Morally challenged
cloning research

The headline was buried in the Jan. 21 NewScience article reporting on another potential scandal in the cloning world.

This one involved claims made in 2003 by researcher Hui-Zhen Sheng of China. In an paper published in New Scientist, Sheng reported he had successfully harvested embryonic stem cells from rabbit-human embryos, potentially finding a way to alleviate the shortage of human eggs needed for cloning experimentation.

TRENDING: Athlete files lawsuit alleging she was forced off team for refusing to kneel

Scientists now wary after being duped by fallen clone king Hwang Woo-Suk are sounding the alarm on Sheng, because no one has been able to duplicate his work.

Scientists did not sound the alarm three years ago when Sheng inserted human cells into rabbit eggs. It only matters now whether Sheng lied about the products of that conception.

In other words, the means weren't called into account, just the ends.

ESCR and cloning researchers say they are an ethical bunch.

For instance, when Chicago researcher Dr. Norbert Gleicher announced at a fertility conference in 2003 he had inserted male cells into 3-day-old female embryos and grew them another six days before killing them, his colleagues denounced him.

"It's one thing if the right-to-life community has problems with your work, but if scientists ... say it's outrageous, that says something," said Boston University bioethicist George Annas of Gleicher's experiments to the Washington Post, according to the New Atlantis.

Let me see if I am intelligent enough to bow while simultaneously turning the other cheek. Yes, whew.

Still, the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology chose Gleicher's research as one of two awards finalists. Gleicher said the only reason committee members told him he lost was "because they didn't want the publicity," according to ScienCentralNews.

Three years later, there are no regulations to stop Gleicher from continuing to create his little hermaphrodites, known endearingly in the ESCR world as "she-males."

In California this past December, Salk Institute researchers announced they had successfully injected 100,000 human embryonic stem cells each into the brains of 14-day-old mouse fetuses, which (who?) went on to live to adulthood. Mice have a 21-day gestation period, so the mouse fetuses were the equivalent age of 6-month-old human fetuses when given their smart shot.

David Magnus, director of Stanford University's biomedical ethics board, understands our concerns. "The worry is if you humanize [animals] too much you cross certain boundaries," said Magnus, as quoted by the Associated Press. "But I don't think this research comes even close to that.''

Now a Stanford team wants to create mice with brains composed entirely of human neurons.

I wonder what Magnus et. al think of that. Never mind, I don't wonder.

Then there's researcher Jose Cibelli, who inserted his own body cells into cow eggs.

Cibelli recently applied for a patent to infuse a complete set of human DNA into animal eggs so as to create human embryonic stem cells.

(I thought embryonic stem-cell researchers only got into the field out of pity for orphaned embryos from in vitro fertilization.)

Meanwhile, a former partner of disgraced clone king Hwang, Dr. Gerald Schatten of the University of Pittsburgh, "is credited with having created the first monkey to contain DNA from another animal – in this case a jellyfish," reported the Associated Press.

What caused Schatten's downfall? According to the AP, former associates said his "vocal" support of embryonic stem-cell research was "his tendency and maybe his weakness," and "Schatten was reportedly interested in adapting Hwang's techniques for use in the primates."

God only knows what new creations Schatten had in mind.

Speaking of which, some wonder whether clones and human-animal beings will have souls.

I myself wonder whether cloning and embryonic stem-cell researchers have souls.