Stem cell controversy

Professor Woo Suk Hwang, who became famous in 2004 for creating the first cloned human embryo stem cell lines, has resigned from all his public roles -including the Chair of the World Stem Cell Hub -amidst allegations over the ethics and accuracy of his research.

The story hit the news when Dr Gerald Schatten from Pittsburgh University, who had been collaborating with Hwang since early last year, announced that he was leaving the team -claiming unethical working practices as the reason. Hwang’s cloning work required 247 unfertilised eggs, which were supposedly ‘donated’ by 16 women. However, reports followed that some of the eggs came from a junior scientist, in a direct violation of rules developed to protect women from being coerced into egg donation. Furthermore, Hwang’s collaborator, Sung-il Roh, a fertility specialist working in Seoul, came under investigation over allegations that he made payments to egg donors, a practice outlawed in South Korea in January 2005.

Hwang claims he did not know at the time about donors receiving payment, or that some had come from his junior team. It seems that he found out later and lied when questioned about the issue. He has since made a public apology, acknowledging that he had found out about the donations from two of his team members but that he chose not to make this information public. He said he did not know about the payment issue until just recently.

The controversy may well affect the planned development of a global ‘stem cell hub’, to be based in South Korea with satellite laboratories in the US and UK - with the aim of ‘establishing a global network on promoting stem cell research’. Since Schatten’s withdrawal, other laboratories that were to form part of the hub have announced that they are pulling out.

In a new twist, Dr Roh has now claimed that Hwang has admitted to certain aspects of his published work being ‘fabricated’. In the Science paper, published in June 2004, Hwang claimed to have created stem cell lines from eleven patients. The rumours suggest that nine of the lines didn’t actually exist. Hwang has asked Science to withdraw the paper, having admitted that certain aspects needed to be clarified. (BioNews 2005; 14, 21, 28 November, New York Times 2005; 16 December)

Boy traces ‘anonymous’ donor father

A 15 year old boy has managed to trace his ‘anonymous’ sperm donor father through the internet.

Using an online genealogy DNA testing firm, the boy discovered two men with similar Y chromosome DNA to his own. The similarities meant that there was a 50% chance they all shared a recent male ancestor. The two men shared the same surname, which the boy then submitted to a tracing website along with the basic donor information his mother had been given at the time of his conception. The search threw up one match, with whom the boy has made amicable contact.

Oxford geneticist Bryan Sykes commented, ‘Fifteen years ago, when the father donated his sperm, nobody in the world could have known this would be possible.’ The case raises questions about past promises of donor anonymity, as well as highlighting the desire donor children have to know more about their genetic and biological origins.

Meanwhile, the complications and regulation of fertility treatments continue to be questioned. A team from the National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health in Helsinki have found that the rate of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is 1.4% after the first IVF treatment cycle, rising to 2.3% overall, with 15% of IVF-treated women needing hospital treatment at least once. According to a report in the Daily Telegraph, past studies indicate that eight per cent of natural pregnancies result in complications that require hospital treatment - around half the rate of the IVF-treated group in the study. Earlier this year a UK woman died of OHSS whilst undergoing egg collection treatments.

The UK’s regulatory body – the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) – have recently launched a new consultation into the use of pre-implantation genetic testing for low penetrance disorders (LPDs). LPDs are those which will not necessarily affect a person but are characterised by the presence of ‘pre-disposing genes’. Predominantly these are familial cancer syndromes. The consultation closes on 16 January 2006. The HFEA have also recently published their reports on the use of donor gametes, and the ‘welfare of the child’ clause in fertility

treatments. (www.hfea.gov.uk 2005, BBC 2005; 30 June, BioNews 2005; 3, 28 November, Daily Telegraph 2005; 25 November)

‘Mercy killing’ in the courts

A ‘loving father’ who smothered his son to death with a pillow in July 2004 has been cleared of murder and been given a two year suspended sentence instead.

Andrew Wragg, a former SAS soldier, pleaded manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, saying that it was a mercy killing to end his son’s suffering -ten year old Jacob Wragg, who had the degenerative Hunter Syndrome, was already deaf and using a wheelchair and expected to die before or during his 20s. Wragg was supported by statements from family saying what a good father he was, and confirming the grief caused by Jacob’s illness. The judge said the sentence was lenient, in part, because of the complicity of Jacob’s mother.

In a different case, a retired family doctor has been found not guilty of murdering three of his patients with morphine overdoses. While Dr Howard Martin said he was ‘simply easing the suffering’ of the three patients, the prosecution argued that he intended to kill or cause serious harm to them. Tests on the body of one patient found the morphine level to be twice the level that is ‘potentially fatal’.

The defence argued that there was no definite causal link between the morphine and the men’s deaths, a view supported by expert evidence.

Pathologist Dr Nathaniel Carey said that one patient, who had lung cancer, would have died regardless of any overdose, adding, ‘…It would not be appropriate to include morphine as a cause of death…’

Durham police have since handed files on twelve more patients to the coroner, as a result of other complaints not covered at the trial. The complaints made to police date back to 1978. (BMJ 2005; 29 October, Daily Telegraph 2005; 26 October, BBC 2005; 14, 15 December)

Joffe returns while Scottish bill fails

The amended Joffe bill has been reintroduced to the House of Lords, as expected, and is based upon the Oregon model of physician assisted suicide rather than seeking to legalise euthanasia as well, as in the Netherlands.

The new bill also allows other members of the healthcare team to assist the patient in administering the lethal drugs, implying that the doctor need not be present. The Bill is likely to be debated early in the New Year and will have to pass through a number of stages before being voted upon by the Lords. If it does pass, it will still need to go through the House of Commons in order to become law. So far the government has taken a neutral position on the Bill, and it seems unlikely that they will give it time in the current parliamentary session, which will end in Autumn 2006.

Joffe’s Bill also now applies to England and Wales only, rather than including Scotland as before. Separate Scottish proposals, which were being supported by Jeremy Purvis MSP, have been dropped. Under the Scottish system a private members bill needs to be supported by 18 other MSPs to proceed. The Purvis bill was endorsed by only five. Though Mr Purvis could reintroduce the bill after six months have passed, and has indicated his intentions to continue challenging the law on assisted dying, many commentators think it unlikely that he will introduce another bill soon due to other political factors. (This is North Scotland 2005; 30 November)

And finally… passive smoking is worse

Unpublished research from the 1980s shows that inhaled ‘sidestream’ cigarette smoke - the smoke that rises from the tip of a burning cigarette between puffs - is more toxic than the ‘mainstream’ smoke inhaled by the smoker – a link the tobacco industry has vigorously denied. The research, conducted by Philip Morris Tobacco at its secret Institut für Biologische Forschung (INBIFO) in Germany, found that inhaled fresh sidestream smoke is four times more toxic than inhaled mainstream smoke. The number, variety, and results of the experiments done by Philip Morris at INBIFO are without parallel in the open scientific literature.

Sidestream smoke makes up around 85% of secondhand smoke, and recent evidence shows that such smoke is worse from filtered ‘light’ cigarettes than from the ‘full flavour’ cigarettes used in the research. (BMJ 2005; 17 December, Tobacco Control 2005;14:396-404)