Stem cells: the blue print for the future

The investment going into stem-cell therapies and technologies is impressive. The objectives are great, including the aim of tissues on demand within 20 years, and the rewards potentially huge with a suggested annual market of US dollar 500 billion. This article outlines current activities on both sides of the Atlantic.

Embryo research: is disclosing commercial intent enough?

This article critically reviews legislative and ethical frameworks that regulate embryo research. Australian legislation for embryo research is currently being reviewed. It is a legal mandate that scientists disclose to embryo donors any intent to pursue commercial gain from altruistic donation. But scientists are also required to inform donors that, as donors, they too must not benefit financially. In the same political context, public subsidy for IVF treatment is under review. There is contradiction in values and indication of inequity in the Australian social context. IVF is undervalued, yet products derived from IVF embryos are imbued with public hope. Rather than regulate to balance this inequity, assumptions of altruism and attention to autonomy in legislative framework give it further scope. This article proposes that justice be addressed by acknowledging reproductive effort, and thereby embryo research be considered in terms of reciprocity. It further proposes regulation of commercial profit and the imposition of a redirected tax levy.

Drumming up dollars for stem cell research

With stringent U.S. federal restrictions on funding for human embryonic stem cell research still in place, states grapple with the issue of whether to fund such research themselves.

Moving human embryonic stem cells from legislature to lab: remaining legal and ethical questions

Greely discusses unanswered ethical and legal issues, such as those surrounding the creation of embryos, derivation of cell lines, uses of cell lines, and questions of intellectual property.

Stem cell research debate shifting to the courts

California stem cell initiative faces legal challenges from groups opposing embryonic research and abortion opponents.

The egg-sharing model for human therapeutic cloning research: managing donor selection criteria, the proportion of shared oocytes allocated to research, and amount of financial subsidy given to the donor

Recent advances in human therapeutic cloning made by Hwang and colleagues have opened up new avenues of therapy for various human diseases. However, the major bottleneck of this new technology is the severe shortage of human donor oocytes. Egg-sharing in return for subsidized fertility treatment has been suggested as an ethically justifiable and practical solution to overcome the shortage of donor oocytes for therapeutic cloning. Because the utilization of shared oocytes in therapeutic cloning research does not result in any therapeutic benefit to a second party, this would necessitate a different management strategy compared to their use for the assisted conception of infertile women who are unable to produce any oocytes of their own. It is proposed that the pool of prospective egg-sharers in therapeutic cloning research be limited only to younger women (below 30 years of age) with indications for either male partner sub-fertility or tubal blockage. With regards to the proportion of the shared gametes being allocated to research, a threshold number of retrieved oocytes should be set that if not exceeded, would result in the patient being automatically removed from the egg-sharing scheme. Any excess supernumerary oocyte above this threshold number can be contributed to science, and allocation should be done in a randomized manner. Perhaps, a total of 10 retrieved oocytes from the patient may be considered a suitable threshold, since the chances of conception are unlikely to be impaired. With regards to the amount of subsidy being given to the patient, it is suggested that the proportion of financial subsidy should be equal to the proportion of the patient's oocytes being allocated to research. No doubt, the promise of future therapeutic benefit may be offered to the patient instead of financial subsidy. However, this is ethically controversial because therapeutic cloning has not yet been demonstrated to be a viable model of clinical therapy and any promises made to the patient might turn out to be illusionary. Hence, it is proposed that a tangible financial subsidy on the medical fees might be the better option for the patient's welfare.

Draft National Institutes of Health guidelines for research involving human pluripotent stem cells (December 1999)

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is requesting public comment on a document entitled "Draft National Institutes of Health guidelines for research involving human pluripotent stem cells (December 1999)". The purpose of these draft guidelines is to recommend procedures to help ensure that NIH-funded research in this area is conducted in an ethical and legal manner. The NIH will not fund research using human pluripotent stem cells until final guidelines are published in the Federal Register and an oversight process is in place.