LT: Welcome to this Medical Research Council podcast on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. I'm Laure Thomas and I'll be speaking to MRC Chief Executive, Sir Leszek Borysiewicz. There's been a heated response to plans to update the 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act; the Act governs all aspects of the artificial creation of embryos for fertility treatment and their use in research. Sir Leszek, why do we need this update in the law?
LB: Well there's been a big change in what science can actually do in comparison with the previous legislation. What this new legislation will allow us to do is to further research into stem cells and in particular to enable us to insert genes into stem cells derived from embryonic tissue. It's an important piece of legislation because at the same time as it provides the opportunity for scientists to push forward the boundaries of what we can do and understand in terms of major diseases that afflict mankind, but at the same time it has inherent safeguards to prevent some of the more exaggerated claims of what would be possible under this legislation. LT: So do you believe this area of research needs specific regulation that other areas of medical research just don't require? LB: I think the nature of public opinion is such that specific legislation is required in this area because it is a highly emotive and important area of debate. This Bill actually enables us to work for 14 days with cells from embryonic tissue but prevents the implantation of any hybrid embryos and therefore I believe it has got that balance right. Do we need specific legislation? I think we can see from the debate that's going on in the press and in the media why such legislation is required in order to ensure that people feel that these situations cannot be abused by scientists. LT: You mention hybrid embryos, human admixed embryos is what they're called in the Bill; these embryos are artificially created for research purposes and they'll mix human and animal DNA. This is one of the more controversial areas of the Bill; why do we need them?
LB: Well because very often if we are going to try to mimic a disease in a test tube we have to actually insert genes from other sources into those cells. Now in order to be able to do that we'll require to create an admixed embryo to derive such cell lines. So what it will enable us to do is to be able to study diseases such as Alzheimer's in the test tube more readily than was previously possible and that's why it matters and it's because science is now able to do this, we're going to be able to accelerate the opportunities for the future benefits, both in terms of treatment and in terms of understanding major diseases more readily. LT: And what kind of treatments are scientists hoping to achieve with these methods?
LB: First and foremost it has an obvious implication in the relationship to stem cell research; it's understanding how embryonic stem cells actually work, what turns them on and off, so that we can regulate them better when we try to use them for example in conditions such as repair of the defects in diabetes, repair of the defects in Alzheimer's, repair of the defects in Parkinson's. So these are very important basic studies that have to be undertaken. Secondly, the presence of such cell lines enables us for example to screen new therapies more readily than is currently possible and being able to do that can certainly accelerate the time that it would take to develop treatments for some of these conditions. So these are the benefits that I would see from the use of admixed embryos.
LT: And do you believe the public is on board, that it supports this type of research?
LB: Well most of the surveys that have been done in the very recent past suggest that anything up to three quarters of the population are actually behind us but what is important I think, is that the debate that we're having at the present time takes place, because that enables people who feel strongly about such issues to ensure that their views are heard and allows parliament as a representative body of the British population to take a balanced judgement of such legislation. I recognise that this is a very emotive issue for some individuals, but what's important is to take the overall balance of benefit into account as well. LT: It is an emotive issue for many people and many fear that this is a slippery slope, the beginning of a brave new world that they're not too comfortable with. What do you say to them?
LB: Well I think that's the importance of this legislation and why people have to study it in detail. The most important issue is to get away from the descriptions and highly emotive descriptions that have been made of admixed embryos. This Bill as with previous legislation specifically precludes any scientist implanting such admixed embryos and it restricts their use for 14 days. That absolutely ensures that we can't actually be creating human animal hybrids in terms of animals or humans as we would normally understand that and I think that is extremely important. Why I particularly support this legislation is because I believe it's got the right balance of opportunity for scientists and clinicians to be able to study important diseases but at the same time have the safeguards such that the public can be reassured that you cannot actually go around creating monsters. LT: And do we really need to be working on embryonic stem cells today as oppose to adult stem cells which seem to be closer to the clinic?
LB: Well both directions are extremely important. Adult stem cells are a fantastic opportunity that has recently come to light, but actually understanding adult stem cells also requires us to work with embryonic stem cells. At this stage it's far too early to predict which of these two lines is going to prove most successful in treatment of disorders and therefore both directions have to be pursued simultaneously at this stage and that is what the MRC is intending to do. LT: Finally on a more personal note, you've told The Times newspaper that you are a practicing Catholic; how do you respond to those in your church who believe that this research is morally wrong? LB: Well as with any large organisation it is always right and proper that dissent occurs within such a large organisation. From my perspective I have examined the clauses in relationship to this Bill, I've read what has been written and stated by members of the Catholic church. I believe they have a right to express those views and opinions but in terms of my conscience I've looked very carefully at this Bill and I don't find a conflict of conscience here at all. I believe that the opportunities that are created through this legislation are such that we may see real benefits of treatments coming forward for people with disorders and therefore I do not see a conflict here at all.
LT: Sir Leszek, thank you very much for your time.
LT: Laure Thomas LB: Sir Leszek Borysiewicz
