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。     

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.     

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…     

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.     

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.     

胚胎干细胞研究进展

胚胎干细胞具有重大的生物学基础研究价值和医学应用价值。关于胚胎干细胞的研究起源自20世纪70年代,目前的研究热点主要集中在胚胎干细胞的基础生物学特性和临床应用上。同时科学家也在想办法克服研究中面临的伦理问题。     

胚胎干细胞研究进展

胚胎干细胞具有重大的生物学基础研究价值和医学应用价值.关于胚胎干细胞的研究起源自20世纪70年代,目前的研究热点主要集中在胚胎干细胞的基础生物学特性和临床应用上.同时科学家也在想办法克服研究中面临的伦理问题.     

评《人胚胎干细胞研究伦理指导原则》

据2004年1月14日<健康报>报道,科技部和卫生部联合发布了十二条<人胚胎干细胞研究伦理指导原则>,这是继1998年卫生部颁布<涉及人体的生物医学研究伦理审查办法(试行)>,1999年国家药品监督管理局颁布<药品临床试验管理规范>后,国家有关主管科研部门颁布的一个专项伦理指导原则.该文件首先指出了遵守国际国内的伦理准则与科学研究的顺利发展的一致性,明确禁止人的生殖性克隆,禁止人胚胎的研究超过14天,禁止将研究用胚胎植入人和其他动物生殖系统,禁止人的生殖细胞与其他物种生殖细胞的结合,禁止买卖人类配子、受精卵、胚胎和胎儿组织,强调贯彻知情同意和知情选择原则,保护隐私以及要求成立伦理委员会,这些都是非常重要的,应该加以肯定.     

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。     

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.     

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.     

De l’interdiction de la recherche sur l’embryon et les cellules souches au régime d’autorisation sous condition : brèves remarques sur la protection de la vie humaine dans la loi no 2013-715 du 6 août 2013

The publication in the Official Journal of Law No. 2013-715 of August 6th 2013 which authorizes under conditions embryos and embryonic stem cells research is a milestone in the legal and ethical field in France. Indeed, the new Article L. 2151-5 of the Public Health Code replaces the prohibition regime of embryos and embryonic stem cells research by an authorization regime, which raises the question of the value and the protection of embryonic life in French law.     

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。     

Human embryonic stem cell research: an intercultural perspective

In 1998, researchers discovered that embryonic stem cells could be derived from early human embryos. This discovery has raised a series of ethical and public-policy questions that are now being confronted by multiple international organizations, nations, cultures, and religious traditions. This essay surveys policies for human embryonic stem cell research in four regions of the world, reports on the recent debate at the United Nations about one type of such research, and reviews the positions that various religious traditions have adopted regarding this novel type of research. In several instances the religious traditions seem to have influenced the public-policy debates.     

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.     

At the edge of humanity: human stem cells, chimeras, and moral status

Experiments involving the transplantation of human stem cells and their derivatives into early fetal or embryonic nonhuman animals raise novel ethical issues due to their possible implications for enhancing the moral status of che chimeric individual. Although status-enhancing research is not necessarily objectionable from the perspective of the chimeric individual, there are grounds for objecting to it in the conditions in which it is likely to occur. Translating this ethical conclusion into a policy recommendation, however, is complicated by the fact that substantial empirical and ethical uncertainties remain about which transplants, if any, would significantly enhance the chimeric individual's moral status. Considerations of moral status justify either an early-termination policy on chimeric embryos, or, in the absence of such a policy, restrictions on the introduction of pluripotent human stem cells into early-stage developing animals, pending the resolution of those uncertainties.     

The ethics of funding embryonic stem cell research: a Catholic viewpoint

Stem cell research that requires the destruction of human embryos is incompatible with Catholic moral principles, and with any ethic that gives serious weight to the moral status of the human embryo. Moreover, because there are promising and morally acceptable alternative approaches to the repair and regeneration of human tissues, and because treatments that rely on destruction of human embryos would be morally offensive to many patients, embryonic stem cell research may play a far less significant role in medical progress than proponents believe.     

Stem Cell Research and the Problem of Embryonic Identity

A basic component of moral objections to embryonic stem cell research is the claim that human embryos have the same moral status as typical adult human beings. There is no reason to accept this claim, however, unless adult humans once existed as embryos—that is, unless the developmental history of adult humans contains embryos to which the adults are numerically identical. The purpose of this paper is to argue that there are no such identities, and hence that no adult human being ever existed as an embryo.     

Assessing the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in egg donation: implications for human embryonic stem cell research

Stem cell research has important implications for medicine. The source of stem cells influences their therapeutic potential, with stem cells derived from early-stage embryos remaining the most versatile. Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), a source of embryonic stem cells, allows for understandings about disease development and, more importantly, the ability to yield embryonic stem cell lines that are genetically matched to the somatic cell donor. However, SCNT requires women to donate eggs, which involves injection of ovulation-inducing hormones and egg retrieval through laparoscopy or transvaginal needle aspiration. Risks from this procedure are fiercely debated, most notably risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). This review examines risk of OHSS resulting from oocyte donation. We conclude that risk posed by OHSS in egg donation is not significant enough to warrant undue concern, and much of this can be eliminated when proper precautions are taken. This bears relevance to the future of stem cell research policymaking.