|
Great article and a highly charged and debatable topic. The value of chimeric animals to furthering research and our understanding of how our bodies function should not be underestimated. Current animal research relies largely on various strains of laboratory mice, none of which possess the all of the same complex biochemical pathways as humans. There are models of human disease, but they are just that, "models". We can only draw limited information from a model with the inherent interspecies differences. A chimeric animal, say a mouse with some human neurons as in the article, could provide very meaningful insights into human diseases like Parkinson's or Alzheimer's.
Another potential benefit of developing chimeric animals would be for the production of humanized organs for transplant. I am sure we can all recognize that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of people waiting for a viable organ for transplant. What if we were able to produce humanized lungs, kidneys, or livers in pigs or sheep? Would you have any objection to raising animals for the harvest of life-saving organs? As most of you are not vegetarians, I suspect not. For those of you who are vegetarian, would you support or oppose the development of humanized organs via animals? The technology may not be developed enough for another decade for this to actually work, but if we put a bioethical ban in place now, the time may never come.
I am in support of further research into developing chimeric animals. I firmly oppose the "ban" on this research on ethical grounds. Far too many members of the public at large are convinced that scientists are allowed free rein to do whatever they like with animals in their laboratories. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have worked as a research scientist for the last ten years. In order to even get approval for the most benign animal experiment (read observing squirrels in their natural environment and taking notes on their foraging habits), an investigator has to write up a detailed proposal which has to be reviewed by a panel of scientists, doctors, and members of the community that meets once a month. For a more advanced proposal, such as the development of chimeric mice or the injection of human DNA, even more stringent requirements must be met and more paperwork has to be submitted to the offices of biosafety. Are additional guidelines and requirements needed specifically to address issues of chimeric animals? I would say, yes. And that will likely be the recommendation of the National Academy of Sciences. Unfortunately for the future of the human race, our current administration has previously taken very powerfully negative stances on science and research. I sincerely hope that no "ban" of research will be put in place. When, in the course of history, have we benefitted from banning information?
|