How and Why to Replace the 14-Day Rule.

IF 2.3 Q4 CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING

Current Stem Cell Reports Pub Date : 2018-01-01 Epub Date: 2018-07-16 DOI:10.1007/s40778-018-0135-7

Sarah Chan

引用次数: 24

Abstract

Purpose of review: The '14-day rule', which limits research on human embryos to the first 14 days after fertilisation, has long been a pillar of regulation in this contested area. Recently, advances in developmental biology have led to calls to rethink the rule and its application. In this paper, I address the question of whether the 14-day rule should be replaced and, if so, how.

Recent findings: The two lines of research that have prompted this question are new techniques enabling culture of embryos at least up to 14 days and patterning experiments with pluripotent cells suggesting that they might form embryo-like structures. I consider each of these in relation to the foundations and function of the rule to examine whether they warrant change.

Summary: I argue that the 14-day rule for embryo research should be open to change, but that this possibility must be addressed through early and thorough discussion involving a wide range of publics and other stakeholders.

查看原文本刊更多论文

如何以及为什么要替换14天规则。

审查目的:“14天规则”，将人类胚胎的研究限制在受精后的头14天，长期以来一直是这一有争议领域的监管支柱。最近，发育生物学的进步促使人们重新思考这一规则及其应用。在本文中，我讨论了14天规则是否应该被取代，如果应该，如何取代的问题。最近的发现:引发这个问题的两项研究是一项新技术，可以培养至少14天的胚胎，另一项是多能细胞的模式实验，表明它们可能形成类似胚胎的结构。我考虑了每一个与规则的基础和功能的关系，以检查它们是否值得改变。总结:我认为胚胎研究的14天规则应该开放改变，但这种可能性必须通过早期和广泛的公众和其他利益相关者的彻底讨论来解决。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Current Stem Cell Reports Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Genetics

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The goal of this journal is to publish cutting-edge reviews on subjects pertinent to all aspects of stem cell research, therapy, ethics, commercialization, and policy. We aim to provide incisive, insightful, and balanced contributions from leading experts in each relevant domain that will be of immediate interest to a wide readership of clinicians, basic scientists, and translational investigators. We accomplish this aim by appointing major authorities to serve as Section Editors in key subject areas across the discipline. Section Editors select topics to be reviewed by leading experts who emphasize recent developments and highlight important papers published over the past year on their topics, in a crisp and readable format. We also provide commentaries from well-known figures in the field, and an Editorial Board of internationally diverse members suggests topics of special interest to their country/region and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research.