Human-Animal Chimera Prohibition Act would criminalize creation of many mixed-species beings, once the realm of science fiction but now real
Presumably this legislation would be strongly opposed by the “furries” community.
Context
In Greek mythology, a chimera was an animal with three heads: a lion, goat, and snake. Since then, the word has come to mean a combination of multiple animals, or a combination of a human and an animal, such as a sphinx (head of a human and body of a lion) or centaur (head of a human and body of a horse). For millennia, these remained fantasies — until recently.
In a laboratory, the first human-pig chimera was created in 2017, while the first human-monkey chimera was announced in April 2021. These aren’t like the chimeras of ancient myth — no “human head with a lion body” creatures. Instead, they take forms such as the mouse with 4 percent human cells, which in 2020 became the highest percentage of human cells ever successfully inserted into an animal.
In response to these developments, the nonprofit International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) issued new guidelines on the subject in May 2021, essentially giving the greenlight. Although the guidelines are non-binding, they are highly influential in the scientific community and heavily followed.
The guidelines did include some limitations. For example, any experiment “should proceed for the minimum time necessary to achieve the scientific aim” and experiments should “limit chimerism to a particular organ system or region” of the animal.
Some find this an exciting innovative new frontier in science, noting the potential advances in public health — for example, a pig could potentially grow a human heart. Others believe this emerging science is ethically and morally dangerous or wrong.
What the legislation does
The Human-Animal Chimera Prohibition Act would criminalize four things:
- Creating, or even attempting to create, a human-animal chimera.
- Transferring a human embryo into a nonhuman.
- Vice versa, transferring a nonhuman embryo into a human.
- Even receiving a human-animal chimera, even if you did not create it yourself.
It appears the legislation would only affect human-animal chimeras, rather than animal-animal ones. Presumably, this would retain the legality of the creature that provided the name of the rock band fronted by Chris Pratt’s character Andy Dwyer in the sitcom Parks and Recreation: Mouse Rat.
It also wouldn’t affect human-human-chimeras, which can occur when (for example) a previously-pregnant woman can carry her baby’s cells in her body for the rest of her life.
The House version was introduced on May 25 as H.R. 3542, by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ4). The Senate version was introduced the same day as S. 1800, by Sen. Mike Braun (R-IN).
What supporters say
Supporters argue that messing with human DNA in this way is a step too far for scientific experimentation.
“Human life is distinct and sacred, and research that creates an animal-human hybrid or transfers a human embryo into an animal womb or vice versa should be completely prohibited,” Sen. Braun said in a press release. “And engaging in such unethical experiments should be a crime.”
“The ISSCR has shown an utter disregard for the value and dignity of human life,” Rep. Smith said in a separate press release. “Its previous rule allowing scientists to create and experiment on human embryos up to 14 days was already unethical and morally repugnant, but the ISSCR has now removed all restraint, allowing unborn humans at any stage of development to be experimented on, manipulated, and destroyed. [The U.S.] now has the responsibility to decide how it will respond to this updated guidance.”
What opponents say
Opponents counter that the ISSCR’s new guidance stays on the forefront of scientific advancements, allowing for the pursuit of knowledge and developments with reasonable safeguards for safety and moral reasons.
“The 2021 update presents practical advice for oversight of research posing unique scientific and ethical issues for researchers and the public,” ISSCR Guidelines task force chair Robin Lovell-Badge, PhD, said in a press release. “They provide confidence to researchers, clinicians, and the public alike that stem cell science can proceed responsibly, ethically, and remain responsive to public and patient interests.”
“This is a significant update, building upon the society’s longstanding commitment to excellence in all areas of stem cell research,” said ISSCR president Christine Mummery, PhD, said in the same press release. “The updates address new methods of understanding fundamental biological processes that may ultimately lead to the alleviation of debilitating diseases and disorders.”
Odds of passage
The House version has attracted 22 cosponsors, all Republicans. It awaits a potential vote in the House Judiciary Committee.
The Senate version has attracted five cosponsors, all Republicans. It awaits a potential vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Odds of passage are low in the Democratic-controlled Congress.
On May 27, the Senate voted on the proposal not as standalone legislation, but as an amendment to another bill. It was rejected 48–49 in a party-line vote, with all voting Republicans in favor but all voting Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents against.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
This article was written by GovTrack Insider staff writer Jesse Rifkin.
Want more? Follow GovTrack by email, on Twitter, and for our “A Bill a Minute” video series — on Instagram, or on YouTube.
Like our analyses? Support our work on Patreon.
