THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, September 27, 1994 TAG: 9409270343
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY DEBRA GORDON, STAFF WRITER
LENGTH: Medium: 99 lines
The birth of America's first in-vitro baby. The freezing and long-term storage of fertilized eggs. The introduction of a single sperm into an egg to induce fertilization.
For 14 years, as each monumental achievement in the field of reproductive technology occurred, one major player was missing - the federal government. That's because the administrations of Presidents Reagan and Bush prohibited federal funding for such research.
Last year, Congress lifted the ban. And today, the first set of recommendations for federal funding of embryo research is scheduled for release by a National Institutes of Health panel.
Early interviews with panelists indicate that the report will recommend allowing the creation of some embryos solely for research purposes. It is expected to provoke strong protest.
Most embryo research, including that conducted at Norfolk's Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine at the Eastern Virginia Medical School, is performed on embryos remaining from in-vitro fertilization.
During IVF, a woman may produce a dozen or more eggs, all of which may be fertilized. Only three or four are implanted into her womb; the rest are usually frozen. Even if she undergoes several implantations, she may still have eggs left. Those are either donated to other couples, disposed of or provided for scientific research.
Creating embryos solely for research has troubling ethical implications, one bioethicist says.
``The problem would be using human beings as objects rather than viewing them as subjects,'' said Father Patrick Norris, associate director of the Center for Healthcare Ethics at St. Louis University in Missouri. ``You are using them as a means to an end. Even those who don't accord the embryo with the full status of personhood are objecting to this provision.''
Dr. Gary D. Hodgen, president of the Jones Institute and a leader in reproductive technology, agrees.
``There will have to be very persuasive arguments for those proposals to be funded,'' he said.
But regardless of the specific guidelines, noted Hodgen, the report and its recommendations ``will definitely be political.''
``There are those who will say it is leading us down the slippery slope towards more experimentation,'' Hodgen said. ``They will say, `Where do you draw the line?' and they will want to ban all research. That's as wrong in its conservatism as someone saying there shouldn't be any limits to scientific research.
``. . . If you give good reasons why the public health will benefit from this research, 90 percent of the people can identify with it.''
That 90 percent doesn't include the conservative International Foundation for Genetic Research, which supports research on Down syndrome. In June, the Pittsburgh-based organization filed a federal suit charging that members of the NIH panel have conflicts of interest and should be prevented from giving NIH advice.
``Stopping the panel and NIH would be a step in the right direction, especially in terms of shining a public spotlight on the activities of the IVF industry,'' the group's executive director, Randy Engel, said Monday as she waited to hear whether a federal judge would grant an injunction against the report's release.
Hodgen has been down this path of political morality before. It's the reason he left his job at NIH in 1983 to come to the Jones Institute.
Since then, he's never depended on federal funding for research. The $2.7 million the institute spends each year on embryo research comes from private sources - pharmaceutical companies, donations and clinical revenues.
Regardless of the outcome of the panel's recommendations, Hodgen plans to maintain a strong level of private funding for research.
Still, the Jones Institute did submit two of the 40 grant proposals NIH has received since Congress repealed the embryo-research ban.
``They're more for a test case than for anything we expect to use or need,'' Hodgen said.
And therein lies the crux of the debate over the NIH regulations that many don't understand, he said: Embryo research will continue, regardless of any federal funding.
The panel's recommendations now go to an advisory committee, and then to NIH Director Harold Varmus. If they are accepted, implementation could occur in late 1995. ILLUSTRATION: Graphic
THE GUIDELINES
Fund the following (with case-by-case approval)
Research on unused embryos from in-vitro fertilization clinics until
the 14th day after fertilization
Limited creation of in-vitro embryos for ``compelling'' research
Not acceptable
Use of sperm, eggs, or embryos from donors who did not give explicit
consent or who received more than reasonable compensation
Sex selection of embryos, except to prevent sex-linked hereditary
diseases
Research on embryos beyond the 18th day
Creation of embryos strictly for research material, for example,
stem cells
by CNB