The big bioethics/research story today is the possibility of extracting stem cells from embryos without destroying the embryos.

The new technique would be performed on a two-day-old embryo, after the fertilized egg has divided into eight cells, known as blastomeres. In fertility clinics, where the embryo is available outside the woman in the normal course of in vitro fertilization, one of these blastomeres can be removed for diagnostic tests, like for Down syndrome.

The embryo, now with seven cells, can be implanted in the woman if no defect is found. Many such embryos have grown into apparently healthy babies over the 10 years or so the diagnostic tests have been used.

Up to now, human embryonic stem cells have been derived at a later stage of development, when the embryo consists of about 150 cells. Both this stage, called the blastocyst, and the earlier eight-cell stage, occur before the embryo implants in the wall of the womb. Harvesting the blastocyst-stage cells kills the embryo, a principal objection of those who oppose the research.

“There is no rational reason left to oppose this research,” Dr. Robert Lanza, vice president of Advanced Cell Technology and leader of the research team, said in an interview.

Wesley Smith has doubts:

Alright, I have read the Nature article and the breathless stories in the media about how the embryonic stem cell debate is over because ES cell lines can be obtained without destroying embryos. I have three preliminary words in response: Ba Low Nee. What is being reported in the MSM and what is actually written up in Nature appear to be not the same thing at all.

He’s looking into it.

Kansas City Catholic pokes some holes in the story as well.

More from Beliefnet and our partners
Close Ad