Final Report (all chapters)

These concerns are not unfounded, as two embryos created by this technique but later aborted
had Turner Syndrome. 17
The same FDA requirements apply to a form of nuclear transfer developed at a New York
City hospital in the early 1990s. In this case, cytoplasm is not merely replaced. Researchers
fertilize not one but two eggs, one from the prospective mother, and one from an anonymous
donor. The nucleus from the donated egg is then removed and replaced with the nucleus from the
prospective mother’s egg. In an effort to circumvent FDA regulations, a leading U.S. scientist in
2001 decided to outsource the procedure to colleagues in China. The Chinese researchers
transferred two embryos. The procedure was successful, but the fetuses died at weeks 24 and 29,
respectively, due to complications apparently unrelated to the technique used in the experiment. 18
Had a child been born with this technique, he or she would have had genetic material not from
two, but from three individuals – his or her genetic parents as well from the egg donor. This is so
because the cytoplasm of the donor egg (or any other cell) contains mitochondrial DNA. 19
Slightly different concerns are raised by a very similar procedure recently proposed by
British scientists. 20 In this case, only one embryo is created, from the gametes of the two
prospective parents. To avoid health risks associated with the egg’s mitochondria, the nucleus is
removed and inserted in a healthy egg from an anonymous donor. Unlike the preceding
procedure, this technique is meant to benefit both the parents and the child, who otherwise might
have been born with degenerative genetic diseases. 21 These children would also carry genetic
material from three persons.
All of these procedures raise ethical concerns above and beyond health and safety
considerations. A reproductive procedure that creates babies carrying DNA from three
individuals – and therefore with three genetic parents – is problematic enough to preclude its
wide adoption based exclusively on effectiveness. Scientists have pointed out that the amount of
17
18
19
20
21
and to ooplasm transfer in particular. Be that as it may, until ART professionals successfully challenge the FDA
in court, for all intents and purposes, ooplasm transfer cannot be performed in the United States.
Ooplasm Transfer as Method to Treat Female Infertility (FDA’s Biological Response Modifiers Advisory
Committee Meeting, May 9, 2002 [cited August 2, 2005]); available from
http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/ac/02/briefing/3855B1_01.pdf
Shaoni Bhattacharya and Sylvia Pagàn Westphal, Controversial Three-Parent Pregnancy Revealed (New
Scientist, October 14, 2003 [cited August 2, 2005]); available from
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4266 ; David Derbyshire, Foetuses Had Three Genetic Parents
(Telegraph Group, October 13, 2003 [cited August 2, 2005]); Denise Grady, "Where Anti-Clone Collides with
Pro-Baby," International Herald Tribune, October 15, 2003; Steve Kirschner, "The Ooplasm Transfer Debate,"
Genomics and Proteomics, November 1, 2002; Rick Weiss, "U.S.-Banned Fertility Method Tried in China:
Woman Became Pregnant through Egg Transfer Technique but Lost All Three Fetuses," Washington Post,
October 14, 2003.
Mitochondria can be described as a cell’s energy source.
James Randerson, Scientists Seek to Create 'Three-Parent' Babies (New Scientist, October 19, 2004, 2004 [cited
August 2, 2005]); available from http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6547; Ian Sample, "Can a Baby
Have Two Mothers?," The Guardian, October 21, 2004.
For an extensive discussion of ooplasm transfer for therapeutic uses, see John A. Robertson, "Oocyte Cytoplasm
Transfer and the Ethics of Germ-Line Intervention," Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 26 (1998).
82