Mom, dad, donor: Britain moves step closer on rules to allow ‘three-parent’ babies
Mom, dad, donor: Britain moves step closer to allowing babies with 3 people’s genes
(about 4 hours later)
LONDON — Britain moved a step closer Tuesday to becoming the first country to formally allow so-called “three-parent” babies as lawmakers gave strong backing to a plan for fertility labs to use genetic material from a mother, father and a female donor.
LONDON — Britain moved a step closer Tuesday to becoming the first country to legalize so-called three-parent babies, as lawmakers moved closer to allowing fertility labs to use genetic material from a mother, father and a female donor.
The debate in the House of Commons reflected the deep passions on both sides of the issue: whether to permit in-vitro procedures that seek to avoid passing along inherited and incurable diseases from mitochondrial DNA, which is carried from mother to child.
The debate in the House of Commons reflected the deep passions on both sides of the issue of allowing in-vitro procedures that could prevent the passing on of inherited and incurable diseases through mitochondrial DNA, which is carried from mother to child.
Supporters say it would offer hope to families who would otherwise risk passing along diseases such as muscular dystrophy to their offspring. But a wide range of critics question the ethics of the proposals, saying it would be another step toward creating “designer babies.”
Supporters say changing the law would offer hope to couples who otherwise would risk transferring diseases such as muscular dystrophy to their offspring. But a wide range of critics question the ethics of the proposal, saying it would be another step toward creating “designer babies.”
In the end, the proposal passed 382-128 and moved to Parliament’s upper chamber, the House of Lords, which is expected to vote soon on the measure but no date has been set. Commentators say the first “three-parent” baby could be born next year if the changes move ahead.
The proposal passed, 382 to 128, and moved to Parliament’s upper chamber, the House of Lords, where a vote is expected soon, although no date has been set. Commentators say the first “three-parent” baby could be born next year if the legislative effort succeeds.
“This is a bold step for Parliament to take, but it is a considered and informed step,” said Britain’s health minister, Jane Ellison, before the vote. She added: “For many families affected this is, indeed, that light at the end of the dark tunnel.”
“This is a bold step for Parliament to take, but it is a considered and informed step,” said the parliamentary undersecretary for public health, Jane Ellison, before the vote. “For many families affected, this is, indeed, that light at the end of the dark tunnel,” she added
Lisa Jardine, the former chair of Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority, Britain’s fertility regulator, dismissed safety concerns, telling BBC Radio 4 that “all of those issues have been investigated.”
The technique, called mitochondrial donation, involves replacing a woman’s faulty mitochondrial DNA with healthy DNA from a female donor. Even if the bill passes, couples seeking treatment would need the permission of the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority, Britain’s fertility regulator.
“The scientific committees have said there is no evidence this procedure is unsafe but like all good scientists, they say it will require careful progress," she said.
Religious leaders have voiced concerns, warning the government against rushing into a decision and arguing that more research is needed.
Religious leaders have voiced concerns, warning the government it shouldn’t rush into a decision and that more research needs to be done.
Fears over genetic manipulation are not unique to Britain. In the 1990s, the United States pioneered a technique called cytoplasmic transfer, aimed at helping infertile women to have their own babies. As part of the procedure, donor material containing mitochondrial DNA was added to the mother’s egg. Fewer than 100 babies were born before the Food and Drug Administration effectively banned the practice over medical and ethical concerns.
“Without a clearer picture of the role mitochondria play in the transfer of hereditary characteristics, the church does not feel it would be responsible to change the law at this time,” Brendan McCarthy, the Church of England’s national adviser on medical ethics recently told the Daily Telegraph.
If the British procedure gets the green light, a baby conceived through the technique would receive its key genetic material from its mother and father, and just a small amount of DNA from a donor female, who would remain anonymous.
Fears over genetic manipulation are not unique to the U.K. In the 1990s, the U.S. pioneered a treatment called cytoplasmic transfer, aimed at helping infertile women have their own baby. As part of the procedure, donor plasma containing mitochondrial DNA was added to the mother’s egg. Less than 100 babies were born before the Food and Drug Administration effectively banned it over medical and ethical concerns.
The aim is to help the estimated 2,473 women in Britain who are at risk of passing on possibly disease-triggering mitochondrial DNA to their children.
If the procedure gets the green light in the U.K., babies born would have all the key genetic material from their mother and father, and just a small amount of DNA from a donor female, who would remain anonymous.
Mitochondria are tiny structures inside cells that act like batteries, providing energy to the cells. They also have their own DNA. When they do not function properly, the results can be devastating. Faulty mitochondria have been linked to blindness, deafness, dementia and muscular dystrophy.
The aim is to help the estimated 2,473 women in the U.K. at risk of passing on possibly disease-triggering mitochondria DNA to their children.
A mitochondrion’s 37 genes are a small fraction of those in the human genome, and unlike nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA does not affect appearance characteristics such as hair color. The ban on tinkering with nuclear DNA would remain in place.
Mitochondria are tiny structures found inside cells that act like tiny batteries, providing energy to the cell. They also have their own DNA. When they don’t do their job properly, the results can be devastating. Faulty mitochondria have been linked to blindness, deafness, dementia and muscular dystrophy.
Still, should the law change, babies could be born with a very small fraction of their DNA, about 0.2 percent from female donors. Some opponents of the proposed legislative change speak of Britain’s stepping on to a slippery slope.
The mitochondria’s 37 genes are a small fraction of those in the human genome, and unlike nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA does not affect appearance characteristics like hair color. The ban on tinkering with nuclear DNA would still be in place.
Fiona Bruce, a member of Parliament from the Conservative Party, said the move would be tantamount to letting “the genie out of the bottle.”
Still, should the law change, babies could be born with a very small fraction of their DNA from a female donor, about 0.2 percent. Opponents to the proposed legislative change say this could be the beginning of a slippery slope.
The bulk of the British scientific community, however, appeared to welcome the result of the vote and widely interpreted it as providing clear guidelines on what is acceptable.
A Conservative member of Parliament, Jacob Rees-Mogg, who voted against the measure on Tuesday, told the BBC: "At the moment, there is a very clear boundary that babies cannot be genetically altered, and that once you decided that you can, even for a small number of genes, you have done something very profound and then it's merely a matter of degree as to what you do next."
“I don’t agree with the slippery slope argument at all,” said professor Alison Murdoch of Newcastle University, which has been at the forefront of mitochondrial research in Britain. “By having a legal framework that says you can do this but you can’t do the other without criminal sanctions, there is an absolute barrier.”
The bulk of the scientific community in Britain, however, appeared to welcome the result of the vote and widely interpreted it as clear guidelines on what is acceptable.
“I don’t agree with the slippery slope argument at all,” said professor Alison Murdoch of Newcastle University, which has been at the forefront of mitochondrial research in Britain. “By having a legal framework that says you can do this, but you can’t do the other without criminal sanctions, there is an absolute barrier.”
