More proof that public consultation is ignored by Government

How the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) manipulates “consultation” , ignores it, and then proceeds how IVF industry and Government wants.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) statement subsequent to their Meeting held at 2pm on Wednesday 5 September 2007.

The papers and this statement can be read at their website..

They acknowledge that the licensing of human – animal hybrids and chimaera research has presented a particular challenge as this research is so novel in legal, scientific and ethical terms.

1.They established such research would legally fall within the HFEA's remit to license.

2. They then assessed whether such research would, in principle, be necessary and desirable in both scientific and ethical terms.

They claim this involved, ” detailed and comprehensive consultation gathering evidence from scientists and the wider public about the issues raised by this research.”

An 11 page PDF document is available explaining what this involved. – “3.10 Some countries, including a number in Europe, have decided to prohibit all kinds of embryo research or, at least, the creation of embryos for research purposes.” – In Australia “research involving the creation of all kinds of hybrid and chimera embryos, including cytoplasmic hybrid embryos, was banned following the tabling of a last-minute amendment during the parliamentary debates.” In Canada the Assisted Human Reproduction Act 2004 came into force, …. the Act prohibits the creation of human chimera embryos for research “

810 people responded to the “consultation” 91% of which were individuals, the rest were organisations.
All the details can be see in Appendix D HFEA 396 – i.e whilst public they are well hidden from public and the idle press.

They were asked ;

A. Do you approve Research using human embryos donated by IVF patients ?
Result : 70% against 30% for

B. Research using human embryos created specifically for research using donated egg and sperm ?

and

C. Research using cloned human embryos created specifically for research through cell nuclear replacement (CNR) received the same results – 75% against 25% for

D. No research using human embryos is acceptable – 65% agree 35% don't agree

On the most critical question.

Do you think that the HFEA should in future issue licences to allow research using chimera embryos?

Out of 810 individuals 500 voted against, 89 voted for, 38 not sure and 109 no response
Out of 74 organisations 33 voted against, 22 voted for, 7 not sure and 12 no response

The House of Commons Select Science and Technology Committee 5th report published on 28th March remarked inter alia … “The Government received 535 responses, from a range of stakeholders and individuals. According to the Department of Health, the “overall tenor of responses to the consultation was opposed to the creation of hybrids and chimeras” However, as we have discussed previously, much of this opposition appears to stem from the belief that all research using human embryos should be prohibited and it is thus difficult to extrapolate from this information to give a clear representation of specific objection to the creation of human-animal chimera and hybrid embryos for research.

3. Having looked at all the evidence the Authority has decided that there is no fundamental reason to prevent cytoplasmic hybrid research.

4. They will now look at the details of the two specific research applications that were submitted earlier this year. We would hope to have a decision on both applications in November.

The HFEA simply represents the views of the IVF industry, It is packed with their parctioners and representatives – the Bishop of Oxford Harries is the sole representative of a church or religious body , and there is a sprinkling of the not very great and the good.

The results are totally unsurprising – the consultation is a nonsense – and it is derided and ignored. ” much of this opposition appears to stem from the belief that all research using human embryos should be prohibited and it is thus difficult to extrapolate ” – well it is perfectly possible to determine what people think about their views on Labour / Conservative / Liberal policies – why is a wider survey respectable public survey by an independent and third party body not undertaken ?

Simply, the result of any respectably run survey would be an overwhelming rejection of any further production of fertilised embryos, of any sort for experimentation .

Briefly HFEA asked ..

Do you think that the HFEA should in future issue licences to allow research using chimera embryos?

Out of 810 individuals 500 voted against, 89 voted for, 38 not sure and 109 no response
Out of 74 organisations 33 voted against, 22 voted for, 7 not sure and 12 no response

Not a difficult set of results to interpret , unwanted …. so … they simply ignored the results.

That is NuLab Democracy …apparently. …

NuLab – Destroying Britain from the inside out.

HatTip Postman Patel

Advertisements

About IanPJ

Ian Parker-Joseph, former Leader of the Libertarian Party UK, who currently heads PDPS Internet Hosting and the Personal Deed Poll Services company, has been an IT industry professional for over 20 years, providing Business Consulting, Programme and Project Management, specialising in the recovery of Projects that have failed in a process driven world. Ian’s experience is not limited to the UK, and he has successfully delivered projects in the Middle East, Africa, US, Russia, Poland, France and Germany. Working within different cultures, Ian has occupied high profile roles within multi-nationals such as Nortel and Cable & Wireless. These experiences have given Ian an excellent insight into world events, and the way that they can shape our own national future. His extensive overseas experiences have made him all too aware of how the UK interacts with its near neighbours, its place in the Commonwealth, and how our nation fits into the wider world. He is determined to rebuild many of the friendships and commercial relationships with other nations that have been sadly neglected over the years, and would like to see greater energy and food security in these countries, for the benefit of all. Ian is a vocal advocate of small government, individual freedom, low taxation and a minimum of regulation. Ian believes deeply and passionately in freedom and independence in all areas of life, and is now bringing his professional experiences to bear in the world of politics.
This entry was posted in Main Page. Bookmark the permalink.