EMBOreports

552 EMBO reports vol. 2 | no. 7 | 2001 © 2001 European Molecular Biology Organization

They are movingGermany has started a broad debate about legalising the use of surplus embryos forbiomedical research

Throughout May and June 2001, biologymade it to the front pages of Germannewspapers and news magazines. Theresearch community in Germany, theGerman government, all political parties,as well as commentators, humanists andother stakeholders are currently engagedin a public debate about the ethicalimplications of genetic research, in particularabout the use of surplus embryos from

in vitro fertilisation for medical research.This is a remarkable development because,until now, it has been an anathema inGermany to discuss any use of an IVFembryo other than its implantation in thewomb.

The incident that triggered this intensedebate was an application to the DeutscheForschungsgemeinschaft by Oliver Brüstle,a neuropathologist at the University ofBonn, to fund research using humanembryonic stem cells. His group, workingon the differentiation of stem cells intonerve cells, has already been able todemonstrate—in animal models—thetherapeutic potential of this approach fortreating severe neurological disorders.Brüstle now wants to transfer his results tohuman embryonic stem cells, and thusplans to import these cells from Israel,where their production is legal. His workwould, in fact, not violate the Germanlaw for the protection of the embryo,since this law prohibits only research thatwould damage an embryo. But it woulddefinitely set a precedent, since humanstem cell research in Germany has so farbeen limited to adult stem cells. In fact, atthe time of writing, the DFG has not made

a final decision about whether to grantBrüstle’s application and is still waitingfor a recently established ethics council togive a recommendation.

What eventually started the nationaldebate, however, was not Brüstle’sapplication, but the DFG’s response. OnMay 3, 2001, Ernst-Ludwig Winnacker,Head of the Gene Centre of the Universityof Munich and President of the DFG,

publicly recommended that the Germanparliament ‘allow the allowed’, i.e. allowthe import of pluripotent stem cell linesfrom abroad. But Winnacker went evenfurther and said ‘If it proves necessary,the DFG suggests as a second step, thatParliament initiate deliberations to makeit possible for scientists in Germany towork actively on the production of humanembryonic stem cell lines. This possibilitymust solely refer to embryos that wereproduced for artificial fertilisation, andthat can no longer be used for this

purpose (“surplus” embryos).’ The DFG’srecommendation came together withthe establishment of a ‘National EthicsCouncil’ whose aim is to advise theGerman government on ethical and moralquestions, and of which Winnacker is amember (see sidebar).

Winnacker is backed by none otherthan Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, who

supports the DFG’s recommendation touse surplus embryos for medical research.In a speech given at the German SavingsBank Conference in Munich on May 16,he said that it is moral ‘not to restrict ourthinking just to the protection of embryos.It is just as moral not to forget the manypeople with critical illnesses who fear fortheir lives and are hoping to be cured orto have their conditions alleviated bymedicines produced by genetic engineer-ing.’ In various interviews, ChancellorSchröder, who does not want to seeGermany lose its lead in the rapidlygrowing European biotechnology industry,also pointed out the economic potentialof medical research.

Many biomedical researchers in Germanywelcome this discussion, because theythink that research using adult stem cellsalone will not necessarily produce thesame results as work with embryonic stemcells. ‘We simply do not know yet if adultstem cells have the same potential withregard to proliferation and differentiationas do embryonic stem cells,’ AnnaWobus, a researcher working on mouseembryonic stem cells at the Institute forPlant Genetics and Crop Plant Researchin Gatersleben, said.

But if the proponents can be sure of theChancellor’s support, the opponents havefound a prominent supporter too. On May18, in a speech given in Berlin, FederalPresident Johannes Rau maintained that thefirst sentence of the German constitution’sBasic Law—‘Human dignity shall beinviolable‘—extends to the fertilised egg,and thus prohibits any use of IVF embryos

This is a remarkable development because, until now, it has beenan anathema in Germany to discuss any use of an IVF embryo

other than its implantation in the womb

Federal President Johannes Rau maintained that the first sentenceof the German constitution’s Basic Law—‘Human dignity

shall be inviolable’—extends to the fertilised egg

analysis

© 2001 European Molecular Biology Organization EMBO reports vol. 2 | no. 7 | 2001 553

for research purposes. ‘Not even importantobjectives of medical research shoulddetermine from what point human lifeshould be protected,’ he said in hisspeech.

In contrast to the UK and the USA—atleast in terms of private companies—Germany does not plan to create embryosin order to produce stem cells. The DFG,the Chancellor and the Federal Ministry ofEducation and Research instead plan touse the one hundred or more IVF eggs thathave not been implanted and are actuallystored in IVF clinics. Many scientistssupport this approach, as they think thattherapeutic cloning will not be necessary.‘I think that a limited number of embryoswould be enough to establish embryonicstem cell lines,’ Wobus said, adding ‘I amagainst therapeutic cloning.’

However, the 1990 German law for theprotection of the embryo prohibits anyuse of an in vitro fertilised egg other than itsimplantation into the womb for the purposeof establishing pregnancy. ChancellorSchröder and Edelgard Buhlmann, theMinister for Education and Research, thusadvocate changing the law in order toallow the use of surplus embryos forbiomedical research. Nevertheless, bothhave made clear that such a decision canonly be made after an extended debate

within Germansociety about thebenefits and theethical implica-tions. ‘The atti-tude [of theGerman govern-ment] is that,right now, it isnot necessary tochange the lawfor the protectionof the embryo,’Bettina Bundszus,a spokespersonfor the Ministerfor Educationand Research,said. But theseplans are disputedeven within thegovernment. HertaDäubler-Gmelin,the Minister ofJustice and astrong opponentof using surplusembryos for bio-

medical research, has already spoken outagainst any change in the law.

An additional problem is that thediscussion about the use of humanembryonic stem cells has been mergedwith the debate about whether to allowpre-implantation diagnostics (PID) for IVFembryos in order to prevent severeinherited diseases. Historically, thisprocedure has found many opponents inGermany, who like to link PID with Nazidoctors’ abuse of eugenics during theThird Reich. Many scientists therefore see

the coupling of stem cell research and PIDin the public debate rather negatively. ‘I seethis as a problem,’ Wobus said, ‘these aredifferent aspects, different problems. […]This has nothing to do with the develop-ment of new therapies.’

The debate has split the government aswell as the political parties in Germany.At the time of writing, the governingSocial Democrats had not yet publishedtheir position on stem cell research or onPID. But the Green party, their smallercoalition partner, have already made

clear that they oppose both and willsupport the Minister of Justice. Even moredivided are the Christian Democrats, themain opposition party. Their strong catholicbase takes a fundamental stance againststem cell research and PID, althoughother members of the party—most notablythe former Federal President RomanHerzog—have made clear that theywould support stem cell research in orderto develop new therapies. In fact, whenWolfgang Clement, the Social Demo-cratic governor of Northrhine-Westfaliawhere Brüstle works, publicly supportedthe import of stem cells during a visitto Israel in the first week of June, theChristian Democratic party leaders—inwhat must have been a political reflex—immediately asked for an import ban.

On May 28, the Bundestag devoted afive-hour debate to discussing the futuredirection of genetic research in Germany.In the end, the legislators agreed on the over-all benefit of genetic research in principle,but remained undecided about the use ofsurplus embryos for medical research.Indeed, some members of parliament con-ceeded that they simply do not know enoughyet about the scientific, medical and ethicalimplications to make a decision.

The outcome of the debate is as yetunclear, but the fact that it has started andit is being carried out on a broad basis isalready a step forward. ‘Science throwsup questions here which concern us all.They need to be discussed at every levelof society and settled by politicaldecision—in parliament,’ President Rausaid in his Berlin speech. It is not clearwhen the final decision about the use ofembryonic stem cells will be made and

what the outcome will be, but, given thebroad debate in Germany, it will be onethat will be backed by the majority of thepopulation.

Holger Breithaupt

DOI: 10.1093/embo-reports/kve143

Members of the National Ethics CouncilWolfgang van den Daele (Science Centre, Berlin)Horst Dreier (University of Würzburg)Eve-Marie Engels (University of Tübingen)Bishop Gebhard Fürst (Catholic Church)Detlev Ganten (Max-Delbrück-Centre, Berlin)Volker Gerhardt (Humboldt University, Berlin)Bischop Wolfgang Huber (Lutheran Church)Regine Kollek (University of Hamburg)Cristiane Lohkamp (Deutsche Huntington Hilfe, Stuttgart)Therese Neuer-Miebach (Fachhochschule Frankfurt am Main)Christiane Nüsslein-Volhard (Max-Planck-Institute, Tübingen)Peter Propping (University of Bonn)Heinz Putzhammer (German Labour Union)Jens Reich (Max-Delbrück-Centre, Berlin)Bettina Schöne-Seifert (University of Hannover)Richard Schröder (Humboldt University, Berlin)Spiros Simitis (University of Frankfurt am Main)Lothar Späth (Jenoptik AG)Jochen Taupitz (University of Mannheim)Kristiane Weber-Hassemer (Supreme State Court, Frankfurt am Main)Hans-Jochen Vogel (Social Democratic Politician)Ernst-Ludwig Winnacker (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Bonn)Christiane Woopen (University of Cologne)

In the end, the legislators agreed on the overall benefit of geneticresearch in principle, but conceeded that they simply do not know

enough yet about the implications to make a decision