软骨组织工程种子细胞的医学伦理分析

软骨组织工程作为一项新兴技术成为治疗软骨缺损的新途径,本文通过探讨软骨组织工程学研究与临床应用的医学伦理学问题。从组织工程学研究的各种不同的种子细胞来源方面阐述其各自存在的伦理学问题及其对策。从而阐明在进行软骨组织工程种子细胞研究的同时,必须充分考虑相关的伦理学问题,遵循伦理原则,使软骨组织工程不仅在技术上可行,在伦理学上也是可行的。     

干细胞移植治疗冠心病的现状与未来

冠心病仍然是全球的主要死亡原因。其所造成的心肌梗死及慢性心力衰竭对生活质量的影响和由此造成的高额医疗费用促使我们不断寻求新的医疗措施。近几年有关干细胞用于心肌梗死后心肌再生、心肌内新生血管形成,可能还会改善梗死后的心功能的研究成为心脏病学研究的最热门领域。尽管干细胞治疗有可能使心力衰竭的治疗得到彻底的革命,但仍有部分问题需要澄清。已发表的各个研究结果设计不尽相同,致使对该项治疗的效果较难得出一致的结论。但这些研究都强调干细胞治疗在未来心血管疾病的治疗中可能会发挥较大的作用。干细胞治疗与药学、外科及介入治疗的结合会显著改善冠心病患者的预后。     

Thy-1肿瘤标记物在肝癌的表达及意义研究

探讨Thy-1（又称CD90）表达与肝癌进展的关系。采用免疫组化法检测组织中Thy-1表达,流式细胞术检测外周血CD45^-CD90^＋细胞百分数。结果Thy-1在肝癌有不同程度表达,随病理级别和临床分期增高,表达也增多。故得出结论,Thy-1与肿瘤进展关系密切,检测Thy-1表达对肝癌的预后评估有实用价值。     

Toward a Better Bioethics

It has been argued that bioethicists too often tend to represent the interests of scientists and not of the broader polity. Indeed, bioethicists seem predisposed to discard the voices and viewpoints of all but the cognoscenti. Focusing particularly on human pluripotent stem cell research, this commentary explores a variety of characterizations of bioethics and bioethicists in relation to forbidding science. Rather than proselytizing or prohibiting, bioethicists should work in partnership with scientists and publics to craft scientifically well-informed and morally sophisticated debates about forbidding science.

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.     

“Show Me” Bioethics and Politics

Missouri, the “Show Me State,” has become the epicenter of several important national public policy debates, including abortion rights, the right to choose and refuse medical treatment, and, most recently, early stem cell research. In this environment, the Center for Practical Bioethics (formerly, Midwest Bioethics Center) emerged and grew. The Center's role in these “cultural wars” is not to advocate for a particular position but to provide well researched and objective information, perspective, and advocacy for the ethical justification of policy positions; and to serve as a neutral convener and provider of a public forum for discussion. In this article, the Center's work on early stem cell research is a case study through which to argue that not only the Center, but also the field of bioethics has a critical role in the politics of public health policy.     

Towards a Global Human Embryonic Stem Cell Bank

An increasingly unbridgeable gap exists between the supply and demand of transplantable organs. Human embryonic stem cell technology could solve the organ shortage problem by restoring diseased or damaged tissue across a range of common conditions. However, such technology faces several largely ignored immunological challenges in delivering cell lines to large populations. We address some of these challenges and argue in favor of encouraging contribution or intentional creation of embryos from which widely immunocompatible stem cell lines could be derived. Further, we argue that current immunological constraints in tissue transplantation demand the creation of a global stem cell bank, which may hold particular promise for minority populations and other sub-groups currently marginalized from organ procurement and allocation systems. Finally, we conclude by offering a number of practical and ethically oriented recommendations for constructing a human embryonic stem cell bank that we hope will help solve the ongoing organ shortage problem.     

The Potentiality of the Embryo and the Somatic Cell

Recent arguments on the ethics of stem cell research have taken a novel approach to the question of the moral status of the embryo. One influential argument focuses on a property that the embryo is said to possess—namely, the property of being an entity with a rational nature or, less controversially, an entity that has the potential to acquire a rational nature—and claims that this property is also possessed by a somatic cell. Since nobody seriously thinks that we have a duty to preserve the countless such cells we wash off our body every day in the shower, the argument is intended as a reductio ad absurdum of the claim that the embryo should be afforded the same moral status as a fully developed human being. This article argues that this argument is not successful and that it consequently plays into the hands of those who oppose embryonic stem cell research. It is therefore better to abandon this argument and focus instead on the different argument that potentiality, as such, is not a sufficient ground for the creation of moral obligations towards the embryo.     

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.     

真核双基因表达载体p1RES-Rb94-E1A的构建与鉴定

以pE1A质粒为模板,扩增E1A基因,然后将E1AcDNA片段插入前期已经构建好的真核表达载体pIRES-Rb94的MCSB的SalI与NotI之间,获得真核双基因表达质粒p1RES-Rb94-E1A,转染肺腺癌A549细胞后,采用RT—PCR和Westernblot方法检测Rb94和E1A在A549细胞中的表达,为研...