人类干细胞之伦理原则与监管政策（上）

本文分两大部分。第一部分从干细胞的功能、来源与社会争议性3种角度划分了人类干细胞的种类,并讨论与人类干细胞研究及临床应用相关的9条伦理原则,特别强调了西方国家对胚胎捐赠在知情同意方面的伦理耍求。第二部分讨论了制定监管人类干细胞研究的3个原则,并简单地介绍了在英美各国监管的情况,其中较详细地评论了英国的种种立法过程、设立的法定机构和执行的种种政策与机制,作为在我国讨论类似政策参考之用。     

人类干细胞之伦理原则与监管政策(上)

本文分两大部分.第一部分从干细胞的功能、来源与社会争议性3种角度划分了人类干细胞的种类,并讨论与人类干细胞研究及临床应用相关的9条伦理原则,特别强调了西方国家对胚胎捐赠在知情同意方面的伦理要求.第二部分讨论了制定监管人类干细胞研究的3个原则,并简单地介绍了在英美各国监管的情况,其中较详细地评论了英国的种种立法过程、设立的法定机构和执行的种种政策与机制,作为在我国讨论类似政策参考之用.     

日本的人类胚胎干细胞研究

干细胞研究的进展体现了人类智慧的一个胜利,但同时也对人类的生命提出了极大的挑战,因为这意味着无论是作为一个整体的社会还是个体,都将面临严肃的伦理、法律及社会问题.通过成人干细胞临床研究原则草案论纲,讨论日本的人类胚胎干细胞研究.     

《美国国立卫生研究所(NIH)关于使用人类多能干细胞研究工作指南》

1　指南适用范围本指南适用于国家卫生研究所 (ＮＩＨ)资金支持的使用源于人类胚胎多能干细胞 (学术上称为人类胚胎干细胞 )或人类胎儿组织 (学术上称为人类胚胎生殖细胞 )进行的研究工作。本指南所称“人类多能干细胞” ,是指来自人类胚胎或人类胎儿组织、被确认发育为初级三胚层细胞和组织的自我复制细胞。虽然人类多能干细胞可能来自胚胎或胎儿组织 ,但这种干细胞不是胚胎或胎儿本身。根据本指南 ,国家卫生研究所资助属于下列情况的人类多能干细胞研究 :研究中使用的人类多能干细胞 (1)来自人类胎儿组织 ;或 (2 )临床使用剩余的由体外受…     

人类胚胎干细胞研究的伦理准则(建议稿)

20 0 1年 1 0月 1 6日通过2 0 0 2年 8月 2 0日修改人类胚胎干细胞 (ＥＳ)研究是 2 1世纪生物医学科学领域的一大前沿课题。由于这项研究涉及人体胚胎的使用 ,因而引发了激烈的伦理之争。反对者认为 ,胚胎是人类生命的雏形 ,理应受到尊重而不该加以破坏。但大多数科学家支持胚胎干细胞研究 ,认为胚胎干细胞研究可为治愈那些至今仍属不治之症的疾病提供美好前景从而造福人类。国家人类基因组南方研究中心伦理、法律和社会问题研究部的伦理委员会 ,认真讨论了胚胎干细胞所引发的伦理之争。我们认为 ,为了“医乃仁术”这个崇高的事业 ,应该支持…     

干细胞研究及其伦理学问题

干细胞是动物体内一种独特的基本细胞类型。干细胞分化时,有些成为特殊类型的细胞,另一些仍维持干细胞,准备替代机体衰老和损伤的细胞。这些干细胞本身能够复制,以供机体终生组织更新的需要。最基本的多能干细胞存在于早期胚胎中,科学家们成功分离和培育干细胞的报告,为退行性疾病主损伤甚至致合性疾病的治疗带来了新的希望,然而,与此同时也引起了世界范围的关于使用人类胚胎和死亡胎儿进行研究的伦理大争论。     

人类胚胎干细胞的来源与伦理思考

人类胚胎干细胞研究的伦理问题较多,因此要思考胚胎干细胞的伦理问题。胚胎干细胞来源有四种：选择性流产的人类胚胎组织;治疗不孕症夫妇不需要的由体外受精产生的人类胚胎;由捐献者专门为研究所捐献的配子由体外受精产生的人类胚胎;由体细胞核移植技术将人体细胞核移植入人或动物的卵泡内产生人类胚胎或嵌合体胚胎。用不同胚胎来源研究干细胞产生的伦理问题不同,伦理的思考和结论也不同。     

胚胎干细胞技术对人类社会利弊辩

正方辩题 :胚胎干细胞技术对人类社会利大于弊反方辩题 :胚胎干细胞技术对人类社会弊大于利正方一辩 :主席、评委、各位辩友 ,大家好 :有位学者曾经说过 :“2 0世纪是药物时代 ,2 1世纪是细胞时代。”1998年 ,美国科学家用人类胚胎干细胞在体外培养和分化的成功 ,引发了全球干细胞研究的热潮 ,同时也激起人们对这一新兴技术发展的争议。经过对这项技术中所蕴涵的科学价值的判断和应用前景的展望 ,以及所带来的生命学、伦理学等诸多问题的理性反思 ,我方一致认为 :胚胎干细胞技术对人类社会利大于弊。所谓胚胎干细胞 ,其实是人胚胎发育早期—…     

人类胚胎干细胞研究的伦理观分析

人类胚胎干细胞是存在于人类早期胚胎中,具有发育多能性的细胞类型.人类胚胎干细胞研究能够帮助科学家了解并治疗帕金森氏症、脊髓损伤等重大疾病.然而,由于提取人类胚胎干细胞的过程中需要摧毁胚胎,该研究从一开始就饱受伦理争议.本文将首先理清人类胚胎干细胞研究伦理争议的本质,对各种观点进行详细解析,进而判断代表我国民众的伦理观念,为构建适合我国人类胚胎干细胞研究的法律规制体系提供理论基础.     

伦理,胚胎和干细胞研究

道德是关于规则、直觉、理解和观点的一个复杂系统。而后者影响着我们相互间处理事务的方式。它们交叉地渗入我们的道德思考。这种思维与胚胎、干细胞的伦理密切相关,因为胚胎和干细胞涉及我们对与治疗和移植组织有关的人的生命及其启始问题。就像在许多对待生命及其可以阐释的研究方法方面,要有一个道德的思辩历程一样,解决这些问题,部分地需要讨论,部分地需要回答。只有在我们认定这种讨论能够融入应用干细胞治疗的胚胎及其类源和人体组织的使用中时,我们才会清楚,大多数人体不同部位的干细胞应用是经过了对人的生命启始、我们儿童、家庭进行了思考。     

Ethics and policy in embryonic stem cell research

Embryonic stem cells, which have the potential to save many lives, must be recovered from aborted fetuses or live embyros. Although tissue from aborted fetuses can be used without moral complicity in the underlying abortion, obtaining stem cells from embryos necessarily kills them, thus raising difficult questions about the use of embryonic human material to save others. This article draws on previous controversies over embryo research and distinctions between intrinsic and symbolic moral status to analyze these issues. It argues that stem cell research with spare embryos produced during infertility treatment, or even embryos created specifically for research or therapeutic purposes, is ethically acceptable and should receive federal funding.     

关于干细胞研究的伊斯兰教观点

干细胞的来源主要有3个,分别是胚囊阶段的人胚胎细胞内物质,胎儿和成人细胞。从伊斯兰教观点来分析干细胞研究,干细胞研究具有巨大潜力使人们受益。但是,胚胎的道德地位是讨论的实质。特别指出仅为胚胎干细胞研究的目的而创造胚胎是不能被接受。     

Rescuing human embryonic stem cell research: the Blastocyst Transfer Method

Despite the therapeutic potential of human embryonic stem (HES) cells, many people believe that HES cell research should be banned. The reason is that the present method of extracting HES cells involves the destruction of the embryo, which for many is the beginning of a person. This paper examines a number of compromise solutions such as parthenogenesis, the use of defective embryos, genetically creating a "pseudo embryo" that can never form a placenta, and determining embryo death, and argues that none of these proposals are likely to satisfy embryoists, that is, those who regard the embryo as a person. This paper then proposes a method of extracting HES cells, what might be called the Blastocyst Transfer Method, that meets the ethical requirements of embryoists, and it considers some possible concerns regarding this method. It concludes by encouraging future HES cell research to investigate this method.     

Rescuing Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: The Blastocyst Transfer Method

Despite the therapeutic potential of human embryonic stem (HES) cells, many people believe that HES cell research should be banned. The reason is that the present method of extracting HES cells involves the destruction of the embryo, which for many is the beginning of a person. This paper examines a number of compromise solutions such as parthenogenesis, the use of defective embryos, genetically creating a “pseudo embryo” that can never form a placenta, and determining embryo death, and argues that none of these proposals are likely to satisfy embryoists, that is, those who regard the embryo as a person. This paper then proposes a method of extracting HES cells, what might be called the Blastocyst Transfer Method, that meets the ethical requirements of embryoists, and it considers some possible concerns regarding this method. It concludes by encouraging future HES cell research to investigate this method.     

The Therapeutic Promise of Pluripotency and its Political use in the Italian Stem Cell Debate

Stem cell research is considered one of the most promising branches of contemporary biomedicine. The capacity to develop into almost any cell type of the mature organism—pluripotency—is associated with human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) and is regarded as having great therapeutic potential. Harvesting stem cells destroys the human embryo, however; so research on embryonic stem cells has provoked controversies. In some countries such as Italy, the use of human embryos for research and therapeutic purposes is strictly forbidden. The Italian restrictive regulation has been explained by structural–cultural factors such as religion, but a better explanation lies in the policy dramaturgies deployed in the Italian debate. It was a struggle between two research trajectories—research on hESCs and on adult stem cells—for monopoly over the most credible therapeutic promise. Each was linked to different views of the Italian social order; each was epistemically legitimized by discourses on pluripotency and on the therapeutic potential of different stem cell types. Catholic actors articulated epistemic discourses on the therapeutic promises of different stem cell sources. The battle to define the social order—between a secular and a confessional view—became a struggle between two research trajectories for monopoly over the most credible therapeutic promise. The restrictive regulatory framework resulted from successfully transforming a policy dramaturgy into a new regulatory order. Thus structural–cultural variables such as religiosity matter only through the agency of institutional actors in local political cultures.     

Human embryonic stem cell therapy

The author presents an overview (completed on September 15, 2001) of three issues involved in the ethics of human embryonic stem cell therapy: the ethical implications of some of the scientific issues involved, the specific ethical issues of the moral standing of the early human embryo and the problem of cooperation, and a consideration of two public policy issues: should the research go forward, and what kind of health care system should the United States adopt. The author argues that the public policy questions are the most important agenda.     

干细胞研究中的多向立体思维方法

干细胞研究取得了里程碑式的进展,在临床疾病的预防和治疗中具有广阔的应用前景,这些研究成果凝聚了各国研究人员的集体智慧,多向立体思维方法得到了充分体现.