• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Scientists Break Record For Growing Human Embryos in Lab. Rekindles Ethical Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.

cameron

Member
The Guardian: "Scientists break record for keeping lab-grown human embryos alive"
Research gives glimpse of critical period of human development, sparking calls for debate on current 14-day legal limit for embryo experimentation
Researchers have broken the record for growing human embryos in the lab, keeping them alive and active beyond the stage when they would naturally implant in a mother’s womb.

The feat has been hailed as a milestone in the field, but the work by two teams of researchers in the US and the UK puts scientists into direct conflict with a decades-old law that prohibits donated embryos from being grown in the lab for more than 14 days.
While the latest work was well within the limit - the embryos were grown for 13 days to the critical time when balls of cells are poised to start the process of sculpting the human form - the achievement has led to calls to revisit the legal limit .

The 14-day rule is enshrined in law in at least a dozen countries, the UK included, and while extending the allowed period for embryo research would be welcomed by some scientists, the move would be resisted by many, including religious groups already opposed to embryo research.

“We can now, for the very first time, study human development at this very critical stage of our lives, at the time of implantation,” said Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz, who led the UK research at Cambridge University. The longest that human embryos had previously been grown in the lab was nine days, though seven days was far more common.

The procedure used to grow the embryos, developed at Cambridge and Rockefeller University in New York, promises scientists fresh new insights into early human development; the causes of early stage miscarriages, and ways to produce stem cells to treat diseases. But the work has also ignited a vigorous debate around the laws that govern human embryo studies.

In the UK and many other countries, scientists are allowed to study spare, donated IVF embryos, but they can only be grown in the lab for 14 days. After that, the embryos must be destroyed. The 14-day stage marks the point when the individuality of an embryo is assured, because they can no longer split into twins. At about the same time, embryos form what is called the “primitive streak”, a faint band of cells that starts to distinguish the head from the tail.

Introduced in Britain 30 years ago, the 14-day rule aimed to give scientists room to study human embryos, while respecting wider views on embryo research. And while it has served scientists well, it has never held them back. Until now, the barrier has been science, not law.
But the latest work, published in Nature and Nature Cell Biology, puts the law under pressure. With the new procedure to culture embryos, many scientists think it will soon be possible to grow human embryos for longer than 14 days.

Writing in the journal, Nature, three researchers, Insoo Hyun at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio, Amy Wilkerson at Rockefeller University in New York, and Josephine Johnston at the Hastings Centre in New York, call for the rule to be revisited.

They call for an international discussion that takes on board the various local cultural and religious views. “The kind of international discourse we envision could facilitate and inform local decisions to amend law or research policy,” they write.

While extending the limit could allow scientists to answer key questions about how the embryo develops into different tissue types, and how sperm and eggs form within them, Zernicka-Goetz said she was not calling for a change in the law.

“To be able to culture embryos for a couple of days longer would provide an enormous body of information, but it’s not for us now to decide whether we should do it or not. Rules are very useful, we would always adhere to them, and they should be set out by the wider community,” she said.
More in the link. Other reading:
NPR: "Advance In Human Embryo Research Rekindles Ethical Debate"
Nature: "Human embryos grown in lab for longer than ever before"
 
Let the clones come.

EDIT: Why do we have laws if the embryos are donated? Shouldn't that be up to the person donating?
 

Ray Wonder

Founder of the Wounded Tagless Children
I'd support it. But then again I don't think an embryo is human until a few months after birth.

There's a ridiculous amount we could learn if we managed to grow an embryo all the way to a to-term baby.

Wait like after they're born, or after the embryo is forming? Like a baby isn't a human? I'm not sure I'm grasping.
 

jmdajr

Member
I'd support it. But then again I don't think an embryo is human until a few months after birth.

There's a ridiculous amount we could learn if we managed to grow an embryo all the way to a to-term baby.

yeah ok

I didn't know I had a new non-human at home.
 

bounchfx

Member
yeah, we are all going to hell. (if there is a god)

regardless, this is so wrong.

i gotta say it's a relief that we, as humans, get to decide what god approves of or not, on his behalf. it's really been a blessing for us as a species

assuming theres a god and all that
 

Calderc

Member
lol, it's a pretty damn unpopular opinion but my view on what's human has to do with development rather than simply being born.

EDIT:


Oh man, I've done it now haven't I?

Whit

If a one day old baby dies, it's a human death. There's no 2 ways about it.
 

Matt_

World's #1 One Direction Fan: Everyone else in the room can see it, everyone else but you~~~
Logically I cannot think of a solid reason against extending the window for this
I mean I'm for abortion and that is at a significantly later stage in development
Yet still something about this sits uneasy with me
 
This could lead to artificial wombs and the end of women needing to get pregnant to have children anymore. Could also solve the population growth crisis in many first world nations as well as colonies on other worlds.


A man and woman (or possibly same sex couples in the future) come together and deposit their seeds into a pod that grows their kid for them.
 

massoluk

Banned
I think for the next step we should fully clone humans so we can disassemble their body parts to replace ours, then may be a perfect being to inspire everyone and may be lead us to the bright future
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
I think for the next step we should fully clone humans so we can disassemble their body parts to replace ours, then may be a perfect being to inspire everyone and may be lead us to the bright future

You just watched The Island didn't you? I don't see why we'd need to grow full humans to replace a persons organs. If anything you're going to grow single organs based on a patients DNA so that there is little chance of rejection.
 

qcf x2

Member
Logically I cannot think of a solid reason against extending the window for this
I mean I'm for abortion and that is at a significantly later stage in development
Yet still something about this sits uneasy with me

I think because abortion is for accidents and unwanted pregnancies, where this seems like intentional harvesting. It is really creepy imo.
 

boiled goose

good with gravy
Meh. Thoughtless groups of cells?
Experiment away.

Morality doesn't really come into play until you start dealing with beings capable of thought (grey area of course, capacity for thought is not binary)

Unless you believe in supernatural things, this is the only rational position.
 

massoluk

Banned
You just watched The Island didn't you? I don't see why we'd need to grow full humans to replace a persons hear. If anything you're going to grow single organs based on a patients DNA so that there is little chance of rejection.

Actually I was watching Vandread and Jojo :p
 

collige

Banned
The limit should obviously be changed. There's no reason why it shouldn't be in line with the legal limit on abortion dates.
 

Zoe

Member
The limit should obviously be changed. There's no reason why it shouldn't be in line with the legal limit on abortion dates.

Well most reasonable abortion limits have to do with viability. Being able to ensure that viability artificially changes the conversation.
 

-Plasma Reus-

Service guarantees member status
Pretty sure this is leading to rich people being able to grow their own humans and harvest their organs for transplants.
If someone paid you £10 million pounds for your DNA, so that it could be grown in to a human being and harvested for its organs, would you do it?
 
I wonder if this research would yield results that would help make pregnancy easier/safer for people with high risk pregnancies? Like they couls learn how to prevent certain things or learn new warning signs for stuff. Seeing what is going on as it's happening is pretty fascinating.

Obviously not with like a 14 day limit but if they could go on for longer or whatever.

Science is hella cool.

This could make it so people who can't even have kids could have kids!!

Or, as someone mentioned...you know... clones.

But yay science!
 

Einchy

semen stains the mountaintops
Pretty sure this is leading to rich people being able to grow their own humans and harvest their organs for transplants.
If someone paid you £10 million pounds for your DNA, so that it could be grown in to a human being and harvested for its organs, would you do it?

I'd do it for much less.
 
Pretty sure this is leading to rich people being able to grow their own humans and harvest their organs for transplants.
If someone paid you £10 million pounds for your DNA, so that it could be grown in to a human being and harvested for its organs, would you do it?

Science could just grow the organ as needed... That's the point of studying the the cells this early on to see how it becomes the different tissues that make up the body.

No need to grow full clones. We need to keep advancing our knowledge in this area.
 

It's cheap to pull the "if you had kids..." but it's true. They exhibit personality much earlier in the womb than people think. That's not just phantom parent ego, they respond to music, kick back, get angry, happy, you can tell. Not 14 days early, but the point is, at what point? When is the line between unthinking fetus and semi-consciousness? And if we're keeping something that has even a rudimentary conscious in a jar, what kind of fucking monsters are we? It's just a dangerous line to be at.
 
Pretty sure this is leading to rich people being able to grow their own humans and harvest their organs for transplants.
If someone paid you £10 million pounds for your DNA, so that it could be grown in to a human being and harvested for its organs, would you do it?

I'd do it for 50 bucks and a 20 piece McNugget.
 

Khasim

Member
Laws shouldn't prevent people from solving medical issues or improving one's quality of life. Full cloning is something I'd be against, unless in very critical cases that I can't even think of right now (maybe 'reviving' people who have natural immunities to deadly diseases if they die of unnatural causes so further research can be done, with their previius consent of course), but if we can allow same sex couples to have biological children with both of the parents' DNA or allow women who have a high risk of birth complications an artificial pregnancy and birth, then why the hell not?

All those debates based on tradition and religion need to go away.

General rule - if someone wants to do something that doesn't hurt other people in any way whatsoever,then why deny them that?
 
Why not all of this stuff?


Why not grow real children outside of the womb in place of pregnancies?

Why not grow mindless bodies for organ harvesting?

Why not grow mindless drones for labor?
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes

Explain what's wrong.



Edit be damned, your opinion is out in left-field. A one-day old newborn is a human my man.

What's wrong about it?
The longer you let the embryo grow the more it turns into a baby or fetus or whatever you wanna call it. I am pro choice and all, but I also looked at fetuses in a science museum, and that shit really puts things into perspective. you cant just call these things embryos and cells and go about your day. the longer you let it grow, the more unethical it becomes.
 

collige

Banned
Why not all of this stuff?


Why not grow real children outside of the womb in place of pregnancies?

Why not grow mindless bodies for organ harvesting?

Why not grow mindless drones for labor?

I dunno if you're being facetious or not but these would all be amazing to do if we had the technology. Though for the latter, it would very much depend on your definition of "mindless" for these hypothetical drones.
 
I dunno if you're being facetious or not but these would all be amazing to do if we had the technology. Though for the latter, it would very much depend on your definition of "mindless" for these hypothetical drones.
I'm not. This is the path we walk with experimentation on embryos and growing embryos outside of the womb. The law needs to stop stifling research that could change the world for the better.

Incapable of higher thought or consciousness. Not self-aware. Basically programmable drones that only have base animal instincts (if that even) beyond their directives.

Obviously something like the film Moon would be verboten.
 

Ray Wonder

Founder of the Wounded Tagless Children
I dunno if you're being facetious or not but these would all be amazing to do if we had the technology. Though for the latter, it would very much depend on your definition of "mindless" for these hypothetical drones.

Yeah the mindless drone thing seems iffy. The other two I'm in for.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom