Richard Braun (Biochemistry, Bern, Switzerland)
Bernardino Ghetti (Neuropathology, Indianapolis, USA)
Mark Hughes (Molecular Genetics, Medicine, Wayne State, USA)
(Associate Panel Members are a community of scientists who
provide support and expertise for the working of the Permanent Monitoring
Panel.)
Mandate
To monitor existing and new biological and genetic engineering technologies
and identify the ethical, economic and political issues arising from them. To
provide an early warning system for potential dangers and abuses and recommend
guidelines and regulatory measures if necessary.
Priorities in dealing with the Emergency
Central Issues
-
Prenatal and presymptomatic
genetic diagnosis, genetic intervention and fertility control.
-
Plant biotechnology and its
implications for human health and biological warfare.
-
Biotechnology of microbial
genomes and its potential use in biological warfare and bio-terrorism.
-
Public and economic control of
biotechnology research.
Other issues to be borne in mind and considered if necessary:
-
Cloning
-
Gene therapy
-
Genetic control of aging
-
Animal husbandry
Workshop and Meeting Reports
Report of the Biotechnology Monitoring Panel Meeting
August 18/19 1999, Erice, Sicily
The Human Genome Project and associated developments in
biotechnology are now clearly the driving force for biological research for the
next century and offer significant promise for novel applications in medicine. A
full catalogue of human genes will be available in the coming years, along with
techniques to study their variation and changes in disease and disorders. The
Biotechnology Monitoring Panel session on August 18-19 1999 entitled
"Fertility Problems: Technological and Ethical Issues" considered some
of the issues raised by these developments. The session included several
discussions of "what is possible".
Dr. Mark Hughes surveyed the current approaches and prospects
for molecular diagnosis of human disease in the prenatal period. This has
progressed technically to where it is now possible to test for genetic disease
even before pregnancy begins. Analysis of a single cell biopsied microscopically
from the human in vitro fertilised (IVF) embryo allows serious inherited disease
to be identified and avoided by transferring to the uterus only embryos shown to
be healthy. This provides a couple who are genetically at-risk with the ability
to have a healthy child while avoiding conventional prenatal testing (e.g.
amniocentesis) and the possibility of choosing an abortion. Relevant
biotechnology now permits routine, efficient and highly reliable testing of DNA
and RNA in a single cell. Multiple genetic loci can be examined from one cell in
several ways. For example, "gene chips" containing microarrays of
thousands of human DNA sequences that sample corresponding genes provide a
platform to study the sequence of genes or the level of expression of those
genes. Scientific insight into normal and abnormal early developmental biology
can therefore be assessed in parallel for thousands of genes. This technology
shows the promise of better understanding and ultimate avoidance of numerous
serious birth defects and pregnancy loss (miscarriage). In turn, these
technologies offer new options for individual human reproduction at the same
time raising important ethical questions that deserve continued reflection and
scientific discourse.
Drs. David Schlessinger and Antonino Forabosco extended the
discussion of current technology to a particular example of the use of genomic
approaches to analyse "premature ovarian failure" (POF). This
condition which affects about 2% of women, arises when eggs and follicles are
too few in the adult female to sustain a full reproductive life-span. As a
result, the women undergo early menopause, by the mid-30s, rather than the usual
age of 50. In such women, follicle formation begins normally, but there is
excessive attrition and, at birth, when a normal female infant has the full
complement of follicles for her lifetime, POF women have too few.
Human genetics and genomic approaches were exemplified in the
study of women with inherited POF. Positional cloning was used to find the genes
affected in these instances, providing an entrée to study the process. A more
extensive "developmental genomic" approach was also outlined, which
uses the mouse genetic system and analyses of gene cohorts on "chips"
(see above) to initiate the determination of the time, place and extent
of gene expression throughout embryonic and fetal life, with special attention
to placental and ovarian formation and function.
The sum of these technologies can provide diagnostic and
therapeutic tools of enormous potential value - for example, for the early
detection of POF before a woman has lost childbearing potential, for the
assessment of fetal wellbeing, and for the improved treatment of premature
infants.
Two presentations were devoted to some of the range of
bioethical concerns about the use of the new technologies and the information
derived from their use.
Professor Angelo Serra provided reflections on 'Assisted
Reproductive Technologies'. He introduced an examination of human and social
aspects related to creating children and building families, including:
1) a review of the response by science to the request to
produce a child with the corresponding differences of viewpoint about the
acceptability of the manipulation of embryos and the discarding of 'unused'
embryos;
2) the response of medicine to the request for a 'healthy
baby' with the further bioethical problems resulting from the use of procedures
that still often fail;
3) the response of society, ranging from great permissiveness
of technological applications by choice, to very great caution and limitations
for those who, like religious Catholics, are not comfortable with
"individual rights" and retain a vision of the dependence of society
on children brought into families through a natural act of love.
Dr. Demetrio Neri continued the discussion of IVF technology
in relation to "women's rights". He also emphasized the wide spectrum
of views, including the variety of feminist discourses that range from
enthusiasm for "liberation from the tyranny of reproductive biology"
to a negative assessment of new technology as a way to perpetuate male
domination and to approaches based on the satisfaction of women's interests
rather than abstract rights. He then explored further two general approaches to
bioethical concerns about IVF: "child-oriented" versus "the right
to have a child". Because these can conflict, difficulties result in
balancing the two views with regulations and legislation. He suggested that some
helpful guidance could be based on the so-called "ethics of care",
with attention to the principle of procreative responsibility and concern.
In spite of the variety of views that were presented, there
was some degree of consensus in the ensuing discussion that continued increases
in sensitivity and in the reliability of technological approaches could help to
provide progress in alleviating ethical concerns. Thus, it was noted, for
example that the acceptance of Gamete Intrafallopian Transfer (GIFT) procedures
by the Catholic Church could, in principle, be extended to other IVF procedures
if a single viable zygote could be created with great certainty, alleviating the
issue of discard. The possibility of approaching this goal through the genomic
and genetic study of mouse and primate reproduction and development was also
pointed out. Thus, the notion was fielded that better technology might remedy
some bioethical problems associated with the current technology.
In a final, cautionary discussion of what can happen when a
particular political or social regime adopts a program based on a failure of
ethics (and even worse, when coupled with bad science), Dr. Benno Müller-Hill
reflected on a still-unresolved feature of the notorious "technology and
medicine" experiments of the Nazi regime. Even 50 years later, a recent
colloquium, organised by the Max Planck Institute for the history of science
came to no conclusion about the degree of involvement in the atrocities of a
member of the laboratory of Dr. F. Butenandt (at Kaiser-Wilhelm Institute,
forerunner of the Max Planck Institutes). Thus, further historical analyses will
be required to clarify the matter, based on the remaining critical papers of Dr.
Butenandt which are currently closed to public inspection until the year 2025 by
an agreement with his family. Clarification is necessary to fully understand the
circumstances that can lead to unethical applications of biological and medical
technology, and to avoid the pitfalls of social mechanisms that can lead to
comparable abuse in the future.
Focus
Primary Topics 1998-99
1. Fertility problems - technological and ethical issues
2. Social implications of biotechnology and genetic engineering
3. Social control of biotechnology and genetic engineering
PRIMARY TOPICS 1999-2000
1. Plant biotechnology and its potential use in human medicine (immunization
and other acquired characteristics)
2. Public and economic control of biotechnology research
| 