Hey TMA docs: "I'm your huckleberry..."
Posted on 05/17/2004 2:27:08 PM PDT by hocndoc
Texas Medical Association votes to abandon medical ethics tradition
Press Release from Texas Physicians Resource Council
http://www.texasphysicians.org/
On May 14, 2004, the House of Delegates of the Texas Medical Association, in a misplaced enthusiasm for medical research abandoned 2500 years of physician ethics and our traditional charge to "First, do no harm." Ignoring the very real and present results of adult and umbilical cord stem cell research in favor of an exaggerated and hypothetical future potential of embryonic stem cells and cloning, the House of Delegates approved a policy supporting "biomedical research on multipotent stem cells (including embryonic, adult, and cord blood stem cells)." They also encourage the use of cloning human embryos for biomedical research, as long as no "human child" is allowed to be born as well as federal funding for both types of research. This brave new ethic reduces human lives to a collection of useful parts to be created and destroyed for the benefits of other humans. Texas physicians should demand that the TMA reverse this utilitarian policy.
By Beverly B. Nuckols, MD Board Member
On May 14, 2004, the House of Delegates of the Texas Medical Association, in a misplaced enthusiasm for medical research abandoned 2500 years of physician ethics and our traditional charge to "First, do no harm." The House of Delegates approved a policy proposed by the TMA's Council on Scientific Affairs supporting "biomedical research on multipotent stem cells (including embryonic, adult, and cord blood stem cells)." They also encourage the use of cloning human embryos for biomedical research, as long as no "human child" is allowed to be born. (1,2)
The new policy ignores the very real and present results of adult and umbilical cord stem cell research (3) in favor of an exaggerated and hypothetical future potential of embryonic stem cells and cloning, at the cost of untold numbers of human embryos which are to be created, cultivated, and destroyed by the harvesting of their cells, tissues, and inevitably fetal organs, although the CSA was originally charged with researching "the likelihood of adult sources of stem cells being practical in the foreseeable future." (4) It most certainly ignores the facts that "the embryonic stage (is) a stage in the development of a determinant member of the species," (5) and that each of us was once an embryo.
The argument made by the Delegates who spoke in favor of the policy at the Reference Committee is that embryonic stem cell research will only involve "spare embryos that will die anyway" because they are frozen and no longer needed after in vitro fertilization (IVF) has succeeded in the births of their brothers and sisters. This ignores the hundreds of thousands of infertile couples that would love to adopt these "unwanted embryos." The advocacy for – and frequent news stories about - embryos purposefully created through IVF, cloning using Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT) and the recent report about the birth of a fertile parthenote should inform everyone that those embryonic humans who are already frozen are not the only ones fated for harvest.
The other common response is that the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling by the United States Supreme Court has somehow allowed human embryos to be used in research as though they are not human research subjects or that denying scientists the "right" to embryonic stem cell and cloned embryos for research will be used to overturn reproductive rights." On the contrary, Roe v. Wade was based on three principles: a) that abortion has always been used by women who do not want to have a child, b) reproductive rights of women must be protected, and c) there is no consensus on when life begins. None of these arguments are relevant to the use of embryonic stem cells and cloning, since a) the technology involved is less than 30 years old and society has never been confronted with the routine, intentional breeding of humans designed with the intent to kill them, b) there are no pregnant women and no uteruses to be emptied, and c) we know from standard embryology texts that embryos ar the earliest stage of self directed development of a new human being.
Pursuing embryonic stem cell research is not only unethical, it is impractical and dangerous for patients. Reports within the last six months have illustrated the genetic stability and dependability of adult and umbilical stem cells compared with embryonic stem cells, both in the laboratory and the body.(4) Last year, the National Academy of Sciences published Peter Mombaerts' extrapolation of the efficiency and costs of harvesting human oocytes for a single course of Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer and embryonic cell development as at least $100,000 to $200,000. (5) With present cloning success rates it would require every woman of child bearing age to donate eggs to just cure diabetes.
The new TMA policy introduces a brave new ethic: one which requires the production of embryonic human lives with the express intent and requirement that they be killed before they are issued a birth certificate. In addition, the policy warps the very meaning of "therapeutic" in that the subjects of the therapy can expect no benefit. (6) It makes human research subjects no more than parts which are useful to others who have power and the desire to use them, This type of utilitarian ethic of sacrificing human beings for the "common good" echos the Tuskegee experiments and Josef Mengele's efforts to breed subjects for his experiments.
This new professional ethic goes beyond utilitarianism. It negates any concept of inalienable equal rights of humans not to be used, much less killed, for the benefit of others, without consent of and possible benefit to the one being used. And it is not medicine.
Fortunately, the organizational structure of the TMA has mechanisms to overturn unfortunate decisions of the Councils and the House of Delegates. The Board of Councilors has the duty and power to interpret the TMA's Constitution and By Laws and to give opinions on ethical matters. They, the officers of the Association, and the constituent County Medical Societies could ask the House of Delegates to reconsider this new policy at the Interim Session in October. Perhaps it is time to call for an open discussion of the nature of medical ethics. Because of the serious consequences of any findings of such a discussion, the Association should hold an open forum, inviting all members to participate.
Each member of the TMA should write or call his County Medical Society officers and the TMA state-wide officers. It might also be helpful to our patients for each of us to write a letter to the editor. Those who wish to learn more can find information on Medline or by searching the Internet using the resources and references I've given. One source is the Christian Medical and Dental Association's "Stem Cells Standards 4 Life," found in the CMDA's Issues section, at http://www.cmdahome.org/index.cgi?BISKIT=406975759 3&CONTEXT=art&art=1655 .
1. TMA Council on Scientific Affairs (2004) "Report on Stem Cells and Cloning, Proposed Policy" http://www.texmed.org/has/stemcell_research.asp 2. AMA Report 5 of the Council on Scientific Affairs (2003) "Cloning and Stem Cell Research" http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/article/2036-7819.html 3. J. C. Chachques, C. Acar, J. Herreros, J. C. Trainini, F. Prosper, N. D'Attellis, J.-N. Fabiani, and A. F. Carpentier "Cellular cardiomyoplasty: clinical application" Ann. Thorac. Surg., March 1, 2004; 77(3): 1121 - 1130. 4. C. M. VERFAILLIE, R. SCHWARTZ, M. REYES and Y. JIANG "Unexpected Potential of Adult Stem Cells" Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 996: 231-234 (2003). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/utils/lofref.fc gi?PrId=3051&uid=12799301&db=pubmed&url=http://www.annalsnyas.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=full&pmid=12799301> 5. Opitz, John M., " Early Embryonic Development: An Up-to-Date Account (Opitz) Testimony to the President's Bioethics Council, http://www.bioethics.gov/transcripts/jan03/session1.html 6. Mombaerts P. Therapeutic cloning in the mouse. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Sep 30;100 Suppl 1:11924-5. Epub 2003 Aug 29. Review. PMID: 12949262 (free text available on PubMed) http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcg i?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=12949262 7. Kass, et al, Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry, Chapter Three, "On Terminology," Washington, DC, 2002 http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/cloningreport/terminology.html
Everyone in the nation is likely to be affected by this new change, since I'm sure that the pro-killing crowd will jump on this as soon as they leave Massechussetts.
Sorry about the footnotes. I did proofread the body.
Can't wait to read it.
Not surprising when you realize we can thank Houston-area hospitals for their cutting-edge adoption of "Futile Care Protocols" laying the track on which euthanasia's coming at us like a runaway train.
This is........I don't know a word that fits!
Sickening is the best I can come up with.
Population reduction is a real aim for these people.
Yep. First appears in the 1970 Congressional Record, as a matter of fact:
Recommendations of the Task Force on Earth Resources and Population
As a result of reduced death rates, there are more people in their non-productive years than ever before. More children and more elderly people unable to participate in the world's work force increase the burden on the productive age group. [...] The National Academy of Sciences has said:Either the birth rate must go back down or the death rate must go back up.
Concerted depopulation efforts have only just begun, IMHO.
Where's the "Don't Mess with Texas" crowd when you need 'em?
Let's leave the Luddite stuff to the liberals and Europeans. Cloning and stem cell research could bring jobs back to America.
Cloning? Do you include the cloning of humans in your little Jobs Program?
May I suggest you read THIS FREE MANUSCRIPT, before you make such a doltish comment again?
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
Why don't we leave the name calling in some emotional arena, not in the realm of science.
Did you read and understand the points?
First, there is nothing "Luddite" about non-maleficence. There is nothing backward about equal protection of the right to live.
There is no need for embryonic stem cells and so no need for the cloning techniques to obtain embryonic cells.
Adult and umbilical cord cells show great promise. The patient's own stem cells are turning out to be the best bet for *true* therapy.
And our doctors don't have to learn to kill in order to treat anyone.
ping
Thanks for the bump!
Hey TMA docs: "I'm your huckleberry..."
I would love to have the ability to "bank" copies of my heart and other vital organs as backups when the originals fail. There is no medical point in cloning entire human bodies at the moment, but this would change if the ability to "download" mental state from a dying brain to a clone replacement ever comes to pass.
As an American, I hope technology like this is not something we are going to have to fly to Shanghai to get.
bttt
"As an American, I hope technology like this is not something we are going to have to fly to Shanghai to get."
I can just hear someone saying, in the defense of experiments on Jews during WWII:
"As an American, I hope brain surgery is not something we are going to have to fly to Berlin to get."
Yes, those experiments led to brain surgery, and it has probably saved more lives than it took. Does that make human experimentation okay?
Hell, by that logic, I am absolutely certain we could start making -huge- medical strides in all kinds of areas if we decide that experimenting on and vivisecting human beings is perfectly okay. Save lots of time and money by not needing to get FDA approval too.
It's totally besides the point anyway. As others have pointed out, adult stem cells are proving perfectly suitable, and in fact, using a person's own stem cells shows the greatest chance of successful therapy. That makes ALL kinds of sense, given the issues surrounding rejection rates, so why even risk it before the possibilities with adult stem cells have been exhausted?
Qwinn
You are talking about adult stem cell technology, not embryonic or cloning as recommended by the TMA.
Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer results in producing embryos, which results in "cloning entire human bodies."
I agree that we need to pursue ethical stem cell research in order to achieve just the sort of advances that you desire.
Very good analogy, Qwinn.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.