Induced pluripotent stem cell press coverage roundup
+ In the Washington Post, Rick Weiss reports that scientists are talking about the news "with stunned elation reminiscent of scientists' reactions in 1997 to the cloning of Dolly the sheep."
+ "Everyone was waiting for this day to come. You should have a solution here that will address the moral objections that have been percolating for years," the National Catholic Bioethics Center's Tadeiusz Pacholozyk told Gina Kolata in the New York Times. Also quoted in the article is Douglas Melton, who called this approach "ethically uncomplicated."
+ "Any scientist with basic technology in molecular and cell biology can do reprogramming," Yamanaka is quoted as saying in a Wall Street Journal article by Gautam Naik.
+ Robert Lanza tells MSNBC's Alan Boyle that "This work represents a tremendous scientific milestone, the biological equivalent of the Wright brothers' first airplane. It's a bit like turning lead into gold. But this is not over by a long shot. It's extremely important to temper this announcement with caution."
+ Reuters Maggie Fox highlights comments from Yamanaka about a potential ethical issue arising from this new approach: "Our technology, however, create a new ethical concerns. It might be possible to generate sperm and eggs from skin cells, via iPS cells. This might help people with infertility problem, but it will be essential to have a proper regulation regarding the generation and usage of human iPS cells to avoid misusages of this technology."
+ Jim Battey, vice chair of Stem Cell Task Force at the National Institutes of Health, in a San Francisco Chronicle story by Sabin Russell, "We would be quite enthusiastic to fund this research in the future."
+ Alta Charo tells the UW-Madison news service that this development begins to redefine the political and ethical discussions surrounding stem cell research. She adds, "It's going to fuel those who call for preferential federal funding only for non-embryonic stem cell research and it will certainly complicate any efforts to expand funding for embryonic stem cell research at the federal level."
(last updated 12:05 pm EST)
Earlier on blog.bioethics.net:
+ Cells that look and act like human embryonic stem cells created from skin cells
+ Are we in the middle of a shift in stem cell research?
contribute a comment
Your contributions to the conversation are very much appreciated. We do have a few simple guidelines, though. Be civil. Stay on topic. We reserve the right to remove comments that violate the aforementioned guidelines. One more thing: comments are moderated, so it may take a little while for your comment to be posted. Thanks.
comments
The media reports and commentators like to focussed on those who are over-reacting and over-speculating the most, I think.
- by emily on Nov 20, 2007 at 11:34 AM | link
Great summary! Thanks for this.
- by Mr. Gunn on Nov 20, 2007 at 1:53 PM | link
Somewhat surprisingly, I thought the MSNBC coverage was the best.
- by Mr. Gunn on Nov 20, 2007 at 7:36 PM | link
MSNBC and Alan Boyle should get points for putting the fact that this research is a long way from becoming a therapy up high in their story. It's in the third paragraph, just about the highest I've seen in all the coverage today.
- by Greg on Nov 20, 2007 at 7:58 PM | link
It is not too early to wonder about the ethical concerns Yamanaka raises surrounding deriving sperm and eggs from stem cells.
Unless they can create gametes that are genetically indistinguishable from the gametes that the person would have if he or she was healthy, then we shouldn't allow them to be used in the creation of a new person.
We should not allow people to implant an embryo (or better, create an embryo) that is not the union of an egg of a woman and a sperm of a man, as is the law in Missouri. That law should be a federal law.
Same-sex conception should not be allowed, and nor should genetic enhancement or modification. We need to preserve natural conception.
- by John Howard on Nov 26, 2007 at 1:54 PM | link