A passionate debate amongst the Lords showed that opposition to assisted suicide and euthanasia is still strong in Britain's upper house. Liberal Democrat Lord Carlile described it as "morally indefensible" and declared that "everybody... knows that those who are moving this bill have the clear intention of it leading to voluntary euthanasia." The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey of Clifton, felt that "if introduced, assisted suicide might be treated as casually as abortion is today, after a few years."

Even one of the UK's leading IVF experts, Lord Winston, opposed the bill. He said that his 93-year-old mother suffered from occasional bouts of dementia. A few months ago, she told him that she had reached "the end", but now she was enjoying life again. "We cannot predict how people may feel about the future and to take that view is ultimately the most presumptuous thing that we can do," he said.

On the other hand, Baroness Mary Warnock, who is probably Britain's best-known bioethicist, contended in the Observer that Lord Joffe's bill was a small step in the right direction. She felt that it had enough safeguards to keep Britain from skidding down the slippery slope. And she questioned whether "sanctity of life" was a principle to be employed in parliamentary deliberations: legislation must be for everyone, whether they possess religious faith or not, and legislators must therefore seek what is likely to be most conducive to the common good, regardless of faith." ~ Observer, May 7; BBC, May 12; London Telegraph, May 13   

EUTHANASIA AROUND THE WORLD

And in Mumbai, India, an impoverished couple in Asia's largest slum has made a pathetic plea for mercy killing. Mukhtar Ahmed Shaikh and Sufiya Banoo want to end their own lives and the lives of two disabled adult children, 26-year-old Mehfooz and 30-year-old Khurshida, as well as their healthy 19-year-old son Khalid. The two older children suffer from muscular dystrophy, which has left them unable to move and dependent on their parents for everything.

Mukhtar, the only breadwinner, is an asthmatic who has had TB and his wife is a survivor of cancer of the uterus. The family of five live in a 9-square metre hut and barely scratch out a living with Mukhtar's US$50 a month income. "I have no way to live in this world... Please help me with medical help to take care of them or grant me mercy killing. Or (else) I have no idea except to commit suicide," says Mr Shaikh. ~ Times of India, May 9   

HWANG INDICTED FOR FRAUD

An insightful editorial in the Chosun Ilbo gave five reasons why Hwang's fraud -- once thought to be groundbreaking work which would give South Korea a commanding lead in world biotech -- went undetected for so long.

(1) Because of the rigid hierarchy in his research lab, Hwang controlled the careers of his colleagues. They followed all his orders to the letter, even if it meant faking results. (2) His institutional review board, which was supposed to provide ethical brakes, was a rubber stamp. Members had to review 5 to 10 cases during their lunch break.

(3) Hwang published a landmark paper in 2004 with 15 authors and a paper in 2005 with 25 authors. "All of them just wanted a free ride on the coat tails of a man who was then considered a national hero," says Chosun Ilbo. (4) The government did not verify his research. Instead, it focused on superficial details like providing him with bodyguards. (5) The media failed its readers. "They joined everyone else in promoting scientific commercialism without warning against the unconditional enthusiasm in the scientific community and society."

Incredibly, at least for Western observers, Hwang still has fierce partisans. A Buddhist group says that it has raised $65 million to enable him to continue his work. Seoul National University has had to request a restraining order against 10 fans who have been demonstrating at the University and harassing university officials every day since February. Hwang's followers claim that his work is vital for South Korea's economic future. ~ JoongAng Daily, May 9; Genetic Crossroads, May 12; BBC, May 12; Chosun Ilbo, May 12   

CHINESE RESEARCH CRITICISED

The problem of poorly monitored research has become so serious that 120 US-based Chinese scientists have written an open letter to China's science minister complaining that the lack of controls could damage the country's scientific reputation. ~ BBC, May 9; Nature, Apr 6, May 11; Seattle Post-Intelligencer, May 12   

UK REGULATOR APPROVES SCREENING
   FOR NON-LETHAL GENES

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority declared last week that IVF clinics should be allowed to sift out and destroy embryos with genes for late onset diseases like breast cancer or colon cancer. Until now, it only permitted the use of pre-implantation embryo selection for genes which always result in a serious illness, usually in childhood. Geneticists say that women with the genes BRCA1 or BRCA2 have up to an 85% chance of developing cancer in their lifetime, often in their 30s or 40s. With the HNPCC gene, 90% of men and 70 per cent of women who have a gene mutation will get some form of cancer by the age of 70. This has been deemed sufficient reason to destroy the embryos carrying these genes.

The HFEA spent a long time debating where to draw the line over which genes were dangerous enough to allow embryo screening. In the end, it decided that it was impossible to set an arbitrary cut-off point. However, it stressed that the decision should not apply to minor conditions like asthma or to conditions caused by several genes, like schizophrenia.

Three days later, an IVF specialist announced that he had already bent the HFEA guidelines and that one of his patients was pregnant after he had screened her embryos for the BRCA1 breast cancer gene. The London Times said it was "Britain's first designer baby selected to prevent an inherited cancer".

Although IVF specialists were delighted with the HFEA's decision, which opens up a new set of services for their clinics, Josephine Quintavalle, spokeswoman for Comment on Reproductive Ethics, felt differently. She said that pre-implantation genetic diagnosis is "currently nothing more than a weapon of destruction, aimed at the ruthless elimination of any embryo which does not conform to eugenic concepts of perfection." ~ news@nature.com, May 11; London Times, May 13; BBC, May 10   

A TALE OF TWO MUMS

At the other end of the scale is a woman far richer, far more elegant, and 50 years older, Dr Patricia Rashbrook, who will become Britain's oldest mum in two months time. She also spoke candidly to the Daily Mail about why she chose to become pregnant at the age of 62. Both she and her husband John Farrant are divorced, but although she had had three children, John had none. "I wanted to give John the child he'd never had," she said. He did not have a happy childhood and she regards a child as "the opportunity for a form of reparation and healing" for him. She thinks that he will make a wonderful father". "No one had ever recognised that quality in me, not least myself," commented John gratefully.

The couple said that they welcomed the ethical debate over the late pregnancy, as it is a necessary part of absorbing technology into everyday lives, but they felt that they had made the right choice. ~ Daily Mail, May 12, 13   

"WRONGFUL LIFE" SUIT FAILS IN AUSTRALIA

As in similar cases in other countries, the judges found that it was impossible to prove that the children's lives represented a loss, deprivation or detriment, compared with non-existence. ~ Sydney Morning Herald, May 9   

UK TO DEFEND COMPANIES AGAINST
   ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS

After three British animals rights activists were sentenced to 12 years in jail for harassing a guinea pig farm, the Blair government is moving to protect potential targets. The Prime Minister said that he himself will sign an on-line petition which declares: "medical research using animals, carried out to the highest standards of care and welfare, and where there is no alternative available, should continue in the UK". Mr Blair also said that he is considering allowing companies to hide the identities of their shareholders. Activists have been obtaining the addresses of shareholders and targeting them. ~ Guardian, May 15   

AUSTRALIAN HEALTH MINISTER UPSETS
   STEM CELL SCIENTISTS

The announcement caught most of Australia's stem cell researchers off guard. An Australian Stem Cell Centre already exists in Melbourne -- and it had not been consulted about the formation of a rival body, albeit a friendly one. A number of scientists wondered why normal funding procedures had not been followed. "I see this as a fairly transparent ploy to undermine the laudable endeavours of biologists working with ES cells," said Paul Simmons, director of the ASCC's adult stem cell program. With the government still to produce a response to a major report which endorsed therapeutic cloning in December, the funding of a rival stem cell centre looks like bad news for researchers in embryonic stem cells. ~ Australian, May 13   

IN BRIEF: Kenya, Virginia, California

Donor 401: The US media is searching for donor 401 at Fairfax Cryobank sperm bank in Virginia. So far, he appears to be the father of 25 children by 18 women. Since 17 vials of his sperm still exist, he may be able to have more, although he has not contributed for two years. Mr 401 was selected from the sperm bank's website by potential mothers. He has a German heritage with blue eyes, brown and wavy hair; he is intelligent, 193 centimetres tall and likes to play sport. He also has a warm relationship with his mother. The women -- who were brought together by NBC's Today show -- say that they are not particularly interested in meeting him. ~ Washington Post, May 4

California cloning: Two California research groups have announced that they will resume their efforts to clone human embryos. They are the University of California at San Francisco and the company Advanced Cell Technology. ~ Wall Street Journal, May 8