The Human Chimera Prohibition Act
On 11 July 2005, a bill known as The Human Chimera Prohibition Act was introduced into the United States Congress by Senator Samuel Brownback; however, it died in Congress sometime in the next year. The bill was introduced based on findings that science has progressed to the point where human and nonhuman species can be merged to create new forms of life. Because of this, ethical issues may arise as the line blurs between humans and other animals, and according to the bill with this blurring of lines comes a show of disrespect for human dignity. The final claim brought up in The Human Chimera Prohibition Act was that there is an increasing amount of zoonotic diseases. With that being said, the creation of human-animal chimeras can allow these diseases to reach humans.[47]
On 22 August 2016, another bill, The Human-Animal Chimera Prohibition Act of 2016, was introduced to the United States House of Representatives by Christopher H. Smith. It identifies a chimera as:
a human embryo into which a nonhuman cell or cells (or the component parts thereof) have been introduced to render the embryo's membership in the species Homo sapiens uncertain;
a chimera human/animal embryo produced by fertilizing a human egg with nonhuman sperm;
a chimera human/animal embryo produced by fertilizing a nonhuman egg with human sperm;
an embryo produced by introducing a nonhuman nucleus into a human egg;
an embryo produced by introducing a human nucleus into a nonhuman egg;
an embryo containing at least haploid sets of chromosomes from both a human and a nonhuman life form;
a nonhuman life form engineered such that human gametes develop within the body of a nonhuman life form; or
a nonhuman life form engineered such that it contains a human brain or a brain derived wholly or predominantly from human neural tissues.
The bill prohibits the attempts to create a human-animal chimera, the transfer or attempt to transfer a human embryo into a nonhuman womb, the transfer or attempt to transfer a nonhuman embryo into a human womb, and the transport or receive of any purpose of an animal chimera. Penalties for violations of this bill include fines and/or imprisonment of up to 10 years. The bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations on October 11, 2016, but died there.[48]
Patenting
In the U.S., efforts into creating a chimeric entity appeared to be legal when the topic first came up. Developmental biologist Stuart Newman, a professor at New York Medical College in Valhalla, N.Y., applied for a patent on a human-animal chimera in 1997 as a challenge to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the U.S. Congress, motivated by his moral and scientific opposition to the notion that living things can be patented at all. Prior legal precedent had established that genetically engineered entities, in general, could be patented, even if they were based on beings occurring in nature.[49] After a seven-year process, Newman's patent finally received a flat rejection. The legal process had created a paper trail of arguments, giving Newman what he claimed was a victory. The Washington Post ran an article on the controversy that stated that it had raised "profound questions about the differences-- and similarities-- between humans and other animals, and the limits of treating animals as property."[49]
