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.     

辩证看待干细胞移植的热化问题

现代科学技术的发展已经并正在给人类展现一个相互矛盾的事实：一方面是科学技术推动人类社会的巨大进步,促进社会生活的极大提高。如核能的利用、转基因作物、转基因治疗、动物克隆、干细胞的开发与应用等等,无不让人类充分地享受到现代科技带来的种种利益和好处。另外一方面人类的生存危机前所未有的加深,环境的恶化、水资源的污染、新的疾病和变异的菌种诞生等等。怎样运用哲学的理性的思维和方法来评判现代科技对人类的影响,摆脱其发展对社会所造成的两难困境,是一个必须解决的难题。以干细胞移植研究为例,如何辩证看待干细胞移植热化问题,如何运用哲学思维来看待干细胞移植的有利性和危害性,探究科学技术的可持续发展道路。     

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.     

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。     

胚胎干细胞研究面面观

人胚胎干细胞来自具有发育成一个个体潜力的人胚胎,其研究引发了一场伦理大辩论。就胚胎干细胞的概念、人胚胎干细胞研究将带给人类的巨大效益和研究所面临需要解决的技术难题,进行了重点阐述,提出了科学技术的发展是解决伦理争议的根本手段。     

重视干细胞研究中的伦理问题

黄禹锡的"卵子风波"反映了干细胞研究领域中伦理规范的缺位.分析了针对干细胞研究的种种伦理争论,并且指出,由于与人类的尊严和幸福密切相关,生物医学领域的研究不能回避伦理问题,相关的伦理研究必须与科学研究同步进行.     

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…     

人类胚胎干细胞科技的专利困境与路径选择

生物医学技术对21世纪的社会影响深远,其重点内容人类胚胎干细胞的研究及其应用技术对科学研究和医疗发展有着重大的意义,如何对人类胚胎干细胞研究及成果进行法律保护,是当前各国面临的重大难题。结合专利保护优势,《专利法》新颖性、创造性和工业实用性的含义变革、科技的进步和经济的需求,其认为《专利法》是人类胚胎干细胞研究者保护劳动成果的首选法律。在分析境内外立法实践基础上,认为应明确人类胚胎干细胞研究及其成果的专利保护的合法性,并明确"不可专利"的客体范围,进行相关法律制度设计,以利于有效地保护发明创造、刺激生物技术的研究、促进国家科学技术的迅速发展。     

人类胚胎干细胞的伦理学应用

人类胚胎干细胞研究和使用面临很多问题,并且大部分已经进行了广泛的讨论,但目前仍有一些问题很少进行讨论。对这些问题的讨论将有助于更好地研究人类胚胎干细胞的使用问题,这些问题是：（1）干细胞研究与社会政策,各个国家有关的政策制定并不一致,除了禁止人的生殖性克隆的国际性公约外,国际性准则在胚胎研究的也没有提供明确的规定;（2）欧洲有些国家在相关的问题的立法一致性上存在着许多问题,有些甚至是相互预报的;（3）干细胞研究应用的预防原则的适宜性问题已引起人们的争论;（4）有利及避免浪费原则在干细胞研究中的应用。     

胚胎干细胞在治疗学研究中的应用

目前有许多研究人员希望能够从事胚胎干细胞的研究。这项研究可能对可移植组织用于对目前认为难以治疗或不能治疗的许多疾病的治疗的发展带来极大的帮助。然而,由于干细胞是源自人体胚胎。这就提出了如下问题：为了治疗学研究,在胚胎植入子宫之前从人类胚胎上获取细胞以从事实验室培养和研究在伦理上能够被接受吗?不同国家的伦理委员会或国家立法机构关于胚胎研究的观点及其采取的解决办法可能存在显著差异。这种差异在多元性世界里是不可避免的。     

State-Supported Science and Imaginary Lock-in: The Case of Regenerative Medicine in Japan

Abstract

Regenerative medicine (RM) in Japan lays strong emphasis on a specific trajectory of its development, which deploys human induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells as the primary sources for the technology. The technique to create these stem cells was developed in 2006 by a Japanese stem cell scientist, Shinya Yamanaka, and since its applicability to human cells was established about a year later, this new type of cells has become to be considered as a potential substitute for human embryonic stem cells. While the clinical value of these cells are yet to be confirmed, the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology decided to concentrate its support on iPS cells research and turned it into a national project. This decision reflected the state's vision of initiating the transition to a knowledge-based society, which was adopted in the 1990s to tackle the prolonged deflation in the country. As the research became intertwined with this policy vision, however, the Ministry came to see bringing its success as more important than ever, while other trajectories of RM were left underrated and largely unsupported. Industrial actors counteracted this situation and developed an initiative to recognize existing technical capability in the country, but its impact has been so far negligible. This indicates that the nation is locked in the particular trajectory of RM. Hence, this Japanese RM research enterprise presents an interesting case to understand how states' commitment may not only shape the course of scientific research but also reduce flexibility in technological development.     

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.     

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。     

Stem cell research in a Catholic institution: yes or no?

Catholic teaching has no moral difficulties with research on stem cells derived from adult stem cells or fetal cord blood. The ethical problem comes with embryonic stem cells since their genesis involves the destruction of a human embryo. However, there seems to be significant promise of health benefits from such research. Although Catholic teaching does not permit any destruction of human embryos, the question remains whether researchers in a Catholic institution, or any researchers opposed to destruction of human embryos, could participate in research on cultured embryonic stem cells, or whether a Catholic institution could use any therapy that ultimately results from such research. This position paper examines how such research could be conducted legitimately in a Catholic institution by using an ethical analysis involving a narrative context, the nature of the moral act, and the principle of material cooperation, along with references to significant ethical assessments. It also offers tentative guidelines that could be used by a Catholic institution in implementing such research.     

到底路有多长--对干细胞移植治疗研究的一点思考

目前干细胞研究的争论主要集中于干细胞研究的过程和方式,诸如干细胞来源以及被提取干细胞的胚胎的权利与地位等伦理问题是争论的焦点所在,而对于研究的最终目的是治病而非克隆人则少有争议.然而在伦理问题等争论相对较小的干细胞应用研究领域,就应用于人的技术层面而言还有很多问题有待解决.安全性(safety)和有效性(efficacy)原则是目前公认的干细胞临床应用研究的基准.干细胞移植治疗最终应用于临床可能还有相当一段路程要走,无论是研究者还是伦理学家以及社会舆论和普通百姓在其中都应当并可以发挥积极的作用.     

Biopower,Styles of Reasoning,and What's Still Missing from the Stem Cell Debates

Until now, philosophical debate about human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research has largely been limited to its ethical dimensions and implications. Although the importance and urgency of these ethical debates should not be underestimated, the almost undivided attention that mainstream and feminist philosophers have paid to the ethical dimensions of hESC research suggests that the only philosophically interesting questions and concerns about it are by and large ethical in nature. My argument goes some distance to challenge the assumption that ethical considerations alone must be foregrounded in philosophical discussions about hESC research by introducing a critical stance on the epistemological and ontological assumptions that underlie and condition it. A central aim of the paper is to show how Foucault's insights into knowledge‐power, taken in combination with Hacking's claims about styles of reasoning, can make these assumptions evident, as well as cast light on their potentially deleterious implications for disabled people. Arguing in this way also enables me to draw out constitutive effects of research on stem cells, that is, to indicate how the discursive practices surrounding research on stem cells, as well as the technology itself, contribute to the constitution of impairment.