scholarly journals The trouble with embryos

2009 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 31-54
Author(s):  
Françoise Baylis ◽  
Timothy Krahn

In an effort to quell ongoing debate about the ethics of human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research, there have been concerted efforts to develop ethical standards for both embryo and hESC research and to entrench these standards in law. Surprisingly these efforts have not included efforts at standardizing the meaning of the pivotal term ‘embryo’. This paper reviews the legal framework for embryo research in the United Kingdom, the United States and Germany and highlights the absence of any agreed upon standard for what counts as a human embryo. This is an important lacuna, especially in light of the most recent advances in stem cell research involving the reprogramming of human somatic cell nuclei to generate human induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells.

2014 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maya Mitre ◽  
Bruno P.W. Reis

This case study deals with the regulation of human embryonic stem-cell (hESC) research in Brazil. It aims to analyze the process that led to the authorization, in 2005, of the use of stem cells obtained from so-called supernumerary embryos for purposes of research and therapy. We argue that the pro-research lobby in Brazil had considerable success because it framed the issue by referring to Brazil’s peculiar policy background in the fields of assisted reproduction and embryo research. Moreover, this group of actors strategically avoided associating hESC research with abortion, highlighting the humanitarian aspects of this kind of research, rather than the motto of freedom of scientific research. Finally, it was able to rely on the judgment of a fairly progressive Supreme Court, which was also sensitive to public opinion at a time of ‘court activism’ or the ‘judicialization of politics’ in Brazil.


Circulation ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 130 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenyi Chen ◽  
Johannes Riegler ◽  
Elena Matsa ◽  
Qi Shen ◽  
Haodi Wu ◽  
...  

Introduction: Both human embryonic stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (ESC-CMs) and human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (iPSC-CMs) can serve as an unlimited cell source for cardiac regenerative therapy. However, the functional equivalency of both approaches has not been previously reported. Here we performed head-to-head comparison on the beneficial effects of ESC-CM and iPSC-CMs in restoring cardiac function in a rat myocardial infarction (MI) model. Methods & Results: Human ESCs and iPSCs were differentiated into cardiomyocytes using small molecules. FACS analysis confirmed ~85% and ~83% of cells differentiated from ESCs and iPSCs, respectively, were positive for cardiac troponin T, and immunofluorescence staining demonstrated that ESC-CMs and iPSC-CMs have striated sarcomeric structure (Figure A-B). Both ESC-CMs and iPSC-CMs displayed similar maturity for calcium handling (transient amplitude: ΔF/F 0 = 3.8±0.3; time to peak: ~200 ms; 50% transient duration: ~400 ms). qRT-PCR showed that ESC-CMs and iPSC-CMs expressed CASQ2, GJA5, KCNJ2, KCNJ5, MYH6, MYH7, and SCN5A at comparable levels to human fetal heart tissue. Next, ESC-CMs and iPSC-CMs were injected into the left ventricular free wall of infarcted hearts (adult nude rats; n=14, 10, respectively). Cardiac function was assessed by MRI one month post cell injection and the hearts were harvested and stained for human cardiac markers. Both ESC-CMs and iPSC-CMs could engraft in ischemic rat hearts (Figure C). Comprehensive functional analysis with small animal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), echocardiography, and pressure-volume loop analysis are underway. Conclusion: We set out to perform head to head comparison for the first time that iPSC-CMs may facilitate cardiac repair at comparable levels to ESC-CMs. Unlike allogeneic ESC-CM therapy, autologous iPSC-CMs could be used to overcome immune rejection for cardiac cell transplantation in the future.


2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan W. Brock

The intense and extensive debate over human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research has focused primarily on the moral status of the human embryo. Some commentators assign full moral status of normal adult human beings to the embryo from the moment of its conception. At the other extreme are those who believe that a human embryo has no significant moral status at the time it is used and destroyed in stem cell research. And in between are many intermediate positions that assign an embryo some degree of moral status between none and full. This controversy and the respective positions, like the abortion controversy, is by now well understood, despite the lack of progress in resolving it. I have argued briefly elsewhere that early embryos do not have significant moral status, but I do not want to reenter that debate here. Instead, I want to focus on an issue that has had relatively little explicit and separate attention, but is likely to loom larger in light of the Obama administration’s partial lifting of the Bush administration’s restriction on the embryos that can be used in stem cell research that receives federal funding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document