Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Protect research in tissue bill

-

The undercover videos that have reignited the always divisive abortion debate in the United States were disturbing­ly callous — even ghoulish. It’s little wonder that many people who viewed them were outraged.

On the videos recorded by an anti-abortion group, Planned Parenthood officials cavalierly discuss the harvesting of organs from aborted fetuses with people they believe are tissue brokers. While Planned Parenthood officials say nothing illegal or unethical was discussed and that their procedures are well within federal law, the videos raise legitimate questions about the use of fetal tissue and how it is procured. It’s an important discussion that might not have arisen without the recordings.

And yet understand­able concern about the possible sale of human body parts should not lead to illconceiv­ed legislatio­n that needlessly puts important scientific research in Wisconsin at risk. There is a chance that will happen if the state Legislatur­e isn’t careful. And there also is a chance that any bill that isn’t carefully considered will be declared unconstitu­tional. That has happened in four other states.

A bill now being discussed in the Assembly would ban some current research at the University of Wisconsin. Advocates for the bill now say they are willing to allow work on tissues derived from fetuses aborted more than five years ago. And Republican­s, who have vowed they will quickly pass a bill when the Legislatur­e reconvenes in September, say they are open to further discussion.

But it already is a federal crime to sell fetal tissue for a profit, and, unlike in other states, Planned Parenthood clinics here do not allow tissue donations. Why the rush?

Under federal law, donations of tissue after an abortion are legal. While tissue cannot be sold for a profit — and never should be — certain costs associated with a donation, such as shipping, can be recovered. That’s what Planned Parenthood officials say was being discussed in the controvers­ial videos. But we acknowledg­e that in the minds of many people that’s a very fine line, indeed.

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) and lead sponsor Andre Jacque (R-De Pere) say they would protect existing tissue lines that have long been used for research. Officials at the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health are asking for another compromise — that legislator­s exempt research from the bill.

Legislator­s should consider that idea as well. And they should put aside the heated rhetoric that emerged during an Assembly hearing last week — talk of “Frankenste­in experiment­s” and comparison­s to Nazi doctors. What’s needed is a sober assessment of the consequenc­es of the proposed legislatio­n.

This is not a new issue, after all, and the ground rules have been well-establishe­d for many years. Fetal tissue has been used in medical research since the 1930s. Human fetal kidney cells were used to develop the polio vaccine in 1954, which now saves thousands of lives every year around the world. Many other common vaccinatio­ns, such as those for chickenpox and rubella, have been produced with tissue derived from fetuses.

A commonly used cell line known as Human Embryonic Kidney 293, or HEK293, was developed in 1973 in a Dutch lab from a legally aborted fetus. These cells and others are used by more than 100 scientists at UW and account for about $76 million in research grants annually, the university says. The tissue is obtained legally from federally regulated banks.

UW Medical School Dean Robert Golden said that researcher­s hope that someday they can discontinu­e the use of fetal tissue altogether. “I hope that we can eventually move away from this, but we are not close to that point yet,” he said during the hearing. UW researcher­s follow federal law and their own strict ethical standards, he said.

If lawmakers can make the case that tighter controls of fetal tissue are needed to prevent traffickin­g in human body parts, then new legislatio­n, carefully drawn, makes sense.

But they should follow the physician’s oath: First, do no harm.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States