On January 11th, The Washington Post ran an article about a new method of harvesting stem cells from embryos. Researchers at Advanced Cell Technologies (ACT) in Massachusetts claimed that their technique of removing only one stem cell from an eight-celled embryo should qualify them for federal funds.
The technique used by researchers is the same used by infertility clinics when conducting genetic testing on embryos. An ACT spokesman argued that many embryos biopsied in clinics are then used to achieve full-term pregnancies and this is evidence that the technique used by the researchers follows federal policy of doing “no harm.” Studies have not been done on the survival rate of embryos biopsied by infertility clinics. However, one study that was cited was published in July– it showed that parents who have had embryos biopsied before implantation have a 30 percent lower chance of giving birth. One source noted that studies that have been done have had flaws.
In addition to using infertility clinic success rates as evidence that the technique does “no harm,” researchers allowed the surviving embryos to continue to grow for five days. Eighty-four percent survived.
The technique has drawbacks for researchers. Kathy Hudson, director of the Genetics and Public Policy Center at Johns Hopkins University commented to the Post, “Embryo biopsy is tricky and requires extraordinarily good hands and technical skills. And even in the best hands, embryos are sometimes lost.”
Surviving embryos were frozen following experiments.














1 user commented in " New Embryo Stem Cell Technique Does “No Harm”? "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackI don’t see the government going after pharmaceuticals for all of the deaths and harm caused by prescription drugs that have been under-studied, forced through the FDA approval process and are now being given to millions of people outside the perimeters of the original clinical trials. Why is that? Actual human beings who are currently living - not embryos without wombs or foreseeable wombs in the future - real, living humans are being harmed every day, dying all the time, or almost worse - having to live with the devastating and irreversible side effects from drugs. Why no Bush-ian uproar over this? Why do these people care more about embryos slated for destruction anyway than they do those who are already living? Why is it that those who make billions off single, harmful drugs have no accountability outside the pithy results of class action lawsuits for death and injury caused by their blatant greed?
Oh that’s right - I forgot. The living aren’t nearly as important as the “pre-born”. (That’s right - sarcasm).
Leave A Reply