Dianne N. Irving
April 16, 2012
Reproduced with Permission
With only a couple of hours to produce these requested comments, I will simply summarize in outline form just a very few of the profoundly unethical consequences that IVF and ART have already wrought that Croatia might prudently consider. Implications of what other purposes lie ahead involving IVF/ART would not require advanced degrees. Extensive references for documentation available on request. The following doesn't even need to appeal to any religious or theological doctrines - just empirical facts --, although the religious and theological considerations of the people are also quite relevant.
Of utmost concern to this writer is that researchers and affiliated others will especially purposefully seek out countries with few or no laws or regulations on IVF/ART and related activities, and a populace that is totally unfamiliar and unschooled in even the "basic" vocabulary required to consider or debate such IVF/ART facilities rationally or intelligently. The reasons for seeking such countries are obvious.
It is critical to understand that we are not looking simply at artificially fertilizing a human embryo in the research laboratory or "infertility" clinic (IVF) - which I will refer to as "sexual reproduction". We are also looking at many other kinds of human reproductive techniques (ART) that also take place in the same labs and clinics that do not use the process of fertilization - which I will call a-sexual reproduction". (In fact, one such case of a-sexual reproduction, monozygotic or identical "twinning", also takes place
naturally
within the woman's body
in vivo). And today it is already possible to reproduce new human embryos, and new human "eggs" and sperm, from
any
kind of human cell [See Irving, "Any Human Cell - iPS, Direct Programmed, Embryonic, Fetal or Adult - Can Be Genetically Engineered to Asexually Reproduce New Human Embryos for Purposes of Reproduction ('Infertility')" (November 2011), at:
http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_194cellasexuallyreproduce1.html].
Common to both methods of human reproduction the following consequences have already been accomplished. Usually it is accompanied by very "hyped" expectations for "curing diseases" or "curing infertility" which never materialize but which appeal to the sympathies of people, especially to disease group advocates and politicians, as well as by the use of false scientific facts of human embryology so as to hope that what is really taking place not be identified by non-scientists.
-
1. PGD, or pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, is performed on new human embryos in order to determine if certain genetic disorders are present. One of the totipotent cells of the new embryo is removed and tested. If such genes are identified, then the new human being is either destroyed, frozen or "donated" for destructive scientific research. Only the "best" embryos are implanted.
-
2. Given that the human genome has still only been about 15-20% decoded (including many other artifacts involved with even those determinations), it is not surprising that a technician's capacity to determine the accuracy of such genetic identifications is possibly erroneous. This would result in the death of a normal human embryo, or his/her "donation" for research, or in the misdiagnosis and implantation of a "diseased" human embryo as "normal".
-
3. The cells of these earliest human embryos tested for PGD are "totipotent" - i.e., capable of being reverted back to a new whole different human embryo by means of the natural biological process of "regulation" - called "monozygotic twinning" or "identical twinning". Thus the removing of any of these totipotent cells (normal or otherwise) of any early human embryo
in vitro
could also be done in order to produce new human embryos for various purposes, e.g., destructive research, unethical genetic engineering, and more "infertility treatments". In fact, many IVF/ART clinics have "twinned" such early embryos as infertility treatments, especially for older women, for decades now - called "twinning", "blastomere separation", "blastocyst splitting", "embryo multiplication", etc. Again, monozygotic twinning is an a-sexual reproductive technique that does not involve "fertilization" or "conception".
-
4. Even the European Court of Justice has recently banned patents that involve the use of totipotent cells, cloned cells, etc., from early human embryos (whether sexually or a-sexually reproduced). And UNESCO's bioethics committee has recently identified and acknowledged the use of human embryos - either sexually or a-sexually reproduced - in international illegal trafficking
for reproductive purposes. Further, many European countries are now banning genetic engineering (including "synthetic biology" and 'biosimilar" drugs) of various types.
-
5. Aside from the obvious questions about the academic qualifications and expertise of those performing IVF/ART, one simple question that is rarely expressed is this: How does a woman
really
know what is
really
being implanted into her womb? The question is particularly relevant today, when
in vivo
research within a woman's body is
necessary
in order to obtain
data
on human embryos who have been
genetically engineered
for various characteristics - both for medical as well as for eugenic purposes. Such goals were actually stated by IVF committee members on the 1998 NIH Human Embryo Research Panel who were complaining about the 14-day limit (based on the scientifically false term "pre-embryo"). Without being allowed to follow such pregnancies
and serially abort
the embryos and fetuses at prescribed times, these reproductive "scientists" could not obtain the data they needed to identify "cause and effect".
-
6. Also of concern are the clearly eugenic purposes that IVF/ART facilities provide for all manner of genetic engineering and "synthetic biology" for "redesigning the human being". The literature on this is massive and fast moving, often internationally promoted by futurists, transhumanists, technoprogressives, postnaturalists, etc., who are by far the majority in policy making positions. Such eugenic goals by definition
require these IVF/ART facilities
in order to reproduce their "designer babies".
-
7. The ability to reproduced new human embryos in IVF/ART facilities has also opened up all manner of "legal and illegal" international trafficking in surrogate mothers, "eggs", sperm, and whole embryos, often associated with international illegal sex trades, and often again associated with underdeveloped countries.
It is always quite difficult to look back at earlier considerations such as allowing IVF and ART and acknowledge that it was a huge mistake. But frankly that is precisely what is needed now, and fast. The "cure" for "infertility" must not be sought in technology, but in reassessing the most
basic
and commonly acknowledged natural law moral foundations in society and character-building that would prevent 99% of such massive infertility that we see today.
Respectfully submitted,
Prof. Dr. Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D.
Former NIH bench research biochemist/biologist
Professor of the History of Philosophy and Medical Ethics
DNIrving@aol.com
Top