Genetic Engineering

[Brendan]

For those who participated in the discussion on Genetic Engineering, here is some follow up information

I recieved feedback from 2 Moral Theologians at 2 different US Seminaries. Both responded back that use of human genes in other organisms was not objectively immoral.

One of them pointed me towards a document on the Vatican website dealing with this issue.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_20010926_xenotrapianti_en.html#Bioethical%20Issues

The document itself addresses moral issues re: the use of animal organs for transplantation into humans.

Section 15 of this document address the conditions under which human genes may be used to genetically engineer more compatible donors.

If anyone would like the contact information for the Theologians, please PM me.

In addition, I filed an informal dubium with the Potifical Academy for Life (PAV), the Vatican dicastery with authority for Bioethics.

This was submitted to the PAV via their email address found at the bottom of this Vatican website.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/index.htm

Here is the question posed to the Vatican

Brendan:

Recently, scientists in Japan have inserted the human gene for the creation of a liver enzyme into rice, for the purpose of creating resistance to pesticides.

In addition, scientists have also inserted the human gene of insulin production into bateria, to create human insulin for the treatment of diabetes.

My question is this:

Is the use of human gene in such circumstances objectively immoral?

Many thanks,

Brendan ------

Here is the response

Dear Mr Brendan ---------,

Thank you for your e-mail of May 3.

The question of the insertion of human genetic material in the genome of animals or plants has been debated since some time already, when the new possibilities of recombinant DNA allowed to prepare the first “transgenic animals”. As you know, human proteins are today prepared thanks to these transgenic animals, like growth hormone, insulin, or monoclonal antibodies. Some plants (like tobacco) could also help in that way (producing DNA vaccines or monoclonal antibodies).

There is nothing morally wrong in the insertion of one particular human gene into the genome of an animal or of a plant. This insertion does not make the animal or that plant “more human”. Genes are biological material which do not require more respect than any other biological material.

The question is different with the realization of chimaera, that is the introduction in the nucleus of a nonhuman embryo of part of the nucleus of a human cell. Then you get generally what is called a “mosaic”, that is to say an animal which may have human cells in its body. Dr Weissman in California wants to make some of these “chimaera”, using (animal) embryonic stem cells, in order to study some human diseases in animal models. In his project, the animal will not be “humanized”, but will have some human somatic cells carrying a particular genetic defect in its body. This seems to be morally acceptable. What would certainly be non acceptable would be the insertion of human brain cells (or of human neural progenitors) into the brain of an animal. This question of the chimaera is anyway preoccupying.

Sincerely yours,

Rev.Mons.Jacques Suaudeau
Pontifical Academy for Life