This month, the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering how to implement new IVF techniques that "create" human beings derived from three other people.
UPDATE 2/4/16: 3-Parent Babies ARE Ethical, Experts Tell President Obama's FDA
UPDATE 3/15/15: Secret Designer Babies via Gene-editing Science
Totalitarians ponder, How many ways can we destroy the family? Divorce, welfare state, abortion, "gay marriage," pornography, "safe" sex, drug abuse, public school from birth — and of course, end religious liberty.
For background, read Lab 'Creates' Human Life with 3 Biological Parents
And read Donor Eggs & IVF 'Creates' Life, Causes More Death
And also read Multitude of Kid's Legal Parents, Yet No Marriage
-- From "FDA Advisory Committees: Cellular, Tissue, and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee Meeting" government announcement for 2/25/14
Agenda: . . . the committee will discuss oocyte modification in assisted reproduction for the prevention of transmission of mitochondrial disease or treatment of infertility.
To read the entire announcement above, CLICK HERE.
From "The Era Of Genetically-Altered Humans Could Begin This Year" by David DiSalvo, Forbes 1/26/14
. . . At some point between now and July, the UK parliament is likely to vote on whether a new form of in vitro fertilization (IVF)—involving DNA from three parents—becomes legally available to couples. . . .
The procedure involves replacing mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) to avoid destructive cell mutations. . . .
. . . the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will start reviewing the data in earnest in February. Among the concerns on the table is whether the mtDNA donor mother could be considered a true “co-parent” of the child, and if so, can she claim parental rights?
Even though the donor would be contributing just 0.1 percent of the child’s total DNA (according to the New Scientist report), we don’t as yet have a DNA benchmark to judge the issue. Who is to say what percentage of a person’s DNA must come from another human to constitute biological parenthood?
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Freeing human eggs of mutant mitochondria" by Alla Katsnelson, Nature 4/14/2010
Researchers have successfully transplanted the genetic material in the nucleus of a fertilized human egg into another fertilized egg, without carrying over mitochondria, the energy-producing structures of the cell. The technique could be used to prevent babies from inheriting diseases caused by mutations in the DNA of mitochondria, which are present in the cytoplasm of the egg.
The British team carrying out the study used fertilized eggs donated by couples undergoing fertility treatment, and which were unsuitable for in vitro fertilization (IVF). At this early stage the sperm and egg nuclei, which contain most of the parental genes, have not yet fused. The researchers removed these nuclei and transferred them into another fertilized egg cell which had had its own nuclei removed.
[Shoukhrat Mitalipov at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland said,] Using fertilized eggs may pose an ethical problem . . . as the transplantation procedure destroys the donor embryo.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "FDA to study 'three-parent embryos'" by Michael Cook, BioEdge 2/16/14
This procedure, which involves removing the nucleus from one human egg whose cytoplasm contains defective mitochondria and placing it in an enucleated egg with healthy DNA for subsequent fertilisation, is also being debated in the UK.
The measure is strongly opposed by the Center for Genetics and Society, which is promoting an open letter to the FDA. It claims that mitochondrial transfer is unsafe, is effectively experimentation on unconsenting human subjects, and would only help a handful of women. Most importantly, it constitutes germline modification, a form of eugenics. This is a bright line which no country has ever stepped across.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Urgent: Tell the FDA to Prohibit Three-Parent Embryo Technique" by Rebecca Taylor, LifeNews.com 2/17/14
Over 40 countries have banned such inheritable genetic modifications. Regrettably, the United States has no such laws and it is up the FDA to regulate the practice. . . .
This is a pivotal point in human history. Will we allow the intentional genetic modification of our children and grandchildren? I do not believe I am exaggerating when I say the future of our species depends on how we answer that question.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 2/3/15: From "Britain votes to allow world's first 'three-parent' IVF babies" by Kate Kelland and Kylie MacLellan, Reuters
After an emotionally charged 90-minute debate that some lawmakers criticised as being too short for such a serious matter, parliament voted 382 to 128 in favour of the technique, called mitochondrial donation.
The vote paves the way for a medical world first for Britain -- which along with the United States has been at the forefront of scientific research on the treatments -- but one that is fiercely disputed by some religious groups and other critics.
Lawmakers were given a free vote on the issue, and Prime Minister David Cameron's spokesman said the British leader had voted to support it, adding it was not "about playing God".
. . . critics say the technique will lead to the creation of genetically modified "designer babies", with Conservative lawmaker Fiona Bruce saying it would amount to letting "the genie out of the bottle".
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Pennsylvania Court Finds Three Adults Can Have Parental Rights
