www.genethique.org

Bioethic information and analysis newsletter

Following Letter

N°79 - July 2006

Vivisection of the embryo
The Biomedicine Agency announced on 20 June 2006 having delivered the first authorisations for research on embryo to six French teams working in public structures. Among the accepted teams, five come from INSERM and Pasteur Institute and will work on imported embryonic stem cell lines. For the first time in France, the sixth team will intend to create stem cell lines from human embryos conceived in the country. This team is co-directed by Marc Peschanski (Istem, Evry) and Stéphane Viville (Strasbourg CHU). Marc Peschanski, financed by Telethon funds (see Gènéthique No 71), actively militated to obtain authorisation for research on embryo and today asks for cloning.

Beyond the bioethics law
The law of 6 August 2004 only foresees an authorisation for research on embryo by derogation and for a five-year period, only “when they are susceptible to allow major therapeutic advances and provided that they cannot be followed by an alternative method of comparable effectiveness, in the current state of scientific knowledge” (art. L.2151-5). Yet, the decree of 6 February 2006 passed silence over the legislative prohibition of research on embryo authorised "by derogation" and erases the conditions established by the law on this research (see Gènéthique n°74). Today, the examination of the files of the six teams shows that none of them undertake these researches with therapeutic purposes but all for fundamental and pharmacological purposes.

Non-therapeutic interest
The use of human embryo cells is by no means a scientific necessity in that researchers are aware of umbilical and adult stem cells present promising characteristics; and the sample in adult do not pose ethical issues because it does not endanger its life. Consequently, the use embryonic stem cells is only motivated by economical interest. The same researches could be carried out on animal embryo but they are more expensive because breeding has to be maintained whereas human embryos without "parental project" are free.

Ethical frame?
We can worry about the praetorian policy of the Biomedicine Agency which sacrifices human being interests for economical interests and is content with a pseudo ethical frame which is based on secondary points. “What kind of ethics are we talking about when the only ethics laid down involve wearing regulation shoes and masks to sacrifice human beings correctly?” questioned J-M Le Méné, president of Jérôme Lejeune Foundation.

Protestation
In a Statement of 29 June 2006, the president of the French Bishops’ Conference, denounced this transgression: « …so the process of reducing the human being to a resource carries on, which is a serious ethical violation. We have to say again that human embryo can be considered as a mere laboratory material (…) Any embryo is already a human being. Then it is not an object available for man. It is not possible to decide a limit beyond which an embryo is a human being and below which it is not. Nobody has the power to fix humanity limits of a singular existence… »

Europe: towards financing of research on human embryo?

European Parliament members adopted on 15 June 2006 a 50 billion euro program for research (7e PCRD, 2007-2013). This Framework Program for Research and Development allocates 2 billion euros to biotechnologies and life science, which was subject to long debates to decide whether Europe had to finance embryonic research.

A very weak majority
Parliament Members approved with 284 votes for and 249 against, the community financing of research on human stem cells, either adult or embryonic. The debate showed strong division on this question: Polish and Italian voted against in majority, French and British for, German was really divided. German Green MEP, Hiltrud Breyer noted: ”if embryos are considered as real transformation materials, maybe we are in a ethical rupture”, denouncing also the risks of drift towards human cloning.

Three positions
Three positions emerged around the lodged amendments:
- the support for financing any research on human, adult and embryonic stem cells, this position was lead by Philippe Busquin, ex European Research Commissioner, member of the Committee on Industry Research and Energy (socialist - Belgium).
- The refusal for financing any research which uses human embryos supported by Peter Liese (PPE - Germany) and Hiltrud Breyer (Green Party - Germany).
- The so-called position of compromise, consisting in limiting the financing of embryonic lines obtained before 31 December 2003.

Why working hard at financing?
The use of embryonic stem cells do not give today any result, either in man nor in animal; from now scientists talk about research interest and not about therapeutic objective. Why from now this relentlessness for financing these works? Undoubtedly we have to find an answer in the fascination for the beginning of life and the will to control them as well as in the choice of free material research, which are supernumerary embryos.

The COMECE « stunned »
The COMECE, European bishops’ assembly, was “stunned” by this vote. It reminds that to be opposed to the instrumentalisation of human life and to its use as raw material is not “only a catholic position” because “scientifically, there is no moral reason to distinguish an embryo at the beginning of its life to an embryo after its implantation in uterus or after 14 days”. Any human life begins from the conception and deserves a particular protection when it is created outside women body.

A decisive step in autumn
During next meeting of ministers for research, on 24 July 2006, European Council will examine the question of financing. Several Member-states let know that they are opposed to the recommendation of European parliament members (Austria, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia…) because they refused to finance a research they prohibit in their country. Then, European Parliament will adjudge, at the second reading, in autumn, before a final joint decision. 

Stem cells: the alternative solution to umbilical cord blood

Going out of the ethical dilemma
Whereas pressures in favour of research on human embryos intensify, an article by Gregory Benichou, professor and the Essec and titular of the bioethics and therapeutic innovation chair comes to clarify the debate¹. He explains that the use of umbilical stem cells in regenerative medicine could offer an alternative to embryonic stem cells without embryo manipulation or cloning.

Big therapeutic promises
Since the first global graft performed in France in 1987 by the professor Eliane Gluckman, umbilical cord blood was transplanted to more than 6,000 patients worldwide, to treat some cancers and blood diseases. Umbilical cord blood cells already allow realising successfully transplants even in case of tissue incompatibility, which is not the case with a bone marrow graft. For that reason, in 2004 Japan was the first country in the world to perform more cord blood graft than bone marrow graft. Moreover, the plasticity of umbilical stem cells is almost like the one of embryonic stem cells, without inducing oncogenic effect after transplantation. Collected by low quantities at birth, they reached to regenerate in vitro and in vivo from the bone, cartilage, vessels, muscle, liver and heart cells and neurones. It seems that their therapeutic applications could be much extended.

Public and private banks
Since 2000, a lively competition develops in the world between cord blood banks. Public banks, without purpose of gain and profit and financed by public health funds, have stored free and non-directed grafts (allogenic graft). Private banks, with purpose of gain and profit, reserve the frozen cord to the exclusive use of the baby is from (autolog graft). In April 2006, we noted 134 private banks worldwide, gathering 740,000 units and 54 public banks having a total stock of 230,000 units and limited by public financings they depend on. Prohibited in France, in Spain and in Italy, private banks develop quickly in Belgium, Great Britain and Germany; their growth shoots up in Asia, aux United States and in Australia.

United States: to encourage ethical researches
In December 2005, American Congress voted the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act, allocating a 265 million dollars budget to researches on bone marrow progenitor cells as well as umbilical cord blood cells.

Sanitary independence
The development of cord blood banks allows countries concerned not to be dependant on bio-resources from other countries.
In France, between 1994 and 2005, 63% of transplantations performed came from imported grafts; France ranks 16th worldwide in number of units per habitant. Faced with an internationally growing competition, France will have to increase the capacity of its bank, by maintaining the excellent quality of its grafts. This is the challenge of Eurocord Foundation supported by professors Eliane Gluckman and Gregory Katz-Benichou.

1. « Bioéthique et cellules souches : sortir du dilemme », Gregory Benichou, Les Echos, 8 June 2006