Human infertility, reproductive cloning and nuclear transfer: a confusion of meanings

The Chief Medical Officer of Health of the United Kingdom has recommended t hat the 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act should be amended to al low cloning in humans for research purposes only. He also recommended that: "The transfer of an embryo created by cell nuclear replacement into the ut erus of a woman (so called 'reproductive cloning') should remain a criminal offence" (recommendation 7, Ref. 1). This recommendation implies that nucl ear replacement and cloning are the same. They are not. Nuclear transfer co nstitutes reproductive cloning only when the individual created is genetica lly identical to the nuclear donor, In this paper, we describe a possible f uture use of nuclear transfer for the treatment of infertile individuals. T he treatment yields an individual that receives approximately equal genetic contributions from each parent. We use this example to illustrate how sema ntic confusion might lead to plausibly moral and justifiable treatments bei ng legally banned. In doing so, we hope to encourage a more accurate and in formed use of language in science, law and politics, so that legislation is properly informed by science and achieves what it intends. (C) 2001 John W iley & Sons, Inc.