Idaho Senate Bill 1310 : The Human Fetal Tissue Transparency Act protects consumers by ensuring transparency regarding the use of human fetal tissue and biological derivatives in products sold in Idaho.
Currently, products containing or developed using human fetal tissue, embryonic cells, or derivative biological matter such as fetal DNA are sold without disclosure, preventing consumers from making fully informed decisions. This bill requires any such products be labeled, including those where testing on the production lot or final product used these materials. By establishing a civil enforcement framework and protecting retailers who act in good faith, this legislation ensures that Idahoans have the transparency they deserve to make purchasing choices that align with their personal, ethical, and moral values.
We commend Senator Ben Toews for introducing this important bill, encouraged by the dedicated efforts of Allison and Kyle Jarnagan.
We look forward to working closely with Idaho in the coming year to move this legislation forward and ensure it receives the attention it deserves.
If you are currently located in Idaho, we invite you to contact us at info@cogforlife.org so we can collaborate with you on this critical issue.
============================
Original Story Appeared: Idaho Senate Committee Holds Bill on Labeling Products
By Logan Finney | FāVS News Reporter
Numerous medical products such as vaccines were developed using human fetal cells in their scientific research. An Idaho Senate committee this week debated if the government should take a stronger role in labeling products developed using those cells, ultimately holding the bill.
Immortal cell lines are commonly used in laboratory settings and medical research for humans. The first such example, HeLa cells — named for Henrietta Lacks, an adult woman whose cancer cells were reproduced without her consent — may be the most well-known cell line in popular culture, but they are far from the only human cells used in research.
Allison and Kyle Jarnagan pitched the bill Monday with Sen. Ben Toews, R-Coeur d’Alene. Their testimony to the Senate Commerce & Human Resources Committee focused on the cell line HEK293, which was derived from a human embryonic kidney sample in the 1970s.
Advocates push for transparency
“When these are the labels that are used on products to describe the fetal cell lines, you can see how it can be difficult for the consumer to discern that these are indicating that these are cell lines and tissues obtained from babies that were in the fetal or embryonic stage of development,” Allison Jarnagan said. “Fetal cell lines under the law are looked at the same whether they are from aborted fetal cell lines or not.”
She provided the committee with handouts from Children of God for Life — describing itself as “the pro-life worldwide leader in the campaign for ethical vaccines, medicines and consumer products” — listing three dozen vaccines and medicines and several skin creams that contain cells, components, proteins or DNA of several different human fetal cell lines.
Kyle Jarnagan lauded his wife, equipped with her biology degree, for learning about the cell lines.
“People cannot make an informed decision unless the information is in front of them. These companies that are producing these products are not labeling it correctly. You have the sheet that you’ve had, with all those different cell lines, so they already know what it is,” Kyle Jarnagan said. “There’s no confusion on whether that cell line is in that product, it’s in there. The name is just not being transpired to where the normal person, without a biology degree, can understand. It should be on those companies to be able to justify what the product actually is, so that people can understand what’s in their product.”
Unlike bills dealing with abortion, which are sent to Senate State Affairs, the commerce committee looked at Senate Bill 1310 through the lens of a regulation on the marketplace.
“It seems to me that this is very different than normal consumer protection issues, because when we use labels it’s typically to protect from danger. This seems to be apprizing or informing the public about the issue that morally might be important to them,” said Sen. James Ruchti, D-Pocatello, “and placing the onus for obtaining that information, or sending it out, on the manufacturer and the retailer as opposed to the consumer.”
Some lawmakers like Sen. Tammy Nichols, R-Middleton, argued the federal government was unlikely to act on fetal tissue until multiple states like Idaho required these labels.
“I agree with the problem, and I know that these things are being used, but the FDA controls labeling. I think that the second we passed this and pharmaceutical companies sued us, Idaho would get preempted immediately,” said Sen. Brian Lenney, R-Nampa. “Idaho can’t fix federal cowardice. Do I think Big Pharma is deceptive? Absolutely. But I don’t want to hand them a win in court and have Idaho get dragged through that whole process.”
Federal preemption concerns cloud the bill
Much of the debate focused on whether Idaho should step into requiring additional warning labels, like California’s Prop 65 warnings, beyond what the federal government mandates.
“We’re dealing with the issue of equating moral information with consumer protection information, to the point where they kind of merge,” said committee chairman Sen. Dan Foreman, R-Moscow. “I guess it’s an individual determination, as to whether or not that’s necessary or whether that falls under the purview of the government. So it’s an interesting question, it does have a moral flavor to it and a consumer protection aspect to it.”
Some committee Republicans were less circumspect about the government’s role.
“Let’s face it, we’re trying to legislate morality into the private sector here,” said Sen. Jim Guthrie, R-McCammon. “This opens a can of worms beyond what we can even imagine.”
The committee voted 5-4 to hold the bill in committee, ending its path forward this year.