BioWorld International Correspondent

BERLIN - The German government intends to take the lead in pressing for a worldwide ban on both human reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning.

Speaking at a conference here, Minister for Education and Research Edelgard Bulmahn said that as a result of "the international integration of science, legal limits can only prove themselves durably effective if they are implemented by all states or at least by a considerable majority of states." She added, "Researchers need unified standards if they do not want to run the danger of entering a legal gray zone or exposing themselves to criminal charges" that could result from international research cooperation among countries with different legal views.

Although Bulmahn did not speak out on specific policy initiatives at the conference, the position of the government is that reproductive and therapeutic cloning should be banned, and that prohibition should be implemented on as broad a global basis as possible. Germany and France have taken up initiatives within the United Nations system and at the European Union to bring the ban into effect. The policy of a comprehensive ban is supported by three of the four major parties in Germany's parliament, including the opposition Christian Democrats. Germany already has some of Europe's most restrictive regulations on medical procedures involving human embryos. (See BioWorld International, Feb. 26, 2003, and Jan. 22, 2003.)

"For the upcoming negotiations on an international prohibition on human cloning, we must use the chance to formulate comprehensive and general standards for research," Bulmahn said.

The conference brought together about 300 people from scientific, legal, medical, philosophical and theological disciplines, as well as interested members of the public. Over the course of three days, more than 40 speakers addressed different aspects of cloning research and legal practice. They included comparisons of results among different species, technical hurdles, as well as similarities or differences to in vitro fertilization and other technologies that had found acceptance among the general population, despite initial qualms of regulators.

Harry Griffin, of the Roslin Institute in Scotland, said that success rates in cloning from cell nucleus transfer in mammals varied widely according to species, genotype or strain, sex, the cell type the nucleus came from, and the cell line being used. Moreover, the differences among species cast doubts about the effectiveness of animal tests as models for humans.

"Chromosome separation in monkeys," he said, "does not seem to function properly." That could be a significant hurdle to producing human blastocysts, or embryos that have undergone more than a very small number of cell divisions.

Eckhard Wolf, from the University of Munich, pointed out that cloned animals exhibit significant differences, ranging from variable markings to different birth weights. While that aspect was widely known to researchers, it was not much understood by the general public.

One of the legal aspects addressed by several experts was the difficulty of drawing distinctions between techniques for stem cell research and potentially outlawed techniques for cloning. While German biotechnology companies have learned to work within its strict regulations on embryo usage, the country is not known as a leading center for stem cell research. In her address, Bulmahn did not address potential economic consequences of a stricter legal regime.

In a final panel, presenters from countries such as Japan, China, Australia and Canada showed the plurality of approaches and questions that any attempt at international regulation must face. Rihito Kimura, a professor at Waseda University in Saitama, Japan, said that the legal discussion in his country turned on "harmonization of social and peoples' life with the development of science and technology." This was a contrast with the absolute tendencies in the European debate.

Nicholas Tonti-Fillippini, of the University of Melbourne in Australia, said the discussion there has been about the disposition of embryos left over after in vitro fertilization. "It was a debate about embryo destruction," he said. According to figures presented by Michael Sandel, of Harvard University's department of government, Australia has a high rate of "excess" embryos per capita, more than twice the level in the United States and close to four times the level in the United Kingdom.

Renzong Qiu, a philosopher from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, noted the traditional Confucian view that a "human person begins at birth." He said that while only "a person enjoys full dignity, both a pre-person [unborn] and a post-person [corpse] enjoy due respect."

"A binding international convention [cloning ban] will not find agreement" among a large number of states, said Alexander McCall Smith, a professor of medical law at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland and member of UNESCO's International Bioethics Commission. The plurality of views at the conference was evidence of the difficulty that the German government's proposals will face in a global discussion.