Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Ian Gibson (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 12 May 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill.


Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill

Yes, that is true; it is the stuff of science fiction, and people see it on the television so they are persuaded to believe that it will happen and that evil people in white coats are running around trying to do that and thinking, ““Who cares about a Nobel prize when we can produce a three-headed monster; that's a real achievement.”” None of the scientists I know ever talks about that; they may do so in a jocular way after a couple of pints, but so far as I know no one wants to do that. There is no gain or benefit; there are merely problems, and it is unlikely to happen. It is unlikely that these admixtures can reach the 14-day stage at present in any case, but it is possible to get very good stem cells at different stages. We know that there are pre-stem cells in certain cancers, and if they are in somebody with a leukaemia, that can develop at later stages into full-blown leukaemia. So the development of drugs against pre-stem cells—we do not have to go into the detail—is much more effective than doing that at later stem-cell stages. We have only managed to do that by being able to do the kind of test I mentioned. I said that I was 99.9 per cent. sure that the sun would rise tomorrow morning. The same percentage is often cited in respect of mitochondria and hybrid admixed embryos. The mitochondrial DNA is the contribution from the animals; that is the 0.1 per cent. We should not dismiss mitochondrial DNA by saying that as it is only 0.1 per cent. so it does not matter. Importantly, there are many mitochondrial diseases in human beings. We should look at the evidence. Work is still being done on this; such embryonic research is difficult, because when we try to make embryos by this method we have to look at the mitochondria. It must be asked whether there is a possibility that material from the nucleus—the DNA—also adds things to the mitochondria, and whether the mitochondrial DNA does, too. Is there an interaction between them, and what actually happens? It appears that in certain cases with such hybrids, human mitochondria starts to appear. It can be assessed by its DNA. Therefore, there is still a lot to learn in that area, even though it is only 0.1 per cent. of DNA. However, there is no evidence that this affects the stem cells produced, and the way they grow, and how they look. Their morphology is one thing, but their biochemistry is another thing, and there is no evidence of any changes in that. It must be pointed out that this is all being done in a very regulated work environment. That regulation is done not only by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, but by local ethical committees. It is necessary to get permission from them to do this kind of research. Lord Winston in the other place complains, of course, saying there is too much regulation; but we have a lot of regulation that makes this work. Let me end by making the following point. There are people in this House—one or two I know of—who have parts of a pig attached to their heart. That keeps them alive. We do not need hypocrisy in this matter. We can have combined pigs and human beings to keep people in this House—and elsewhere—alive. There are combinations from different sources, and we should welcome that.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
475 c1112-3 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Civil partnerships Clones Abortion Blood Fertility Human embryo experiments Diseases Donors Genetics Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Ethics IVF Discrimination Foetal tissue NHS Medical treatments Screening Religion Sexuality Research Stem cells Christianity Human-animal hybrid embryos
Legislation
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (HL) 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk