Home Overview Press Room Blog Publications For Students about us
Search

About US Federal Policies & Human Biotechnology


Federal regulations on most human biotechnologies are inadequate, falling far short of the kind of comprehensive approach that is needed. This situation is due to the unique social and policy challenges posed by human biotechnologies, to the anti-regulatory environment of recent years, and to the divisive politics and religious beliefs that accompany issues involving human embryos.

One regulatory failure is Congress's inability to pass a law prohibiting human reproductive cloning. Nine in ten Americans oppose it, as does every member of Congress and nearly every reputable scientist. Bills that would prohibit reproductive cloning have been introduced several times, but have failed because of disagreements over research cloning.

Another failure is assisted reproduction's scant regulation and oversight. Despite numerous reported abuses and billions of dollars in revenues, federal oversight remains limited to collecting data on success rates.

Medical gene transfer (also called gene therapy) is slightly different. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are supposed to oversee each clinical trial. But researchers have often ignored this requirement, as revealed most dramatically after the 1999 death of 18-year-old Jesse Gelsinger in a gene transfer experiment.

The most publicized aspect of federal biotechnology policy has been the limitation on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research that was imposed by President Bush in 2001. This restriction both hinders research and interferes with appropriate government oversight. Currently, embryonic stem cell research is regulated only by voluntary and unenforceable guidelines.



Emerging Technologies and a Sustainable, Healthy, Just WorldThe Case of Human Reproductive and Genetic Technologiesby Marcy Darnovsky and Jesse ReynoldsBiodiversity: The Newsletter of the Consultative Group on Biological Diversity (Winter 2010)Environmentalists are in a position to play a critically important role in determining how powerful, emerging technologies are ultimately developed, used, and regulated.
"Moral Questions of an Altogether Different Kind" [PDF]Progressive Politics in the Biotech Ageby Marcy DarnovskyHarvard Law and Policy ReviewFebruary 23rd, 2010Human genetic, reproductive and biomedical technologies are taking us into uncharted moral and political waters.
Gene Patent Challenge Gets Support in the Pressby Jesse ReynoldsBiopolitical TimesFebruary 14th, 2010The lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of human gene patents received its first hearing, but the real developments occurred in the media.
Sex Selection: Tools for Actionby Marcy DarnovskyBiopolitical TimesFebruary 10th, 2010Information, political education activities, and policy suggestions for reproductive rights and justice advocates.
Synthetic Biology as Super-Weapon?by Pete ShanksBiopolitical TimesFebruary 10th, 2010DARPA is investing in synthetic biology -- and provoking some criticism.
Medical groups assail patenting of human genesby Elizabeth WeiseUSA TodayFebruary 3rd, 2010Groups representing thousands of doctors, scientists and patients argued in court that no one should be able to patent human genes.
Embryos destroyed for "minor" disordersby Lois RogersThe TelegraphJanuary 24th, 2010UK fertility regulators are allowing doctors to screen out embryos that could lead full lives despite having a genetic condition.
Cellular reprogramming and bans on reproductive cloningby Jesse ReynoldsBiopolitical TimesJanuary 19th, 2010A recent paper argues that prohibitions against human reproductive cloning should be strengthened to cover any method.
Legal Updates: DNA Databases, Human Gene Patents, Octomom’s Doctorby Osagie ObasogieBiopolitical TimesJanuary 17th, 2010The past few weeks have seen a number of legal developments involving reproductive and genetic technologies.
Nudging the Discourse?by Pete ShanksBiopolitical TimesJanuary 8th, 2010The Popular Mechanics article misleadingly titled "How to Create a Designer Baby" includes a call for regulation of assisted reproduction.
Displaying 1-10 of 290  
Next >> 
Last Page » 
« Show Complete List » 


ESPAÑOL | PORTUGUÊS | Русский

home | overview | blog | publications| about us | donate | newsletter | press room | privacy policy

CGS • 1936 University Ave, Suite 350, Berkeley, CA 94704 • • (p) 1.510.625.0819 • (F) 1.510.625.0874