The Telegraph has posted a video of Lord Winston being interviewed about the Government’s embryology bill. Leaving aside the fact that the video is incredibly unbalanced and one-sided as it gives Lord Winston a platform to promote embryo research but fails to provide any comment from those of us who oppose embryo research, here’s a few incredibly confused points Lord Winston makes:

1. Lord Winston is asked if there is a consensus on the rights of the embryo.
Lord Winston replies that he asked some people at a talk he recently attended (no mention of number of people or why they attended) if they support embryo research if there is a chance of finding cures, and they agreed. It is incredible that a scientist would extrapolate from this tiny biased sample that this is indicative of public opinion! Lord Winston himself acknowledged straightaway that he had asked a loaded question. In fact it was also a massively misleading question as it suggests that embryo research is going to lead to cures and it suggests that there is no alternative – untrue again. This is exactly why a proper platform for those who oppose embryo research and support ethical alternatives such as adult stem cell and umbilical cord stem cell research is needed.

Lord Winston failed to mention that the Wellcome Trust commissioned a series of focus groups which were a lot more rigorous, which proved the exact opposite, that people opposed research on embryos when asked.

Lord Winston went on to say that under the law a child does not have full human rights until the child is born -completely untrue, as even under the Abortion Act, the appalling piece of legislation which allows the destruction of 200,000 babies a year in the UK, abortion is only allowed up till 24 weeks under specific grounds, and the limit is a massive issue of debate with polling indicating that the vast majority of people are uncomfortable with the abortion of highly developed babies up to six months old. Later in the interview, Lord Winston completely contradicts himself by talking about the rights the embryo has at 14 days.

2. The interviewer says he was recently at a meeting of Eurostem which is trying to produce ethical guidance on the use of human embryos and the one thing they couldn’t get consensus is the status of the embryo. Could Lord Winston think of any way to take onboard the concerns of religious groups and still be pragmatic?
This was a golden opportunity for Lord Winston to say any number of things. Those who believe in the right to life of all human beings will always oppose all destruction of human embryos but in a democratic society, at the very least the consensus should be to restrict the number of embryos used in research. Equally, it would be fair to say no research proposals will go ahead unless it is clear that they are scientifically valid when reviewed by a committee representing those of prolife views (unlike the current practice of the HFEA saying yes to everyone), or no embryos would be used in research until ethical alternatives are exhausted, such as adult stem cells and umbilical cord stem cells. This would be completely in line with the ethical principle in scientific research that you don’t test on human beings until you have exhausted all alternative avenues and proved that the treatment is likely to have a beneficial effect when used in humans. No one could really argue with this. If there is an alternative to using embryos, such as umbilical cord stem cells or adult stem cells, then why on earth aren’t we using it? Lord Winston didn’t say any of these very reasonable things, he said instead, that it doesn’t matter about taking onboard the concerns of those who are opposed to research.

One final point, a consensus on the status of embryos is possible. All we have to look to is the Declaration of Human Rights, the right to life is absolute and accepted universally – it’s clear that the embryo is the first stage of a human life, without which none of us would be here. Lord Winston does mention the right to life, but says that it is fine to kill in defence, what honestly does that have to do with the defenceless embryo?