胚胎干细胞源性配子细胞的诞生对伦理学的冲击

胚胎干细胞在伦理学界引发的争论尚未平息,胚胎干细胞源性配子的诞生又在更深层次对伦理学产生了新的冲击.ESDG将在解决人类生殖问题中作出重要贡献,特别是给合法结婚的同性恋者带来了拥有带有自身遗传性状后代的希望.但是,这方面的进展势必会与伦理学产生冲突,并且有多方面的伦理问题需要人类慎重考虑.     

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。     

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…     

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。     

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。     

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.     

人类胚胎干细胞研究伦理问题的调查和讨论

此次对各级医生进行关于人类胚胎干细胞研究伦理认知的调查研究,其目的是为制订相关的伦理准则提供认知依据,调查是在我国东西部二个城市的8家三级医院进行,采用随机抽样、自愿无记名填写信息表方法调查.调查结果表明,50%以上医生认为早期胚胎不是道德意义的人,70%以上医生对胚胎干细胞的研究表示支持.海峡两岸的医生由于有相同的文化根源,在对待胚胎干细胞研究的伦理观点及态度上极其接近.     

人类胚胎的道德地位

胚胎干细胞技术的发展带来了干细胞来源的伦理争论,提出了如何看待"胚胎道德地位"的问题。围绕这一问题,有三种观点,它们分别从生物性、理性功能以及人的潜能性来界定胚胎的道德地位。通过对三种观点的分析,本文强调坚持人的尊严原则,是推动新兴生物技术发展的核心和归宿。     

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.     

The ethics and politics of small sacrifices in stem cell research

Pluripotent human stem cell research may offer new treatments for hundreds of diseases, but opponents of this research argue that such therapy comes attached to a Faustian bargain: cures at the cost of the destruction of many frozen embryos. The National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC), government officials, and many scholars of bioethics, including, in these pages, John Robertson, have not offered an adequate response to ethical objections to stem cell research. Instead of examining the ethical issues involved in sacrificing human embryos for the goal of curing fatal and disabling diseases, they seek to either dismiss the moral concerns of those with objections or to find an "accomodation" with those opposed to stem cell research. An ethical argument can be made that it is justifiable to modify or destroy certain human embryos in the pursuit of cures for dread and lethal diseases. Until this argument is made, the case for stem cell research will rest on political foundations rather than on the ethical foundations that the funding of stem cell research requires.     

关于胚胎干细胞研究的一场伦理之争

关于“人兔细胞融合”的伦理之争,主要围绕“人兔细胞融合”实验是否违背伦理,要不要经过知情同意,以及科学技术与伦理道德的关系等问题而进行。这场讨论是正常的,健康的,有益的,倘能加以认真总结,将有助于推进学术争鸣。     

Some Ethical Concerns About Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells

Human induced pluripotent stem cells can be obtained from somatic cells, and their derivation does not require destruction of embryos, thus avoiding ethical problems arising from the destruction of human embryos. This type of stem cell may provide an important tool for stem cell therapy, but it also results in some ethical concerns. It is likely that abnormal reprogramming occurs in the induction of human induced pluripotent stem cells, and that the stem cells generate tumors in the process of stem cell therapy. Human induced pluripotent stem cells should not be used to clone human beings, to produce human germ cells, nor to make human embryos. Informed consent should be obtained from patients in stem cell therapy.     

Using Surplus Embryos and Research Embryos in Stem Cell Research: Ethical Viewpoints of Buddhist,Hindu and Catholic Leaders in Malaysia on the Permissibility of Research

The sources of embryos for Embryonic Stem Cell Research (ESCR) include surplus embryos from infertility treatments, and research embryos which are created solely for an ESCR purpose. The latter raises more ethical concerns. In a multi-religious country like Malaysia, ethical discussions on the permissibility of ESCR with regard to the use surplus and research embryos are diversified. Malaysia has formulated guidelines influenced by the national fatwa ruling which allows the use of surplus embryos in ESCR. Input from other main religions is yet to be documented. In light of this, this study addresses (i) the ethical viewpoints of Buddhist, Hindu and Catholic leaders on the permissibility of using surplus and research embryos; and (ii) the moral standpoints of religious leaders towards attaining a consensus on the practice of ESCR in Malaysia. Responses from the religious leaders were obtained via semi-structured, face-to-face interviews. The findings show that generally the Buddhist and Hindu leaders approve the use of surplus embryos. Their responses on the creation of research embryos for ESCR are varied. Meanwhile, the Catholic leaders distinctively objected to ESCR regardless of the embryo sources, referring to it as the destruction of life. Taking into account the diverse views, this study explores the response of the religious leaders for a general consensus wherever possible. The ethical discourse surrounding ESCR in a multi-religious setting offers new perspective, which needs to be explored in a broader global community.     

An obscure rider obstructing science: the conflation of parthenotes with embryos in the Dickey-Wicker amendment

In 1996 Congress passed the Dickey-Wicker Amendment (DWA) as part of an appropriations bill; it has been renewed every year since. The DWA bans federal funding for research using embryos and parthenotes. In this paper, we call for a public discussion on parthenote research and a questioning of its inclusion in the DWA. We begin by explaining what parthenotes are and why they are useful for research on reproduction, cancer, and stem cells. We then argue that the scientific difference between embryos and parthenotes translates into ethical differences, and claim that research on parthenotes is much less ethically problematic. Finally, we contextualize the original passage of the DWA to provide an explanation for why the two were possibly conflated in this law. We conclude by calling for a public discussion on reconsidering the DWA in its entirety, starting with the removal of parthenogenesis from this prohibition of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding.     

Developing human-nonhuman chimeras in human stem cell research: ethical issues and boundaries

The transplantation of adult human neural stem cells into prenatal non-humans offers an avenue for studying human neural cell development without direct use of human embryos. However, such experiments raise significant ethical concerns about mixing human and nonhuman materials in ways that could result in the development of human-nonhuman chimeras. This paper examines four arguments against such research, the moral taboo, species integrity, "unnaturalness," and human dignity arguments, and finds the last plausible. It argues that the transfer of human brain or retinal stem cells to nonhuman embryos would not result in the development of human-nonhuman chimeras that denigrate human dignity, provided such stem cells are dissociated. The article provides guidelines that set ethical boundaries for conducting such research that are consonant with the requirements of human dignity.     

Ethical reflections on the status of the preimplantation embryo leading to the German embryo protection act

Ethical conflicts have always been connected with new techniques of reproductive medicine such as in-vitro fertilization. The fundamental question is: When does human life begin and from which stage of development should the embryo be protected? This question cannot be solved by scientific findings only. In prenatal ontogenesis there is no moment during the development from the fertilized oocyte to a human being which could be recognized as an orientation point for all ethical problems connected with the question of the right to dispose of prenatal life (interruption of pregnancy, research on embryos). The protection of an individual human life must be valid for all in the same manner and from the very beginning on. It must not depend on value judgments or on stages of development, so-called grades of humanity, because these would then become selection criteria. Procreated life must have the right to be born. These were the essential ethical arguments which led to the German Embryo Protection Law.     

A ray of light about frozen embryos.

The Tennessee Supreme Court's decision in Davis v. Davis, a case that raises the question of how to allocate frozen embryos in the event of divorce, addresses many of the legal issues posed by in vitro fertilization. The decision considers the interests of the progenitors as well as of the children who may result. For example, the court held that gamete providers' discretion regarding the disposition of embryos can be limited only when their decisions would harm the children who might be born. The court also made clear that efforts to seek genetic parenthood are protected only when accompanied by a desire to raise the resulting children, a conclusion that also affects other reproductive technologies. In addition to elaborating an analytic framework, the court set guidelines for resolving disputes when the couples had made no prior agreements, including holding that while the embryos are ex-utero the desire to avoid genetic parenthood almost always trumps the wish to become a parent. The well-reasoned analysis in Davis v. Davis should help shape legal and ethical discussion regarding the use of in vitro fertilization for many years to come.     

Creating embryos for research

ABSTRACT The 1987 Amendment to the Infertility (Medical Procedures) Act (Vic) allows the creation of embryos specifically for research purposes, as long as the proposed experiment takes place within 24 hours. The purpose of this paper is to determine whether there is aany significant ethical difference between creating embryos specifically for research and using those that are surplus from the new reproductive technologies. The relevant arguments in this debate can be grouped under three heads: those focussing on the embryo; those focussing on the possible consequences of these practices and those focussing on the women who donate the eggs.     

植入前遗传学诊断中性别选择的伦理辩护

植入前遗传学诊断（PGD）是在胚胎植入子宫前进行遗传学检查的新技术。它可对植入胚胎进行性别选择,从而引发了会增加我国出生人口性别比的担忧。通过对PGD性别选择伦理风险的分析,指出其用于医学需要时不会对性别比造成危害。但在实施过程中需要医生、患者及社会全体人员共同参与,避免该技术用于非医学目的的需要。