A British parliamentary decision to approve a controversial fertility procedure that would produce so-called “three-parent babies” has captured the imagination of people who believe it could save lives.
But experts say that a fear about “designer babies” and the strict laws that govern reproductive technology in Canada have had a chilling effect on any discussion here about the procedure.
"I think part of the problem is that potential punishments are so severe that it scares people off," says Sara Cohen, a Toronto fertility lawyer.
"There’s no conversation about this, there’s none," Cohen said. "We’re talking about a really significant topic medically. I think at the very least we should be having a conversation about it."
On Feb. 3, the U.K. parliament voted in favour of allowing clinical trials for Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy (MRT), which would prevent mothers who carry a specific type of Mitochondrial disease from passing it on to their newborns.
Dr. Mark Tarnopolsky, a medical professor at McMaster University in Hamilton and an expert on the disease, says the decision gives hope to mothers who carry it.
"These women have a potentially fatal disease," Tarnopolsky says. "They essentially have a Sword of Damocles hanging over their head with this disorder, where if they have a fairly high burden of the disorder, they are likely to pass it on to every subsequent offspring."
The two MRT procedures
Mitochondrial disease refers to a group of disorders affecting the mitochondria, which are tiny structures located within almost all cells of the body. The mitochondria act as the powerhouse of the cell by converting food and oxygen into energy.
According to MitoCanada, an organization that supports Canadians who suffer from the disease, 1 in 5,000 people have some form of it.
Treatment for the disease is limited and no known cure exists. Most children who have the disease do not live longer than their mid-teens.
The cause of the disease is a genetic mutation in the mitochondria itself. The mutation causes the mitochondria to stop producing energy, and when mitochondria cannot produce energy, cells fail and in turn the body’s organs can fail, causing death.
Since 2008, scientists in the U.K. have researched two procedures to prevent this mutation from being passed on to newborns.
One procedure involves removing the nucleus from an embryo containing the mutated mitochondria and transferring it to a donor embryo containing healthy mitochondria. The embryo is then implanted in the mother's uterus.
The other procedure is similar but involves transferring the nucleus from the mother’s unfertilized egg to a donor’s egg containing healthy mitochondria. The embryo is then fertilized and implanted in the mother's uterus.
Babies born from this procedure inherit 99.9 per cent of their DNA from the parents, with the other 0.1 per cent coming from the donor, according to a report from the U.K.-based think tank Wellcome Trust.
At present, MRT remains illegal in Canada, under the Assisted Human Reproduction Act.
Passed in 2004, the legislation states no person can knowingly "alter the genome of a cell of a human being or in vitro embryo such that the alteration is capable of being transmitted to descendants."
It also states that any person found guilty of breaking the law can face fines of up to $500,000, or a jail sentence of up to 10 years, or both.
Because of this, many in Canada's scientific community want to take a wait-and-see approach with the British ruling, says Dr. Neal Mahutte, president of the Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society.
"Let’s see what the results show in the next five to 10 years," Mahutte said. "At some point, people might be confident enough to say, 'Well, maybe we should start doing that in other countries.'"
Mahutte does believe that most fertility clinics in Canada would want the government to review the legislation as a whole. He says research in the field has evolved rapidly since 2004 and some other aspects of the legislation may also need updating.
Mahutte also says that some difficulty exists in communicating this to Health Canada, the ministry responsible for administering the legislation. This is partly because the ministry has been slow to reorganize ever since being given responsibility for the legislation in 2012.
"It’s still very difficult to put forth any questions when they come up," Mahutte said.
The ‘designer baby’ fears
A specific ethical concern may also explain why the topic receives little discussion.
According to Health Canada’s website, altering the genetic code of an embryo was made illegal to prevent so-called "designer babies." This term refers to babies created to have "specific genetic traits that the intended parent(s) consider to be desirable."
"I think the reality of what they’re doing in the U.K. is so far removed from that," Mahutte says. "The mitochondrial DNA do not code for any traits at all."
Cohen feels that government tried to calm public fears that science would one day give parents the option of creating designer babies by outlawing any altering of the genetic code.
"We legislated before we were even there," Cohen said. "We legislated in concern of the potential of the worst possible science-fiction outcome that could exist one day."
Although provisions of the legislation may have discouraged debate on MRT, Tarnopolsky believes a dialogue about it will eventually begin in Canada.
"When a sophisticated first-world country like the U.K. deems this appropriate to move forward, I see no reason why that dialogue should not be open, and open soon, in Canada."
Also on HuffPost
GettyAccording to new national figures released in November, the preterm birth rate in the United States dropped for a seventh consecutive year, to a 17-year low of 11.4 percent of all births in 2013. (Though the report was released in 2014, the figures are for the previous year.)
Experts with the March of Dimes, which released the report, characterized the results as promising, up to a point, saying there is still much work to be done at a public health level. The report emphasizes that while many risk factors for preterm birth are unknown or outside of parents' control, efforts to change modifiable risk factors, such as smoking during pregnancy, have made a measurable difference in outcomes.
GettyA study published in the journal Pediatrics in July, which investigated the factors linked to sleep related deaths in babies, found that "bed-sharing" (i.e., an infant sleeping on the same surface as another person or pet) was the top risk factor for those age 4 months or younger. In older babies -- those between 4 months and 1 year -- rolling onto objects in the sleep environment, such as a blanket or pillow, was the top risk factor linked to death. It is important to note, however, that the study looked only at correlations; it did not establish cause and effect.
GettyDespite known concerns over the safety of objects in the sleep environment (see finding number 4 in this list), more than half of parents in the U.S. put their babies to bed with blankets or other loose bedding, according to a government report issued in December.
As Reuters' Andrew Seaman reported, the percent of parents who put their infants to sleep with loose bedding has dropped since the 1990s. And those who have not adopted the American Academy of Pediatrics' guidelines may be confused by magazine and catalogue images depicting babies in cribs with unnecessary -- and potentially unsafe -- plush blankets and pillows.
GettyA small but startling study published in October, which focused on one Oregon hospital, found that more than 90 percent of moms, dads or caregivers made at least one important error in how they installed their newborn's car seat, or how they positioned the baby within the seat itself when leaving the hospital after birth. The researchers found an average of 4.2 "misuses" per family, while 50 percent of the families who participated in the study made five or more mistakes. Though it was impossible for the researchers to quantify the effect those errors might have, they said the findings clearly highlight the need for improved resources enabling parents to keep their children safe in the car.
GettyEvery eight minutes, a child under the age of 6 experiences a medication error when not in the doctor's office or hospital, an October study found. Fortunately, the majority of the errors were not life-threatening, though they were widespread, affecting more than 200,000 children in the United States annually. The rates of errors were highest among children age 1 and younger, suggesting new parents may be particularly susceptible to making medication-related mistakes.
GettyA review released by researchers with the RAND Corporation in July added to the substantial body of evidence supporting the safety of vaccines, finding that serious adverse reactions to 11 common vaccines generally given to children under the age of 6 are rare. (It also found no link between those vaccines and increased risk of Autism Spectrum Disorders.)
In an editorial accompanying the report, Dr. Carrie Byington of the University of Utah's Department of Pediatrics, wrote that the findings "should be reassuring to parents of young children and to the clinicians who care for them."
GettyIn June, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued its first-ever statement on the promotion of childhood literacy, urging pediatricians to speak with parents about the importance of reading aloud to their kids at visits, just as they would discuss important medical and emotional concerns. The benefits of reading together, the AAP emphasized, go beyond literacy promotion -- reading to children helps nurture them emotionally and strengthens familial bonds.
GettyAccording to figures released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in March of 2014, 1 in 68 children in the United States have now been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder, or ASD. That figure is roughly 30 percent higher than the previous national estimate of 1 in 88 children that was reported in 2012.
The reasons behind the increase are not fully understood: Awareness of ASD has increased, which has led to more diagnoses, but experts also believe that certain risk factors may be on the rise.
GettyIn a September policy statement, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommended that intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants -- both reversible, long-acting forms of hormonal contraception -- be the first-line contraceptive option for teenage girls who are sexually active. However, because neither method protects against sexually transmitted infections, condoms should also be used when teens have sex, the AAP urged.
GettyIn August, the American Academy of Pediatrics took steps to emphasize the critically important role that sleep plays in teenagers' overall health, pushing for middle schools and high schools to start no earlier than 8:30 a.m. in order to help reduce widespread sleep deprivation and encourage tweens and teens to get the 8.5 to 9.5 hours of nightly sleep recommended for them. (As HuffPost's Rebecca Klein reported, roughly 40 percent of high schools in the U.S. currently start before 8 a.m.)