Human Cloning and the Abuse of Science

7/29/2019 Human Cloning and the Abuse of Science

1/12

family research council

Washington, DC

Huma Cloigad the Abuse o Sciece frc

FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL

BE ENGAGED

Policy Publication Releases:Highlights new and notable publications from

Family Research Council. It's a must for anyone

wanting to keep abreast of pro-family issues.

Help Us Get Others Engaged:

Tell a friend about this publication.

click here to subscribe

click here to forward
https://www.frc.org/includes/ecom/com_cart_manipulate.cfm?action=add&item=WX07K01&var1=PPSUBhttps://www.frc.org/get.cfm?c=REFER&f=BC07J01https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?c=REFER&f=BC07J01https://www.frc.org/includes/ecom/com_cart_manipulate.cfm?action=add&item=WX07K01&var1=PPSUB


2/12

Thak you or choosig this

resource. Our pamphlets are

desiged or grassroots activ-

ists ad cocered citizesi

other words, people who wat

to make a dierece i their amilies, i their com-

muities, ad i their culture.

Recet history has clearly show the iuece that

the Values Voter ca have i the political process.FRC is committed to eablig ad motivatig idi-

viduals to brig about eve more positive chage

i our atio ad aroud the world. I ivite you

to use this pamphlet as a resource or educatig

yoursel ad others about some o the most press-

ig issues o our day.

FRC has a wide rage o papers ad publica-tios. To lear more about other FRC publicatios

ad to fd out more about our work, visit our

website at www.rc.org or call 1-800-225-4008.

I look orward to workig with you as we

brig about a society that respects lie ad pro-

tects marriage.

Presidet

Family Research Coucil

human cloning and the abuse of science

by william l. saunders, jr. and dr. david prentice

suggested donation: $1.50

2007 family research council

all rights reserved.

printed in the united states

Huma Cloigad the Abuse o Sciece

Human cloning is a subject o international

controversy-it is being debated on every continentand at the United Nations. In the United States, thequestion is being addressed at both the national andstate levels. No matter the venue, however, clear andcareul thinking is necessary. To make an inormeddecision about human cloning, we must understandwhat it is and what it entails. How we answer thequestion o human cloning has signifcance or the

uture o biotechnology, medicine, ethics, and humandignity.

In this pamphlet, the Family Research CouncilsDr. David Prentice and William L. Saunders,

JD, provide the clear and careul analysis that thesubject merits. First, Dr. Prentice, FRCs senior

ellow or lie sciences, explains the precise science othe cloning process and evaluates the scientifc claims

or its potential medical use versus alternatives. Dr.Prentice demonstrates that there is no doubt thathuman cloning creates a new, living member o thehuman species. Next, Mr. Saunders, FRCs senior

ellow or human lie and bioethics, examines theethical standards that apply to scientifc researchinvolving members o our species. He demonstratesthat universally acknowledged ethical standards

clearly prohibit the cloning o human beings.

The Family Research Council hopes that the readerwill use this publication to learn the basic acts abouthuman cloning and its ethical implications. We areconfdent that when the acts are careully considered,it will be evident that any human cloning is an abuseo science.

william l. saunders, jr. is Seior Fellow & Director oFamily Research Coucils Ceter or Huma Lie & Bioethics.A graduate o the Harvard Law School, he was eatured i itsiaugural Guide to Coservative Public Iterest Law i 2004.

dr. david prentice is Seior Fellow or Lie Scieces atFamily Research Coucil. He was ormerly Proessor o LieScieces at Idiaa State Uiversity, ad Adjuct Proessor oMedical ad Molecular Geetics or Idiaa Uiversity School

o Medicie.


3/12

2 3

The Sciece o Cloigdavid a. prentice, ph.d.

Cloning always starts with an embryo. The mostcommon technique proposed or human cloningis called somatic cell nuclear transer (SCNT).

This cloning is accomplished by transerring thenucleus rom a human somatic (body) cell into anegg cell which has had its chromosomes removed

or inactivated. SCNT produces a human embryowho is virtually genetically identical to an existingor previously existing human being.

Proponents o human cloning hold out two hopesor its use: (1) the creation o children or inertilecouples (so-called reproductive cloning), and(2) the development o medical miracles to cure

diseases by harvesting embryonic stem cells romthe cloned embryos o patients (euphemisticallytermed therapeutic cloning).

Termiology

All human cloning is reproductive. It createsreproducesa new, developing human intendedto be virtually identical to the cloned subject. Bothreproductive cloning and therapeutic cloninguse exactly the same technique to create the clone,and the cloned embryos are indistinguishable.

The process, as well as the product, is identical.The clone is created as a new, single-cell embryoand grown in the laboratory or a ew days. Then

it is either implanted in the womb o a surrogatemother (reproductive cloning) or destroyed toharvest its embryonic stem cells or experiments(therapeutic cloning). It is the same embryo,used or dierent purposes. In act, the clonedembryo at that stage o development cannot bedistinguished under the microscope rom an

embryo created by ertilization joining egg andsperm. Trying to call a cloned embryo something

other than an embryo is not accurate or scientic.Biologically and genetically speaking, what iscreated is a human being; its species is Homosapiens. It is neither sh nor owl, neither monkeynor cowit is human. Even leading scientic

journals and embryonic stem cell scientistsacknowledge that what is produced is a humanembryo, and that trying to redene embryo orpurposes o SCNT1 or dene away the act thatSCNT produces an embryo is disingenuous.2

remove

skin cell

from

patient

remove

DNA from

unfertilized

egg

fuse cells

early embryo

with donor DNA

[clone formed]

cloned

embryo

embryonicstem cells

implant insurrogate

infant cloneof patient

"reproductive cloning""therapeutic cloning


4/12

4 5

Cloes are Beset with Abormalities

Cloning has an enormous ailure rate95 to 99percent o clones die beore or soon ater birth.For example, out o 277 cloned embryos, onlyone sheepDollywas produced, and even thissuccessul clone had numerous abnormalitiesand nally had to be destroyed. The same rateo ailure is seen in all mammals that have beencloned. We can expect that, o those ew clonedhumans who survive to birth, most will die shortlythereater, and the others will be plagued byabnormalities. And because o the abnormalitiesinherent in cloning, the health o the surrogatemother carrying the clone is also endangered.

Created i Order to be Destroyed

Therapeutic cloning is obviously not therapeuticor the embryo. The new human is specicallycreated in order to be destroyed as a sourceo tissue: [Therapeutic cloning] requires thedeliberate creation and disaggregation o a humanembryo.3

Most cloned embryos do not even survive oneweek, to the blastocyst stage, when they aredestroyed in the process o harvesting their cells.Experiments with animals show that even theseearly embryos have abnormalities in geneticexpression.

Theoretically, the embryonic stem cells rom thecloned human embryo would be used to generatematched tissues or transplant into the patientrom whom the embryo was cloned. But it isalso a act that there are no therapies currentlyavailable rom therapeutic cloning, and none inthe oreseeable uture.4

However, the promises put orth or therapeutic

cloning are not supported by the scienticliterature. When the experiment was tried inmice, rather than producing matching tissues, thecloned cells were rejected:

Jaenisch addressed the possibility that ESclones derived by nuclear transer techniquecould be used to correct genetic deects. . . .

However, the donor cells, although derivedrom the animals with the same geneticbackground, are rejected by the hosts.5

Indeed, the only real success in the experimentwas achieved by bringing cloned mice to birthand using the born-mouse bone marrow adultstem cells to treat the disease. Ironically, thesimilar genetic deect in humans, severe combinedimmunodeciency syndrome (boy in the bubbledisease), was cured in inants in 2000 using genetherapy with the inants own bone marrow adultstem cells.6

remove nucleusSomatic (body) cellfrom patient

egg withnucleusremoved

Somatic Cell

Nuclear Transfer(SCNT)

grow cloned embryoto blastocyst stagein lab

destroy embryonichuman being andharvest inner cell mass

differentiateto desiredcell type

grow embryonicstem cells

pancreaticislets

nerve cell grown;used to treat patient

cloned embryo


5/12

6 7

Beyond the abnormalities caused by the cloningprocedure, embryonic stem cells rom cloned

embryos will still ace problems or their use,including the tendency to orm tumors, andsignicant diculties in getting the cells to ormthe correct tissue and unction normally.

Adult Stem Cells:

The Ethical Alterative

Human cloning is completely unnecessary ormedical progress. Too oten a alse choice hasbeen put orththat we must either destroyembryos or allow patients to die. But there areother choices, particularly adult and umbilicalcord stem cells. Those who say adult stem cellsare not a valid alternative are quoting obsolete,

outdated inormation. A wealth o scienticpublications now documents that adult stem cellsare a much more promising source o stem cellsor regenerative medicine than embryonic stemcells. Some adult stem cells show the capacity togenerate virtually all adult tissues. Most, i not all,tissues contain stem cells that can be isolated andgrown in culture, providing sucient numbersor clinical treatments. Adult stem cells haveeectively treated numerous diseases in animalexperiments, including diabetes, stroke, ALS,Parkinsons, heart damage, kidney damage, spinalcord injury, and retinal degeneration.7

Moreover, human patients are already beneting

rom the use o adult stem cells in treatments ormore than seventy diseases, including multiplesclerosis, lupus, arthritis, various cancers, anemiasincluding sickle cell anemia, spinal cord injury,heart damage, and juvenile diabetes.8 These arereal treatments or real patients. Adult stem cellsare being used to orm new cartilage and ligaments

so that people can walk, to grow new corneas torestore sight to blind patients, to treat strokepatients, and to repair damage ater heart attacks.

Adult stem cells have successully alleviated thesymptoms o Parkinsons disease and allowedspinal cord injury patients to walk again with theaid o braces. The patients own adult stem cellscan be used or these treatments, thereby avoiding

immune rejection and tumor ormation-problemswhich plague embryonic stem cell research.

Huma Cloig Poses

Health Risks to Wome

Cloning is a tremendously inecient process, and

an enormous supply o human eggs will be neededto create even a ew cloned human embryos.The most optimistic estimates are that it willrequire at least 50-100 human eggs to produce

just one cloned embryo.9 A simple calculationreveals that treating just one patient group, the17 million diabetes patients in the United States,

will require at least 850 million to 1.7 billion

human eggs. Approximately 85 million womeno childbearing age would have to donate eggs.

This will subject a large number o women tohealth risks due to the high hormone doses andsurgery that they will undergo. The result will bethat human eggs will become a commodity and


6/12

8 9

disadvantaged women will be exploited on a globalscale. Cloning research has produced one o the

biggest rauds in scientic historyDr. Hwangspublication o supposedly successul cloning ohuman embryos and isolation o embryonic stemcells rom the destroyed clones. Hwangs raud

was nally exposed,10 but not beore over 100women donated eggs or the experiments, manyo whom experienced health problems rom theegg extractions.

Theraputic Cloig Leads to

Reproductive Cloig

Because there is no dierence in the nucleartranser technique or the cloned embryo,allowing therapeutic cloning experimentationto proceed will inevitably lead to reproductivecloning. The technique can be practiced andhuge numbers o cloned embryos produced.

Proposals even include creating human-animalhybrid clones or experiments and to practice the

cloning technique.11 Despite previous statementscondemning the idea o reproductive cloning,some scientists are now saying that it would beokay to produce born cloned children.12 Theslippery slope is indeed a reality when it comes tocloning, with no limits oreseen or desired by thescientists involved.

Human cloning is unsae and unnecessary. Thereare no valid or compelling groundsscientic ormedicalto proceed. A comprehensive ban onall human cloning is the only sucient answer.

Dr. David A. Prentice is Senior Fellow for

Life Sciences at Family Research Council. He

joined FRC after almost 20 years as Professorof Life Sciences at Indiana State University and

Adjunct Professor of Medical and Molecular

Genetics, Indiana University School of Medicine.

Pearson Education/Benjamin Cummings recently

published his frst book, Stem Cells and Cloning.


7/12

1110

The Abuse o Sciecewilliam l. saunders, jd

As Dr. Prentice has shown, cloning indisputablydestroys innocent human lie. This basic truthshould lead the world to reject human cloning.However, in an eort to extricate human cloningrom this ethical vise grip, its supporters attemptto draw a distinction between human lie, which

begins at conception, and human personhood,which begins only at their say-so.

Unortunately, the arbitrary denial opersonhood to human beings has a long andcruel history. The Nuremberg Code, ormulatedin the years ater World War II, is particularlyinstructive with regard to the current debate on

human cloning. For instance, when the principalauthor o the report on human cloning issued bythe National Academy o Sciences testied beorethe Presidents Council on Bioethics, he statedthat reproductive cloning would violate theNuremberg Code: The Nuremberg Code, with

which I am in ull agreement, outlines those kindso things you would not simply [do] or the sakeo knowledge that involve human subjects.13

The Nuremberg Code is a body o ethical normsenunciated by the Nuremberg Tribunal, which,ater World War II, had the responsibility o

judging the actions o the Nazis and their allies.The point o the code was to restate and apply the

established ethical norms o the civilized world.

Nazi laws had dened Jews and other undesir-ables as non-persons. Eventually, between six andnine million o these undesirables were sent toextermination camps and killed. However, beore

the killing in the camps began, the Nazis hadengaged in an extensive campaign o euthanasiaagainst the mentally and physically handicapped,

which not only oreshadowed but also preparedthe way or the extermination camps. In his

bookThe Nazi Doctors, Robert Jay Liton drawsour attention to a book titled The Permission to

Destroy Life Unworthy of Life,written during thecampaign. Liton writes:

[It was] published in 1920 and written jointlyby two ... German proessors: the jurist KarlBinding ... and Alred Hoche, proessor opsychiatry at the University o Freiburg.Careully argued in the numbered-paragraphorm o the traditional philosophical treatise,the book included as unworthy lie notonly the incurably ill but large segmentso the mentally ill, the eebleminded, andretarded and deormed children. ... [T]he

authors proessionalized and medicalizedthe entire concept; destroying lie unworthyo lie was purely a healing treatment anda healing work.14

The Nazis were determined to cleanse thegenetic pool to produce better Aryans. Nazi


8/12

13

ocials announced that under the direction ospecialists ... all therapeutic possibilities will be

administered according to the latest scienticknowledge.15 The result o this therapeutictreatment o inerior lives was that eventually anetwork o some thirty killing areas within exist-ing institutions was set up throughout Germanyand in Austria and Poland.16 In their book, TheNazi Doctors and The Nuremberg Code, George

Annas and Michael Grodin reveal that:

At the same time that orced sterilizationand abortion were instituted or individualso inerior genetic stock, sterilizationand abortion or healthy German women

were declared illegal and punishable (insome cases by death) as a crime against

the German body. As one might imagine,Jews and others deemed racially suspectwere exempted rom these restrictions.On November 10, 1938, a Luneberg courtlegalized abortion or Jews. A decree o

June 23, 1943, allowed or abortions orPolish workers, but only i they were not

judged racially valuable.17

Later, the Nazis created the extermination campsor the Jews and other inerior races. In thecamps, Nazi doctors engaged in cruel experimentson the Jews, Gypsies, Poles, and others. Theyexposed them to extreme cold to determinethe temperature at which death would occur.

They injected them with poisons to see howquickly certain lethal elements moved through

the circulatory system. They subjected twins toall manner o disabling and brutal experiments

to determine how genetically identical personsreacted to dierent conditions.

Some o the experiments were nonethelessdesigned to preserve lienot o the subject, buto, or example, German pilots who were orcedto parachute into reezing ocean waters.

Everyone agrees the Nuremberg Code prohibitsreproductive cloning. What relevance does ithave or therapeutic cloning? I human embryosare human beings, then therapeutic cloning,

which creates an embryo only to destroy it inthe process o exploiting its stem cells, violates acardinal principle o the Nuremberg Code: There

is to be no experimentation on a human subjectwhen it is known that death or disabling injurywill result.18 Regardless o the good that might beproduced by such experiments, the experimentsare o their very nature an immoral use o humanbeings.

The Debate over the Statuso the Huma Embryo

Human lie begins in one o two ways: either inthe normal, sexual waywhen a emale oocyte, oregg, is ertilized by a mate sperm cellor, as withcloning, asexuallywhen the nucleus o an oocyteis removed and is replaced with a nucleus rom

another cell, ater which an electrical stimulusis applied.19 In either case, rom that momentorward there is a new human organism. It isgenetically complete. From the rst moment, thenew single-cell organism directs its own integralunctioning and development. It will proceedthrough every stage o human development until


9/12

14 15

one day, it looks like we do. To illustrate, simplythink o photographs rom your own inancy

you dont look like that today!

Your appearance has changed, but you are stillthe same person. Change is the very essence olie. As Dr. John Harvey rom the GeorgetownMedical Schools Center or Clinical Bioethicsobserved, A human being is unchangeable andcomplete only at the moment o death!20

The embryo will grow and develop, and it willchange. But it will undergo no change in itsnature. In other words, there is no chance it willgrow up to become a cow or a sh. It is a livinghuman beingits nature is determinedrom therst moment o its existence.21 As the respectedethicist Paul Ramsey said, The embryossubsequent development may be described as aprocess o becoming what he already is rom themoment o conception.22

Guardig Ourselves agaist

Committig Ihuma ActsRecall how the Nazis subverted the meaningo healing. Recall how they used the termtherapeutic to describe not the helping osuering people, but the killing o them. Recallthat the Nazis eliminated those unworthy olie in order to improve the genetic stock oGermany. Recall how the Nazis undertook lethalexperiments on concentration camp inmates inorder, in some cases, to nd ways to preserve thelives o others.

The point is not to suggest that those whosupport therapeutic cloning are, in any sense,Nazis. Rather, the point is to cause each o us to

think deeply about whether there is any essentialdierence between the reality o those Naziexperiments and therapeutic cloning. As wehave shown, each case involves a living humanbeing, and that human being is killed in the aimo a perceived higher good.

Cloning proponents try to distinguish between

the two cases by saying that the cloned humanbeing has no potential. But in each case, it isthe actions o other human beings that rob therst o potential (in the rst case, the actions oNazi executioners; in the second, the laboratorytechnicians). In either case, the human subject isull o potential simply by being a living humanbeing. O course, almost miraculously, many othe inmates o the camps did survive when theallies rescued them. Equally miraculously, rozenembryos have been implanted in a womans womband brought to live (and healthy) birth.23


10/12

16 17

As we have shown, every embryo is not merelypotentially a lie, but actual lie, a human being

rom the rst moment o existence. Furthermore,any living human embryo has the inherentpotential to develop into a healthy baby. It isdisingenuous or supporters o cloning to claimthe cloned human embryo is only potential liebecause they plan to mandate by law that it bedestroyed beore it can come to birth. Regardlesso its location, the human embryo, by its nature,is ull o potential, unless the actions o adulthuman beings deprive it o the opportunity torealize that potential.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a man who chronicledand suered under another ideology that deniedthe dignity o each and every human being,

observed, Gradually it was disclosed to methat the line separating good and evil passes notthrough states, nor between classes, nor betweenpolitical parties either, but right though everyhuman heart, and through all human hearts. Thisline shits. Inside us, it oscillates.24

Solzhenitsyn did not regard the perpetrators o

brutal crimes in his own country as inhumanmonsters. Rather, he saw the essential truththey were human beings, engaged in immoralacts. They engaged in those acts by dehumanizingthe persons on whom their brutality was inficted,and they did so in the name o (perhaps inthe passionate belie in) a greater good. ButSolzhenitsyn reminds us that, unless we are willingto admit that, or the best as well as or the worsto motives, we are also capable o inhuman acts,

we will have no guard against committing them.No one is sae rom brutality so long as we thinkthat it is only inhuman others who are capableo inhuman acts. Rather, we will be secure when

we are willing to look honestly at the objectivereality o our acts, while realizing that we, too, are

capable o acts that violate the inherent dignity o

another, and reuse to engage in such acts despite

the good we believe would result rom those acts.In the debate over the cloning and destructiono embryonic human beings, this essential truthmust be our guide.

William L. Saunders, JD, is Senior Fellow andDirector o the Center or Human Lie and Bioethics atthe Family Research Council. A graduate o Harvard

Law School, he has written widely on bioethics andhuman dignity. Most recently, he authored TheHuman Embryo in Debate, a chapter in HumanDignity in the Biotech Century, published by

InterVarsity Press.


11/12

18 19

footnotes

1. Editorial, Playing the name game,Nature 436(2005) 2

2. A. Boyle, Stem cell pioneer does a reality check:James Thomson refects on science and morality,MSNBC, June 22, 2005

3. R.P. Lanza, A.L. Caplan, L.M. Silver, J.B. Cibelli,M.D. West, R.M. Green, The ethical validity ousing nuclear transer in human transplantation,

Journal of the American Medical Association 284(2000) 3175-3179.

4. D. Magnus and M.K. Cho, Issues in oocytedonation or stem cell research, Science 308 (2005)1747-1748

5. R.Y.L. Tsai, et al., Plasticity, niches, and the use ostem cells,Developmental Cell2 (2002) 707-712.

6. M. Cavazzana-Calvo, et al., Gene therapy o humansevere combined immunodeciency (SCID)Xldisease; Science 288 (2000) 669-672.

7. D. Prentice, Adult Stem Cells. AppendixK inMonitoring Stem Cell Research: A Reporto the Presidents Council on Bioethics, 309-346,(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Oce,

2004). Available at http://bloethics.gov/reports/stemcell/appendix-k.html

8. D.A. Prentice and G. Tarne, Treating Diseaseswith Adult Stem Cells, Science 315 (2007)328; D.A. Prentice and G. Tarne, Adult versusembryonic stem cells: Treatments, Science 316(2007) 1422-1423; D.A. Prentice, Current scienceo regenerative medicine with stem cells,Journalof Investigative Medicine 54 (2006) 33-37; see

also National Marrow Donor Program, http//www.marrow.org and Do No Harm, http://stemcellresearch.org

9. D. A. Prentice, Stem Cells and Cloning, 1st edition,M. A. Palladino, series ed., (San Francisco: PearsonEducation/Benjamin-Cummings, 2002); see also,

Mombaerts P, Therapeutic cloning in the mouse,Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesUSA 100, Sept. 30, 2003: 11924-5.

10. J. Couzin, Breakdown o the year: Scientic raud,Science 314 (2006) 1853

11. I. Sample, Scientists call or right to use animal/human embryos, The Guardian, June 18, 2007.

12. Backing or baby cloning to beat disease, DailyTelegraph, June 5, 2006

13. From the third meeting o the Presidents Councilon Bioethics, April 13, 2002, available at: www.bioethics.gov/meetings/200202/0213.html.

14. R. J. Liton, The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killingand the Psychology of Genocide (New York: BasicBooks, 1986): 46.

15. Ibid., 54.

16. Ibid., 54.

17. G. J. Annas and M. A. Grodin, The Nazi Doctorsand The Nuremberg Code (Oxord University Press,1992): 22.

18. Nuremberg Code, Article 5.

19. The cloning procedure supplies the oocyte witha complete set o chromosomes, all o which arecontained in the nucleus which is transerred into thedenucleated oocyte. With sexual reproduction, hal othe chromosomes are supplied by the sperm and halby the oocyte.

20. J. C. Harvey, Distinctly Human: The When,Where, and How o Lies Beginnings,Insight

244 (Washington, D.C.: Family Research Council,2002): 6.

21. In R. P. George, The Ethics o Embryonic StemCell Research and Human Cloning,At the Podium87 (Washington, D.C.: Family Research Council,2002). Proessor George oers a cogent critique o


12/12

20

all arguments against the personhood o the embryo,including the view that the human embryo prior to

possessing a brain is not a person.

22. P. Ramsey,Fabricated Man: The Ethics of GeneticControl(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970):11.

23. See, e.g., M. Charen, Another Kind o Adoption,Jewish World Review, Feb. 28, 2001, availableat: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/colscharen022801.asp

24. Available at: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/russolzhenitsyn.htm

Stem Cell Research,

Cloig & Huma Embryos

BC04C01

Medical techology is advacig at a icredible

pace. But this advace, as welcome as it is, leads

us ito difcult bioethics dilemmas. This pamphlet

provides a cocise overview o the scietifc

processes ivolved i cloig ad stem cell

research ad examies their ethical implicatio.

Suggested Doatio: $1.50

Washigto Update Family Research Coucils agship subscriptio: a

daily email update with the latest pro-amily take o

Washigtos hottest issues. Complimetary

To order these resources or to see more FRC publicatios,

visit our website at www. rc.org or call 800-225-4008.

frcADDITIOnAL RESOURCES FROM

FAMILY RESEARCH COUnCIL

Adult Stem Cell Treatmetsnie Faces o SuccessBC06I01

There are curretly over 1100 FDA approved

cliical trials goig o i the Uited States usig

adult stem cells. There are oe or embr yoic

stem cells. The ollowig are a ew o the success

stories o people who have bee helped by

adult stem cell therapies. We ivite you to read

these stories ad meet a small umber o the

thousads o people beig treated by adult stem

cell research.

Suggested Doatio: $1.50

Suscribe FREE today!

Suggested Doatio $1.50

Suggested Doatio $1.50
http://www.frc.org/content/stem-cell-research-cloning-and-human-embryoshttp://www.frc.org/content/washington-update-subscriptionhttp://www.frc.org/content/adult-stem-cell-treatments--9-faces-of-successhttp://www.frc.org/content/washington-update-subscriptionhttp://www.frc.org/content/adult-stem-cell-treatments--9-faces-of-successhttp://www.frc.org/content/stem-cell-research-cloning-and-human-embryoshttp://www.frc.org/content/washington-update-subscriptionhttp://www.frc.org/content/stem-cell-research-cloning-and-human-embryoshttp://www.frc.org/content/adult-stem-cell-treatments--9-faces-of-success

Documents

Human Cloning and the Abuse of Science