Homepage  /  News

Controversial doctor to use MRT technique for over 40s fertility

Shaoni Bhattacharya

Progress Educational Trust

23 June 2017

| | | |
[BioNews, London]

The fertility doctor who led the team which produced the world's first baby through mitochondrial replacement therapy (MRT) is now looking to use the same technique in a commercial venture.

Dr John Zhang of the New Hope Fertility Center Clinic in New York City aims to use the maternal spindle transfer process to 'rejuvenate' the eggs of older women aged 42 to 47, according to press reports last week.

This technique was used by Dr Zhang and colleagues in the birth of the first baby using MRT to a mother carrying a heritable mitochondrial disorder in Mexico, 2016.

It involved taking a donor egg with healthy mitochondria, removing its nucleus and replacing it with a nucleus from the mother, before carrying out fertilisation through standard IVF.

Now Dr Zhang's new company, Darwin Life, is offering 'Human Egg Reconstitution in vitro fertilisation' or HER IVF.

'Since age doesn't affect the quality of DNA directly, HER IVF replacement techniques may result in a patient oocyte (egg) that is decades younger in age than the patient herself - prolonging natural fertility,' states Darwin Life's website.

The company is currently assessing women for the procedure, according to MIT Technology Review, which will cost US $80,000 - $120,000. But as the technique is illegal in the USA, it would be offered only outside of the country.

The plan has met with criticism and concern. 'This is an experimental technique, with no robust peer-reviewed studies to support either its effectiveness or safety,' said Marcy Darnovsky, executive director of non-profit organisation The Center for Genetics and Society, USA.

Professor Robin Lovell-Badge of the Crick Institute, London, said the plan was 'concerning', noting that the procedure carries potential risks such as faulty mitochondria still ending up in the resulting embryo, and the chance of genetic incompatibility.


Fertility Doctor Markets Risky Unapproved Technique; Looks Forward to "Designer Babies"

Center for Genetics and Society | 13 June 2017

The Fertility Doctor Trying to Commercialize Three-Parent Babies

MIT Technology Review | 13 June 2017

This Controversial Doctor Wants to Use 'Three-Parent' Embryos to Treat Infertility

Gizmodo | 16 June 2017

© Copyright Progress Educational Trust

Reproduced with permission from BioNews, an email and online sources of news, information and comment on assisted reproduction and genetics.

Share IVF News on FaceBook   Share IVF News on Twitter

Page Views: 2380
Add to Favorites | Reply to Ad | Tell Your Friends
Date Added: 23 June 2017   Date Updated: 23 June 2017
Customer Reviews (3)
write a review
lingjiawang   12 July 2017
MISCARRIAGE AND STILLBIRTH ARE CHARACTERISTICS OF MITOCHONDRIAL REPLACEMENT THERAPY Mitochondrial replacement therapy (MRT) is reaching its peak after Dr. John Zhang (the New Hope Fertility Center Clinic in New York City) declared to use MRT for older women to get pregnancy. His theory is to use the maternal spindle transfer process to “rejuvenate” the eggs of older women aged 42 to 47 by the donor’s egg cytoplasm. The human eggs will reconstruct themselves. “Since age doesn't affect the quality of DNA directly, HER IVF replacement techniques may result in a patient oocyte (egg) that is decades younger in age than the patient herself - prolonging natural fertility”. This “invention” is looked very great and successful. However, papers published have confirmed that Zhang’s hypothesis is naive.is lack of scientific bases. Chasing back to a paper published by John Zhang, Hui Liu and Jamie Grifo, et al. in 2003 (Hum. Reprod 18: 1903-1907), large scale of mice experiments (483 oocytes) were performed on nuclear transfer and pronuclear transfer (i.e. chromosome transfer). The experiments produced 20 live birth (4.1%). Dr. Grifo concluded several times in news reports that pronuclear transfer was confirmed to be very safe by their plenty experiments, and FDA prohibited them to do the work in US, thus pushed them to do the work overseas. In first group of the experiments in their paper, they produced 86 of 2 – cell embryos after chromosome transfer, then they transferred them to foster mice and got six mice pregnancy. One mouse was used for biopsy experiment. The remained five mice “survived to term, but none delivered a live – born pup.” They were all stillborn. How many? No report. If one mice produced six stillborn, five mice would produce 30 stillborn in this group. In second group, 68 reconstructed 2-cell embryos were transferred to foster mice. Eight pups were live birth (12%). In third group, 48 reconstructed 2-cell embryos were transferred, and produced 6 live birth (13%). In fourth group, 37 reconstructed 2-cell embryos were transferred, and produced 6 live birth (16%). How many stillbirth were produced in second, third and fourth groups? Omitted and not reported. They had set up control group for this great scale of experiments. Nevertheless only in their figure 2, they showed the control mouse uterus with significant nice, bigger and shining pregnant bulbs, while the foster mouse uterus with MRT embryos showed smaller reabsorbed bulbs (i.e. miscarriage in human). How about the live birth data of the control group? They (usually more than 30% live birth rate) were too good to be published. How about the stillbirth data of the control group? Not reported. They threw the control data and not published. Luckily, scientists working on mice embryo transfer knows that stillbirth is rare (near 0%) in normal mice, and live birth rate should be trained over 30% before any true experiment. The paper did not calculate the reconstruction failure and non-maturation rate which was up to [(483-311) / 483 =] 35.6%. This reconstruction failure rate was very similar to general reconstruction failure rate: about 33% in nuclear transfer. Obviously, this paper showed chromosome transfer in eggs severely harmed embryo formation and development and influenced live birth in their results. It was not possible to conclude as “safe” and to submit these data for FDA to review. According to their data, people can judge FDA was/is doing in a correct way. The live birth (such as the cloned sheep Dolly) can show a kind of phenomenon, but cannot be used as a confirmation of safety. Also, 20 of live birth from 483 eggs (4.1%) or from 153 embryos (13.1%) in mice cannot be used as a formal confirmation of safety. Safety should be scientifically confirmed by statistical data with control group at the beginning to the end of the experiments. Also in 2003, John Zhang worked in China for human MRT. According to Chairman CanQuan Zhou, (Dept of OB/GYN) interviewed with reporter of Goat City Evening, they performed 12 MRT cycles, produced 7 pregnancies and 5 stillbirth. No live birth was available. John Zhang only selected one pregnancy and two stillbirth to report in ASRM and 2016 paper (RBO,33: 529-533). Professor GuangLun Zhuang recently complained that MRT is “very difficult to get one pregnancy” (when comparing with normal IVF). That was why in the case which John Zhang reported, five reconstructed embryos were transferred rather than usual two or at most three embryos were transferred as in normal IVF. The fact showed: MRT technique is not safe both in human reproduction and in animal reproduction. In animal research, Prather, et.al. (Biol Reprod. 1989, 41: 414-418) reported: “A total of 56 pronuclear exchange embryos were allowed to go to term, and 7 piglets were born.” That meant: (56 – 7 = ) 49 stillbirth happened in pig research. Severe stillbirth (many more than 30 in mice, 5 in human and 49 in pig) occurred in mice, human and pig experiments. They were really horrified. People performed this work in China have a kind of guilty feeling and refuse talking about that MRT work anymore. They tried to forget it as earlier as possible. The gross assessment of stillbirth was very remorseful when facing the dark bodies. Were the stillbirth independent events? Grifo guessed that: if the work was performed in US and the pregnancy happened in US, the advanced techniques would lead to live birth. The truth was not as simple as what he thought. When omitted a lot of data, only looking at several live birth, they could confuse themselves by the make-up of the selective data. Now, three independent events (mice, human and pig) combined together. The cover-up problems exposed. It showed at least one systematical problem existing, which both John Zhang and Grifo do not notice and not understand the intrinsic reason until now. The true reason of plenty of miscarriage and stillbirth happened in MRT is that the techniques of chromosome transfer break down the normal cytoskeleton in the eggs or zygotes. It’s not a shame of US government to ban MRT. But it’s a shame of our “scholars” not to read or not to understand basic university science. And it’s a shame of our “scholars” with so cruel heart when seeing so many stillbirth mice bodies and five Chinese stillbirth bodies, they still wish go ahead for large scale of manslaughter with nice word of “rejuvenate” the eggs of older women. When they focus on the cytoplasm, they only focus on hypotheses of molecular biochemical function of the cytoplasm. They neglect and ignore the molecular anatomy function of the cytoplasm. Without normal anatomy structure, our “scholars” could not stand up, could not eat and could not think, also could not survive. Anatomy is the first course in our medical college. No bases, no high-rise building. FOCUSING BIOCHEMICAL FUNCTION AND IGNORE ANATOMY FUNCTION IN CYTOPLASM IS THE SAME AS FOCUSING EXON FUNCTION AND IGNORE INTRON FUNCTION IN DNA RESEARCH. IT IS NOT SCIENTIFIC. Recent research results showed: HUMAN GENETICS OR HEREDITY IS NOT ONLY DEPEND ON CHROMOSOMES, BUT ALSO DEPEND ON BOTH OF INTACT CYTOPLASM FUNCTION AND INTACT CYTOSKELETON. IGNORE ANYONE OF THEM IS NOT SCIENTIFIC. For the aim of increasing biochemical function in cytoplasm (to “rejuvenate” the eggs of older women), to damage cytoskeleton by MRT is not scientific, and it is life threatening. Also, IT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED THAT CYTOPLASM WAS DIFFICULT TO REJUVENATE AGING DNA IN EXPERIMENT. John Zhang’s theory “age doesn't affect the quality of DNA directly” is lack of scientific bases according to cancer and Alzheimer’s disease research. In Chapter 16, “The Cytoskeleton” of a book “Molecular Biology of The Cell”, It said: “For cells to function properly, they must organize themselves in space and interact mechanically with each other and with their environment. They have to be correctly shaped, physically robust, and properly structured internally. --- These spatial and mechanical functions depend on a remarkable system of filaments called the cytoskeleton”. “The cytoskeleton’s varied functions depend on the behavior of three families of protein filaments – actin filaments, microtubules, and intermediate filaments. Each type of filament has distinct mechanical properties, dynamics, and biological roles, but all share certain fundamental features. Just as we require our ligaments, bones, and muscles to work together, so all three cytoskeletal filament systems must normally function collectively to give a cell its strength, its shape, and its ability to move.” The egg or zygote cytoskeleton will differentiate into cytoskeleton of muscle cells and neuron cells, etc. as embryo and fetus development. When muscle contract, the “force-generating molecular interaction between myosin filaments and actin thin filaments takes place only when a signal passes to the skeletal muscle from the nerve that stimulates it.” When the actin are damaged, although the muscle is existing there, it could not function as normal human muscle. It would be lack of strength. If it happened in the respiratory muscle, it would lead to RESPIRATORY FAILURE. “The heart is the most heavily worked muscle in the body, contracting about 3 billion (3X109) times during the course of a human lifetime. Heart cells express several specific isoforms of cardiac muscle myosin and cardiac muscle actin. Even subtle changes in these cardiac-specific contractile proteins – changes that would not cause any noticeable consequences in other tissues – can cause serious heart disease” “which can also result in early heart failure”. During chromosome transfer and electrical fusion, some actin will be damaged. Thus the MRT babies will have weak heart contracting muscles and they are easily die from HEART FAILURE. When heart failure combining with respiratory failure, stillbirth, or sudden death after live birth is easily foreseeable. In nervous system, “Neurons also contain complex cytoskeletal structures.” “Both axons (nerve fiber) and dendrites are filled with bundles of microtubules that are critical to both their structure and their function.” Neuron function mainly is to transfer signals. “After the arm of a …cell is cut off with a needle, the microtubules in the detached cell fragment reorganize so that their minus ends … buried in a new microtubules-organizing center.” Thus the old microtubules separating parts will be difficult to reconnect together at the broken point again. In chromosome transfer, the broken microtubules will be difficult to reconstruct as the original unbroken one. So the neuron is lack of normal structure and functions. Muscles are controlled by neuron signals. When muscles could not get normal nerve signals for breath and heartbeat, human die. Or if the baby survives, the muscle function would be weaker than our normal human beings, because abnormal reconstructed microtubules will transfer lesser signals in the axon of the neuron. Live born does not mean safe and healthy in MRT subhuman beings. The reconstruction rate of cytoskeleton and other cellular organelles of the MRT subhuman beings will be varied from 40%? to 90%? in different items to be tested and in different MRT person. That is how “sub” is originated for the “sub”human beings according to scientific bases. In our human beings, our cytoskeleton is intact, i.e. we are all 100% existing there for over 5 million years and need not to be reconstructed. In Chapter “The Mitochondrion”, it said: “Mitochondria are often associated with the microtubular cytoskeleton, which determines their orientation and distribution in different cell types”. Katayama (Devel Biol 2006, 299: 206-220) reported his experiment results and showed that nuclear transfer destroyed the normal movement of mitochondria to the location near nucleus to supply energy for maintaining normal function of DNA: “The ability to translocate mitochondria to the perinuclear area was lower” in nuclear transfer oocytes than in IVF oocytes. It showed that the reconstructed microtubules functioned worse than the intact microtubules. When the nucleus of the cell is lack of mitochondria energy, aneuploidy will happen. John Zhang’s hypothesis “To use the maternal spindle transfer process to ‘rejuvenate’ the eggs of older women” is failed again according to this reported animal results. His hypothesis is only for business advertisement which is lack of any scientific bases. MRT is only to harm mitochondrial function in the eggs rather than “rejuvenate” the eggs. With above basic theory about Cell Anatomy – Cytoskeleton, it will be much easier to understand the comment: “ARTIFICIAL NEW SPECIES – SUBHUMAN BEINGS (Abnormal Cell Anatomy of MRT Subhuman Species)” published on ivf.net 09 April 2017 comment for “Method behind first successful mitochondrial replacement therapy revealed” response on 27 April 2017. John Zhang recently registered a new company “Darwin Life” specially offering “Human Egg Reconstitution in vitro fertilization” to perform spindle transfer. He has three reasons for this action. First, he knew that spindle transfer will produce a lot more miscarriage and stillbirth than usual IVF. He had rich stillbirth experience on animal research and human practice in China in 2003. HIS “NEW HOPE” CLINICAL NAME IS NOT CORRESPOND TO THE FACT OF NUMEROUS MISCARRIAGE AND STILLBIRTH. One of Darwin’s theory “Those individuals with heritable traits better suited to the environment will survive” can remind the patients what will happen: i.e. “Those eggs or embryos reconstituted or reconstructed better survive”. “Miscarriage and stillbirth are nothing to do with John Zhang”. “That is natural selection”. Thus John Zhang try to rule out his crime in subhuman reproduction by Darwinism, which subhuman reproduction is absolutely not safe. MRT is not natural selection, but is artificially creating new species of subhuman life and a kind of fascist killing by damage normal cell anatomy. Second, if spindle transfer leads to John Zhang BANKRUPTCY, HE WISH TO USE “DARWIN LIFE” TO FILE Chapter 11 or Chapter 13 in U.S. to discharge obligations that he owe to the patients in countless law suits. So he may save his “New Hope” business. John Zhang has foreseen that he will be in high possibility to be sued by the patients and will get bankruptcy very soon after he understood the comment “ARTIFICIAL NEW SPECIES – SUBHUMAN BEINGS (Abnormal Cell Anatomy of MRT Subhuman Species)”. In the consent form he gave the patient, he would never tell the patient that the child which he would produce would be a subhuman being, and the child would have abnormal cell anatomy problems. Registration of “Darwin Life” means John Zhang is very self-distrustful on his spindle transfer work. His previous animal and human work are full of make-up data, which are confusing his justification today: “safe or not safe?” Third, John Zhang is finding A WAY TO STEP DOWN. “To use spindle transfer for old women to get pregnancy” is a way to avoid spindle transfer and get money and pregnancy. Ten years ago, IVF staff had experience that it is easy to get 60% pregnant rate for women over 40 years old. John Zhang wished to use money ($80,000 - $120,000) to motivate IVF centers to follow him for spindle transfer and push down government regulation. This is pure business thinking, and it is nothing related to science. John Zhang is in a new dilemma in this step down. A. Go on true spindle transfer for older women: the more performance, the more lawsuits. Each of them may cost him one million or up to 3 million dollars. Because MRT person (when grows up) should not marry or sex with human beings to produce offspring to spread out the abnormal cytoskeleton in the world. Abnormal cytoskeleton is a kind of genetic syndromes created by MRT. As MRT going on, it is foreseeable that some new laboratories will be setting up soon for a new kind of medicine - Subhuman Medicine, to diagnose the reconstruction rate of microtubules, actin, mitochondria and Golgi apparatus, etc. Those subhuman children, whose reconstruction rate is not 100% in any of those test items, are qualified to sue the people who make them to be subhuman beings. It shows that MRT will not be a billions-dollar business but billions-dollar lawsuit and billions-dollars of government burden. That is why FDA ban MRT in U.S. B. Go on normal IVF and collect $100,000 fee with the “reason” of spindle transfer, and it will not last long. One drop of child’s blood DNA can confirm that the child is not three parent genes. C. Perform any procedures and no pregnancy was reported, and it will not last long too. D. Perform spindle transfer with the pregnancy to be low. Other centers will show higher pregnancy rate with general IVF techniques. Spindle transfer will be gone too. E. If charge half million dollars for one real spindle transfer, the income may just cover the law suit fee. Which patient is happy with this kind of investment? On the whole, Safety of MRT is the key issue. Live birth is not the proof of safety. The end of the MRT pseudoscience is coming soon. This is the recent 20-years history of the world war between human reproduction and subhuman reproduction. Ke-Hui Cui M.D., Ph.D.
Ke-Hui Cui   23 June 2017
Corruption of Subhuman Reproduction
FALSIFICATION OF DATA REPORT IN MITOCHONDRIAL REPLACEMENT THERAPY (MRT) WERE POPULAR DUE TO SAFETY PROBLEM Creators of first artificial subhuman baby in human history, John Zhang et al. published his paper in Reproductive BioMedicine Online (RBMO) 34: 361-368, 2017. There are many severe problems in the published paper and other MRT related reports. 1. All of the news were reported that Zhang’s procedures were performed in Mexico. Thus Zhang’s procedures did not violate U.S. regulations. However, this paper showed most of Zhang’s procedures were performed in U.S. and only embryo transfer was performed in Mexico. This paper confirmed that Zhang and his workers broke U.S. regulations in the U.S. territory. Those original news were falsified in order to escape U.S. government punishment. 2. The paper described the stimulation was minimal ovarian stimulation. However, 18 oocytes were collected in the second cycle was belong to hyperstimulation. The author used “minimal ovarian stimulation” in the published paper as his business advertisement, rather than scientifically reported his work. 3. Although editors urged the author to describe the oocyte quality in any depth, the author refused to do so. This was one of the reason that all editors of RBMO were unanimous in deciding that the paper should be published for further critical evaluation and open discussion. All of the oocyte retrieval results and fate of oocytes were outlined in the Table 1 of the paper. The paper described: “Because of the overall poor quality of the oocytes, only nine of the 29 harvested oocytes were found to have a polar body (MII) oocytes”. Was it true? Zhang was reckless. In Table 1, eleven rather than nine of MII oocytes were found. Also, a total of 15 oocytes were described as “degenerate”. What was the reason for so high number of oocytes to be “degenerate”? It was a great issue related to whether the MRT techniques were safe or not. Let us analyze all of the data step by step about Table 1 to confirm the inappropriate report manner. A. In 29 oocytes, there were three oocytes with germinal vesicle. It meant that the cycle stimulation days were not overdue. Under this condition, the oocyte membrane would be tough and was not possible to be broken down during retrieval. B. No MI oocytes were reported. If there was any MI oocyte, it would be reported as the case of germinal vesicle to be reported. C. Although the editors mentioned the possibility of atretic oocytes to be the degenerate ones, the author keep the writing not to be changed. It meant that no atretic oocytes were found. D. Some trick was hidden in the table1. There were two rows of MII oocytes: one row was “MII (spindle visualized)” and another row was “MII without zona”. They hinted more MII oocytes to be possible in other row. Thus the degenerate row was the focus for everyone to guess whether they were the MII oocytes or not. Without spindle transfer experience, no one could guess them correctly. That was the point for the author to “play” the MII data easily. E. There were two MII oocytes without zona. It meant the worker’s skill for hand manipulation in deluting oocytes was poor. He was not a very careful worker. F. After retrieval and oocyte delution, no atretic oocyte and no MI oocyte were found. What were the reason to produce 15 oocytes to be degenerate? If the “degenerate” row was also belong to MII oocytes and some of them were categorized as degenerate by no spindle view, and some of them were degenerated in the courses of spindle aspiration and electrofusion, and also in the later course of embryo death, the editors’ question could be solved. The author avoided to mention any of them for the safety reason. He only put them simply as “degenerate” due to “poor quality of the oocytes”. He showed very nice and very safe results of spindle transfer for FDA to scrutinize, for Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA) in U.K. to further support mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRT), and for the world people about his “milestone” work. G. No document could be shown in the world that a mother with mitochondrial mutant load 23-33% would produce poor oocytes with high degenerate rate. This mother had pregnancy for four times. It confirmed that most of her oocytes were good in quality at the MII stage rather than too poor to have polar body. H. In spindle transfer, MII oocytes will not be able to be shown 100% spindle view with polscope. If they can be shown 80%, it will be good enough. The author showed it to be 100% successfully. I. During maternal spindle transfer (MST) or pro-nuclear transfer (PNT) in MRT, chromosomes (spindle or pro-nucleus) of the mother’s eggs (or zygotes) were torn out from mother’s eggs. Microtubules connecting to those chromosomes were also torn, turn to be thin and at last broken down. To use 15 micrometer OD glass needle to aspirate spindle, 80% success rate without cell lyses would be very good. The author and his worker used 20 micrometer OD glass needle to aspirate spindle showed it to be 100% successfully without any cell lyses. J. When the chromosomes were transferred by electrofusion to enucleated donor’s cytoplasm, 90% success rate would be very good. The author showed it to be 100% successfully. K. When embryos showed two pronuclei and grow to blastocyst in IVF, 80% blastocyst rate is very good. The author showed it to be 100% successfully with spindle aspiration and electrofusion reconstructed embryos. The author used very “poor quality” oocytes, and used poor aspiration needle with poor manipulation skill (above E) performed by the reckless worker for the very traumatic procedures. They reported their result data as 100% successfully in the above procedures of H, I, J and K. It meant that the author had used the worst stuff with most harmful techniques, and he would have produced the best results in the world. It was naïve, impossible and inappropriate. Every embryologist still remembers the 15 “degenerate” oocytes, and knows that oocytes with poor quality will never survive well in severe traumatic manipulation, and they will never develop well in later growth and produce live birth. Put 15 oocytes to be “degenerate” but not “MII oocytes” is out of common sense. Those 15 oocytes were not only (MII) mature oocytes with polar body, but also were manipulated by them in spindle transfer. Their results were degenerated. The author wished to set up his “degenerate” model as a new format for pseudoscienticists to follow in their future subhuman reproduction, to elude safety problem. 4. To avoid safety problem, Zhang used another “scientific” technique in his another report paper, which technique may be called “selective data report or part data report”. When he performed PNT in China in 2002 and 2003, total 7 to 10 pregnancies were reported by the news in autumn of 2003, in which five stillbirths happened without any live birth. These data showed very severe safety problem of MRT. U.S. FBI and FDA chased Grifo and Zhang into China and protested to Chinese government. Chinese government – Department of Health immediately banned MRT practice in China in the week of the news report. (That was why Zhang perform frozen embryo transfer in Mexico in 2016). Zhang should report the whole picture of PNT results in China to the public. However, he only reported one pregnancy with twin stillbirth in the 2016 paper after 13 years of the practice in China. The “selective data” report showed much better condition to the public. It was a misleading report. In Zhang’s recent live birth report, the author claimed that only one case of MST was performed. It was forever not possible for the public to know how many cases the author had performed, while “selective data report” existed. 5. .Jacques Cohen also used “selective data” to report his MRT health documents. He performed MRT with 5-10% of cytoplasm transfer which was mild damage to the eggs and embryos, because no chromosome transfer was performed. He only selected 13 from 17 cases to report. His incomplete report still showed the MRT babies (produced by only cytoplasm transfer) are suffering from more immune deficiencies and neuropathy problem than usual incident rate of general population. It showed that the three parents’ proteins and genes may be the factors to harm the offspring’s immune system and mental development by embryonic feedback mechanism which has been confirmed in mouse experiments. The results of the quadruplet which did not be reported are very questionable in safety. If four children were suffering from mental retardation, the safety problem would be much severe. 6. There was no statistical animal research data to confirm the safety question of MRT in the world. The reason was: It was very obvious that MST and PNT were both very traumatic procedures. The statistical results would only show that they were not safe even use the techniques to produce the first generation babies comparing with a control group. If using the sperm and oocytes from the first MRT generation to produce second generation with MRT techniques, the results would have be much horrible while comparing with the control group. How about the third generation and up to ten generation comparing to the control group? That was why in animal research, people could only use birth case report to show a miracle in MST or PNT. The birth report is to show a life can be produced by the procedures but it is not the statistical results to confirm safety issue. This was the same reason why the cloning sheep Dolly was a case report and there was no statistical data to confirm whether the clone techniques were safe or not. Only the statistics is a scientific method for safety research. A case of birth report is not a reason for scientists to change statistics method to be case birth method to confirm safety. To use live birth report with untrue data or selective data to attract public is not scientific but misleading. It is a corruptive business manner reflects to the field of human reproduction. 8. Both electrofusion and virus techniques will harm DNA structures and they are not suitable to be used on human reproduction while germline cells are very vulnerable to anything rather than itself cytoplasm. 9. Professor Sir Doug Turnbull and Sir Dr. Winston in U.K. should change their research manner from case report to more scientific statistics, from clinical practice to more basic research, such as Cell Anatomy. Then they can understand that human cell structure should not be changed for the aim to prevent genetic diseases. The unique natural and normal cell structures in human beings are the basic stone for normal genetic materials to be normally inhered to our generation from one million years ago. 10. HFEA in the U.K. should suspend the issued licence in Newcastle Fertility Centre about performing MRT with PNT or MST techniques. HFEA should avoid using British people as animal to perform MRT. The basic reason is: MRT with PNT and MST techniques will change the normal cell structures in our human beings to be chaotic cell structures, which will produce severe safety problem. MRT will make human reproduction to be changed into subhuman reproduction. Human species will be changed into subhuman species by the change of germline cell structures. Please also read: “ARTIFICIAL NEW SPECIES – SUBHUMAN BEINGS (Abnormal Cell Anatomy of MRT Subhuman Species)” published on ivf.net 09 April 2017 comment for “Method behind first successful mitochondrial replacement therapy revealed” response on 27 April 2017. Ke-Hui Cui M.D., Ph.D.
Ke-Hui Cui   23 June 2017
Subhuman Reproduction - MRT
ARTIFICIAL NEW SPECIES – SUBHUMAN BEINGS (Abnormal Cell Anatomy of MRT Subhuman Species) Professor Sir Doug Turnbull wished UK to become the third country to produce artificial subhuman babies. The first baby of this kind of artificial subhuman (in human history) was reported by infamous Dr. John Zhang in 2016 in U.S. His work was performed in U.S. by a technique called spindle transfer, and embryo was transferred in Mexico. The event was a critical and tremendous signal to our human beings: human species will be artificially changed into subhuman species. Was that a good news or bad news for our human beings? Absolutely, it was a very, very bad news for human beings, patient families and for true scientists. Why? Because the superior hereditary genes, chromosomes, microtubules and mitochondria in the eggs, sperm and embryos (i.e. in the germline cells) of our nature human beings will be disturbed, torn, mixed and changed. They will be changed into inferior and abnormal genes, chromosomes, microtubules and mitochondria in the abnormal cellular atmosphere, structures, contents and relationship. Human reproduction will be changed to be subhuman reproduction. There are several reported methods for pseudoscientists and money chasers to use subhuman reproduction to damage and replace human reproduction, such as A. Mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRT). For example: mitochondrial Augment Program by OvaSciences suggested that artificially extracted mitochondria should be injected into every eggs to produce our human babies. The MRT techniques will produce MRT Subhuman Species; B. Artificial human sperm, oocytes or embryos derived from human stem cell culture will be used to produce babies. Stem cell techniques will produce Stem Cell Subhuman Species; C. Human gene(s) will be modified in human sperm, oocytes and embryos by gene CRISPR techniques. People will further use them to produce babies. It will produce CRISPR Subhuman Species; D. Human cloning to produce Cloning Subhuman Species; … etc. On March 16, 2017, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) in UK changed their work responsibility from human reproduction to subhuman reproduction, and granted UK licence to Newcastle Fertility Centre to perform MRT with pro-nuclear transfer (PNT) or maternal spindle transfer (MST) techniques. From the reported news, meeting conversation and paper reports, PNT and MST techniques have been shown very detrimental effects on eggs, on the fertilized zygotes and on their future results: from low embryo cleavage rate, low blastocyst rate, high miscarriage rate to high stillbirth rate. The inferior results of the subhuman reproduction from MRT are very easy to be understood by the following Cell Anatomy: All chromosomes in the eggs and zygotes are not freely floating in the nucleoplasm and cytoplasm. They are anchored to the nuclear membrane and then further anchored to the cell membrane by microtubules and endoplasmic reticulum in very good order by natural cellular system. Such as: No. 1 chromosome connecting to No. 1 microtubule is anchored on part 1 location of the egg membrane.… And up to No. 22 chromosome connecting to No. 22 microtubule is anchored on part 22 location of the egg membrane, …. Except chromosomes, all of the tiny organelles such as mitochondria (producing energy ATP), Golgi apparatus (producing proteins), endoplasmic reticulum, … etc. in the nature eggs and the zygotes are all organized well in good order. Near Chromosome 1, there are more Golgi and mitochondria around and connect (or channel) with it due to chromosome 1 is the longest chromosome containing more genes which will produce more proteins and will need more energy. The No. 1 microtubule will be stronger microtubule to hold the heaviest chromosome. Near the Chromosome 22, there are lesser Golgi and mitochondria around and connect (or channel) with it due to chromosome 22 is the very small chromosome containing not too many genes, which will produce much lesser proteins and will need lesser energy. The No. 22 microtubule will be a weaker microtubule to hold the lighter chromosome. People originally thought genes control all activities of the cells. However, cytoplasm and normal organelle structures in cytoplasm have recently been confirmed that they have a lot of important function to influence on and feedback to nuclear DNA in gene expression by several channels and cellular systems. When pseudoscientists performed MRT to prevent mitochondrial diseases, could they keep the normal human cell structures to be intact? It is not possible for anyone to do so. PNT and MST will: First, tear and break the microtubules in all different length and at different locations; Second, disturb all of the organelles into chaotic order at different location; Third, break down all of the normal configuration and relation of the organelles; and Fourth, the transferred chromosomes will be randomly reconnecting to different microtubules at different location with different length. In all of these severe disturbance during PNT and MST, chromosomal disturbance will produce the most profound influence on the eggs and zygote for future abnormal development: early death of the embryos, fetus, babies and children, … The Pathology and Genetics related to the abnormal Cell Anatomy in MRT subhuman species will be outlined as the following: A. NO CONNECTION OF CHROMOSOME. After MRT, if the broken part of the microtubule could not find the opposite part of microtubule or chromosome to reconnect, the related chromosomes will be lost and produce aneuploidy of the cell. The embryos will die, or will survive and produce babies with chromosomal abnormalities. B. ABNORMAL LENGTH OF MICROTUBULES. First, if a short broken microtubule reconnects to another short broken microtubule after MRT, it will produce extra-short microtubule, which will make it easy to be torn apart in cell cleavage. The chromosome reconnecting to this new short microtubule will be lost and produce aneuploidy. Second, if a long broken microtubule reconnects to another long broken microtubule after MRT, it will produce extra-long microtubule, which will wrap around any chromosome(s) like a long rope. The simple and better result of this wrap around chromosome(s) will produce aneuploidy and the embryo dies. The complex results of this wrap around chromosome(s) will produce small chromosomal abnormalities or influence normal gene expression (i.e. to produce new genetic disease) at any later stage of embryo or fetus development, after birth, at childhood, in adult, in aging time, in any future generations. C. CROSSOVER OR TWIST OF MICROTUBULES AND CHROMOSOMES. If microtubules mismatch opposite microtubules with different chromosomes after MRT, it will produce crossover each other or severely twist together by microtubules. a. When microtubule crossover occurs: the eggs or embryos will die in severe condition. In less severe conditions, eggs and future embryos will survive, and chromosomal abnormalities or gene diseases will happen after birth at different ages or in future generations due to the crossover microtubules press, wrap and influence normal action of those related chromosomes and genes. b. When microtubule twist occurs: the eggs or embryos will die because they will not cleave smoothly. D. DISLOCATION OF CHROMOSOMES. After MRT, if No. 1 Chromosome is reconnected to No. 22 microtubule, the No. 1 Chromosome will be pulled by the No. 22 microtubule to the original No. 22 chromosome environment. In that wrong location, there are lesser Golgi and mitochondria around and connect (or channel) with the No. 1 Chromosome. It will make No. 1 Chromosome difficult to obtain enough energy to maintain normal gene function, and difficult to produce enough proteins for cell normally to run on all kinds of function. It will produce gene mutation, metabolic diseases or cancer. Different chromosomal dislocation (from No. 1 chromosome to No. 22 chromosome, X and Y chromosomes) will produce different abnormal cell structures. These abnormal cell structures will be of countless styles according to the different order and different combination (in math) of 24 kinds of chromosomal dislocation. These abnormal cell structures will produce plenty of unknown genetic diseases and other diseases. E. DISCONNECTION OF NORMAL COMMUNCATION IN CELLULAR ORGANELLES. The normal communication channels between DNA and other organelles, such as endoplasmic reticulum, Golgi, …etc. will be torn off by MRT. The new reset communication will be much worse than the original nature one. The new abnormal organelle communication will severely influence nuclear gene expression, energy production and all kinds of cellular function, although the shape of all of the cells is still kept to be the same. Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH) technique can find out the above A. no connection of chromosome, but it may not find out the above B and C condition (abnormal length of microtubules, and crossover or twist of microtubules and chromosomes). Technique of aCGH is not possible to find out the above D and E condition – dislocation of chromosomes and disconnection of normal communication in cellular organelles. Thus aCGH is not so useful in evaluation abnormal cell structures destroyed by MRT techniques. It may detect most of aneuploidy, but it can not detect any abnormal functions of the euploidy cells with abnormal cell structures. In mice experiments in 1991, embryo cells at 8 cell stage were pressed by glass pipette needles (i.e. let cell organelles to be pressed 3 to 5 seconds) and then the press was released, and all cells immediately restored to their original location and shape. However, it produced two mice stillbirth in 41 offspring. The control group (39 mice pups) were all normal. It confirmed that: even gentle cell organelle dislocation or distortion would severely change cell structures, organ function and life system function. The damage from MRT manipulation (i.e. chromosome transfer) is horrible when comparing with this simple pressing test. To greatly disturb all organelles in the eggs or zygotes by MRT will significantly change the natural structures of Cell Anatomy of our human species into chaotic condition. DIFFERENT MRT CHILD WILL HAS DIFFERENT ABNORMAL CELL STRUCTURES IN CELL ANATOMY. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME AS NATURAL AND NORMAL HUMAN BEINGS WHICH CONTAINING ONLY ONE SAME CELL STRUCTURES IN ALL OF THE SIX BILLIONS OF HUMAN POPULATION. SINCE HUMAN BEINGS EXIST IN THE WORLD FOR OVER I MILLION YEARS, THIS SAME CELL STRUCTURES HAVE NOT BEEN CHANGED BY ANYONE. Center performing MRT is a factory to change the unique normal cell structures in human beings to be countless abnormal cell structures in the subhuman species. The center will produce all new kinds of chromosomal abnormalities or new genetic diseases which we have not known before. All of those new kinds of chromosomal abnormalities or new genetic diseases and other kinds of diseases will be discovered in the life time of those three parent’s children and their future different generations forever. These new diseases will be a very heavy burden to patients’ families and English government forever. Those babies with abnormal cell anatomic structures are a new species in heredity, an inferior species, or MRT subhuman species. There are TWO CHARACTERISTICS IN THE MRT SUBHUMAN SPECIES (OR MRT SPECIES): ONE IS: THEY CONTAIN THREE PARENTS’ GENES; AND ANOTHER IS: CHAOS OF CELLULAR ORGANELLES IN CELL ANATOMY (STRUCTURES). Anatomy is the basic stone of human medicine. Cells are the basic stone of our organs and systems in human body. The chaos of cellular organelles produced by MRT will only produce inferior cellular structures (detailed as above paragraph A,B,C, D and E), and inferior cellular function (detailed as above paragraph D and E), i.e. inferior cells. The inferior cells will only be composed to be inferior organs, and inferior organs will only produce inferior rather than superior systems, thus will only produce inferior and subhuman babies rather than normal human babies. These subhuman people will have the appearance as same as our human beings. Nevertheless, they are abnormal in their cell structures, in their weak organ and system function. Everyone can reasonably understand it. Is it true in fact? The fact is: It is not possible to say the baby produced by Dr. John Zhang is normal and healthy, because all of the boy’s cells are all containing abnormal cell structures –abnormal Cell Anatomy. No anyone in the world is able to diagnose his abnormal cell structures at present even electron microscopy to be used. His abnormal cell structures will continuously inhere to his offspring forever. It will need two to three generations and up to ten generations to evaluate the safety for any research about heredity or genetic change, which should have a very perfect and mandatory documentation system for every offspring in all life, and for further generations. In the world, no any center, institute or country has set up this kind of research system, such as: yearly health check,…and up to birth certificate, driver’s licence and social security number specially designed for the MRT species. It also showed that HFEA is not responsible in their MRT job. Without using large number of animal research data statistically comparing the control group to confirm genetic problem, it is not a scientist’s behavior. All of Dr. John Zhang’s reports showed, he had one live birth and 5 stillbirths (in China). Stillbirth is 500% of the live birth. However, in general IVF, stillbirth to live birth will be lesser than 5%. That means: MRT with nuclear transfer produced 100 times of stillbirth more than usual IVF. Dr. John Zhang failed to explain why he produced so high stillbirth rate in all of his reports. Abnormal cell anatomy of MRT can be perfectly to be used in explanation of the stillbirth reason for Dr. John Zhang in the following paragraph. Dr. Jacques Cohen performed MRT with 5-10% of cytoplasm transfer which was mild damage to the eggs and embryos, because no chromosome transfer was performed. He only selected 13 from 17 cases to report. He failed in his job responsibility to collect the whole data scientifically and honorably to report to the people. His incomplete report still showed the MRT babies (produced by only cytoplasm transfer) are suffering from more immune deficiencies and neuropathy problem than usual incident rate of general population. It showed that the three parents’ proteins and genes may be the factors to harm the offspring’s immune system and mental development by embryonic feedback mechanism which has been confirmed in mouse experiments. When small disturbance of cellular organelles by injection 5-10% donor’s cytoplasm, it produced lesser inferior cells than the prognoses of PNT or MST which the chromosomes were transferred. However, the results still showed the inferior function of immune and nervous system in the 13 reported children. The results of the quadruplet which did not be reported are very questionable in safety. When chromosomes were transferred in MRT, inferior organ and system problems were very severe due to the cells lack of energy and lack of normal function, which have been detailed in the above paragraphs about abnormal cell anatomy in MRT. The inferior function of the respiratory, nervous, circulatory, muscular and endocrine system was the reason for the five stillbirth performed by Dr. John Zhang. The Pathophysiology of MRT stillbirth is: Birth was a very stressful condition for the fetus and the baby. Endocrine system should be greatly activated to mobilize the respiratory, nervous, circulatory, muscular system to work much harder together for further survival when birth is on the way. The inferior systems which were composed by the inferior cells (disturbed cell structures by MRT) failed to work. During stress, the blood vessels composed of inferior cells would contract abnormally and stopped the blood to go back to the heart. The inferior heart could not react with normal function and heart failure happens. It further produced respiratory failure. The stillbirth happened immediately. If live births happen, those MRT babies’ future will be full of risk, from sudden death (lack of normal stress reaction), all kinds of severe diseases (which were mentioned above) to short of life span, and adverse future generations. The major cause is: Their cell structures were disturbed by MRT and the cells do not function normally. Mrs. Sally Cheshire (HFEA Chair, a finance and business professional) does not have common sense and scientific background to correctly understand that human beings should not be changed to subhuman being as species. She did not know that MRT will change cell structures in eggs or zygotes, which will make all of the future cells in the MRT babies to be in abnormal cell structures, and will lead to abnormal organ and system functions. Those MRT babies are not the same as normal human species in scientific background - cell anatomy, in organ functions and in system functions, although their faces and bodies were looked to be the same as normal human. She was not able to collect complete information without bias from other countries such as five stillbirth in China, performed by Dr. John Zhang in 2003. She also failed to correctly and scientifically analyze statistical data to show to the congress the unsafe results of MRT. At last, she granted the licence to Newcastle Fertility Centre to perform MRT with pro-nuclear transfer (PNT) or maternal spindle transfer (MST) techniques. Although she is very kind, she failed in her responsibility by her limited scientific ability. She should resign her employment as chair of HFEA and the licence granted should be suspended. Parliament should waive their decision about MRT, thus to save the luster of Great Britain for the aim of keeping normal and nature human species in England. U.S contains the most advanced scientists and techniques in the world in the field of human reproduction. Why did U.S. ban MRT in U.S. and is happy UK to try it? That is: U.S. threw the “hot potato” to England, and to see how long English can hold it in their hands. Some reporters described the MRT discussion as a political issue, as a religion reason, as an ethical reason or as a safety issue. All of these could not get the key point of the discussion. The key point is: THIS IS THE INTERNATIONAL BIG FIGHT FOR KEEPING NATURAL HUMAN SPECIES NOT TO BE CHANGED ARTIFICIALLY. IT IS A HUMAN AND ANTI-HUMAN FIGHT. DO NOT DO ANYTHING HARMFUL OR BETRAY THE DIGNITY OF HUMAN BEINGS. We (people and true scientists of all countries in the world) have fought for this for twenty years and prepare the fight will last for 3 to 4 centuries. About the abnormal Molecular Biochemistry of the mothers’ eggs, please read: “CHANGING HUMAN BEINGS BY MRT IS MISLEADING AND NOT SCIENTIFIC” published on ivf.net 05 December 2016 comment for “Expert panel approve cautious use of mitochondrial donation in the UK” response on 19 December 2016. Ke-Hui Cui M.D., Ph.D.

Join Our Newsletter - Don't Miss Anything!!!

Stay in touch with the latest news by subscribing to our regular email newsletters