Thursday, November 02, 2006

National Newspaper Ad: DOCTORS DIG DEEP TO INFORM PUBLIC ON CLONING

NEWS For immediate release THURSDAY, 2nd NOVEMBER

NATIONAL ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN ON CLONING:
DOCTORS DIG DEEP TO INFORM PUBLIC

Doctors have spearheaded a $120,000-plus national advertising campaign to argue the ethical and scientific case against the legalisation of human cloning.

A full page color ad in The Australian and tabloid-size ads in newspapers in every state capital will be rolled out from today, leading up to the Senate conscience vote on cloning next week.
See http://www.makeastand.org.au/dnh_broadsheet.jpg 673KB http://www.makeastand.org.au/dnh_tabloid.jpg 407 KB

The ad, authorised by Dr David van Gend of Do No Harm! Australians for Ethical Stem Cell Research, has been supported by Doctors Against Cloning, a group of more than 200 doctors formed recently to express opposition to cloning on ethical and scientific grounds.

Dr Megan Best, national convenor of Doctors Against Cloning, said: “We wrote last month to all Senators and MPs stating that only ethical and effective stem cell research should be supported. This advertisement explains why cloning is unethical in humans and ineffective even in animals, and reminds the public that adult stem cell research is superior both ethically and scientifically. Therefore we are very pleased to support the ad.”

Dr van Gend said: “The public has no idea of the inhuman provisions of the Patterson Bill - that it will allow the creation of human embryos as mere laboratory material, decreeing that they must be killed at 14 days of age; that it will allow the creation of animal-human hybrid embryos using eggs of a pig or rabbit; and even allow an aborted baby girl to become the ‘mother’ of an embryo which will then be destroyed in research.

“This advertising initiative, funded by doctors and concerned mums and dads across Australia, will help alert the public and their representatives to the unethical proposals of the Patterson ‘clone and kill’ Bill,” Dr van Gend said.

“Cloning is wrong in humans, unproven in animals in terms of safety and effectiveness and unnecessary.

“Australia should support stem cell science that serves our humanity, not this misguided science that violates our humanity,” Dr van Gend concluded.

The ad argues that cloning is wrong, because cloning creates a human embryo like any other embryo, and it is wrong to create human embryos solely for research.

The ad argues that cloning is unnecessary, because “we will still get the great benefits of stem cell science” using adult stem cells, which have been proven to be both safe and effective in humans.

It warns of the “future abuses” that will only be made possible if Australia perfects the technique of cloning, quoting Melbourne Professor Julian Savulescu’s demand to develop cloned embryos to the fetal stage to obtain organs for transplantation, and Melbourne academic Daniel Elsner’s defence of cloning right through to birth.

The ad links to the resource website of Do No Harm (www.cloning.org.au) and to a new campaign website (www.makeastand.org.au) where the public can email their Senators and Federal MPs to ask them “to reject cloning, but support the magnificent field of adult stem cell science.”

CONTACTS NATIONAL AND STATE

NATIONAL: Dr David van Gend, 0417 007066; 07 46329377; vangend@machousemedical.com.au
National Director Do No Harm! Australians for Ethical Stem Cell Research www.cloning.org.au

NATIONAL AND NSW: Dr Megan Best, 0434 823678
National Convenor, Doctors Against Cloning

VIC: Dr Eloise Piercy, 0438 363509
QLD: Alan Baker, 0412 265157
WA: Richard Egan, 0416 148008
SA: Damien Wyld, 0402 751889
TAS: Pat Gartlan 03 6223 1818

NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION DAYS

THURSDAY 2nd November:
The Australian
The Age
The Sydney Morning Herald
The Courier-Mail
FRIDAY 3rd November
The West Australian
SATURDAY 4th November
The Advertiser (Adelaide)
SUNDAY 5th November
The Sunday Tasmanian

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Dr Van Gend, I am completely against this bill, but I had an admittedly cursory glance at it and I thought I saw that it prohibited the formation of human-animal hybrids.

Or was I reading an amendment? Would you mind clarifying this for me please?