Skip Navigation


Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on December 16, 2005
Human Reproduction 2006 21(5):1113-1116; doi:10.1093/humrep/dei461
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/5/1113    most recent
dei461v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jones, D.G.
Right arrow Articles by Towns, C.R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jones, D.G.
Right arrow Articles by Towns, C.R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

OPINION

Navigating the quagmire: the regulation of human embryonic stem cell research

D.G. Jones1 and C.R. Towns

Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, University of Otago, PO Box 913, Dunedin, New Zealand. E-mail: gareth.jones{at}stonebow.otago.ac.nz

Embryonic stem (ES) cell research has garnered almost unprecedented attention. Debate over the boundaries of such research is ongoing, and the regulation of the field varies widely between countries. This article identifies and evaluates the four major positions that emanate from current international regulations. ES cell policies may ultimately impact on public health, and hence they must be both rigorous and transparent. We contend that these goals will only be achieved if policy is both ethically consistent and clinically realistic with regard to the ability to achieve therapeutic goals. We conclude that policies allowing the ongoing extraction of stem cells from spare in vitro fertilization embryos and the creation of embryos for research (within set limitations) cope most adequately with the tension between varying views on the moral status of the human embryo and the therapeutic potential inherent within ES cell research.

Key words: embryonic stem cells/ethical consistency/regulations


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.