January 11, 2007

HFEA hybrid embryo research announcement

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority decided to gauge public opinion before granting any licenses for the creation of human-animal hybrid embryos for research purposes.

Professor Ian Wilmut, Director, Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, said:

“I welcome the fact that the HFEA have decided to investigate the scientific merits of the use of animal eggs in research to understand human diseases.

“The group based in Edinburgh and at King’s College, London who wish to use this approach to study Motor Neuron Disease will certainly make detailed submissions. In addition we will also wish to play a full role in the public discussion of the value of this research.”

Professor Chris Shaw, Neurologist, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London, said:

“I predict that most Motor Neurone Disease Patients will be delighted that the HFEA is seeking further consultation on animal and human stem cell research.

“A blanket ban by the Government would kill off valuable research and the hopes of many Motor Neurone Disease patients.”

Professor Colin Blakemore, Chief Executive of the Medical Research Council, said:

“The Medical Research Council is pleased that the HFEA did not rule out applications in this important area of research involving human-animal embryos but the postponement of a decision is disappointing. The ensuing delay will be a blow to scientists and to those who pin their hopes on advances in medical research to tackle diseases which affect them or their loved ones.

“The Medical Research Council will respond positively and actively to the HFEA’s proposed consultation. We hope that any public debate will be informed by a rational presentation of the scientific case and not by knee-jerk responses. We will continue to talk to the Government and the public about the benefits this type of research could yield.

“In recent years, scientists have been attracted to our shores by the robust and progressive regulatory environment as much as the UK’s outstanding tradition of scientific excellence and leadership. Let us hope they do not feel the tide is turning.”

Dr Mark Walport, Director of the Wellcome Trust, said:

“I am pleased that the HFEA has not turned down these research applications but anxious that further delay should be minimised. I hope the consultation will clarify the scientific and ethical issues and will receive a strong response. But, this must be accomplished swiftly – there is important research at stake here.”

Aisling Burnand, Chief Executive of the BioIndustry Association (BIA), said:

“The BIA is pleased that the HFEA’s announcement does not support the proposed ban in the Government White Paper on research using hybrid embryos.

“There is widespread scientific and public support for this ground-breaking medical research into treatments for diseases such as multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease and motor neurone disease.

“Preventing the research would dash the hopes of millions of patients. It would also completely undermine the Government’s support for stem cell research and its commitment to establishing the UK as a world-leading location for innovative scientific research.”

Dr Stephen Minger, Stem Cell Biologist, King’s College London, said:

“Although we are naturally disappointed that the HFEA has not recommended that our research applications go to the licensing committee, we are happy with their decision to consult both public and scientific opinion regarding SCNT (cloning) of human cells using non-human eggs.

“This will hopefully provide the scientific community the opportunity to inform the public and government of the merit of this research which we feel will provide valuable new research tools for developing new therapies for devastating neurological disorders.

“One good outcome is that the HFEA has not buckled under pressure from the government on this issue.”

Lyle Armstrong, Lecturer in Stem Cell Biology, University of Newcastle Upon Tyne, said:

“Overall I think the HFEA announcement is a lot better than it could have been. They have not supported an outright ban of our work and moreover, the possibility of a further public consultation exercise gives us the opportunity to explain why the science is so very important for Britain and humanity in general.”