The Ethics of Stem Cell-Based Embryo-Like Structures

Author:

Pereira Daoud A. M.ORCID,Dondorp W. J.ORCID,Bredenoord A. L.ORCID,de Wert G. M. W. R.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractIn order to study early human development while avoiding the burdens associated with human embryo research, scientists are redirecting their efforts towards so-called human embryo-like structures (hELS). hELS are created from clusters of human pluripotent stem cells and seem capable of mimicking early human development with increasing accuracy. Notwithstanding, hELS research finds itself at the intersection of historically controversial fields, and the expectation that it might be received as similarly sensitive is prompting proactive law reform in many jurisdictions, including the Netherlands. However, studies on the public perception of hELS research remain scarce. To help guide policymakers and fill this gap in the literature, we conducted an explorative qualitative study aimed at mapping the range of perspectives in the Netherlands on the creation and research use of hELS. This article reports on a subset of our findings, namely those pertaining to (the degrees of and requirements for) confidence in research with hELS and its regulation. Despite commonly found disparities in confidence on emerging biotechnologies, we also found wide consensus regarding the requirements for having (more) confidence in hELS research. We conclude by reflecting on how these findings could be relevant to researchers and (Dutch) policymakers when interpreted within the context of their limitations.

Funder

ZonMw

Research School for Oncology and Developmental Biology

Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference79 articles.

1. Aach, J., J. Lunshof, E. Iyer, and G.M. Church. 2017. Addressing the ethical issues raised by synthetic human entities with embryo-like features. eLife 6: e20674.

2. Akin, H., K.M. Rose, D.A. Scheufele, et al. 2017. Mapping the landscape of public attitudes on synthetic biology. BioScience 67(3): 290–300.

3. Althaus, C.E. 2005. A disciplinary perspective on the epistemological status of risk. Risk Analysis 25(3): 567–588.

4. Ancillotti, M., V. Rerimassie, S.B. Seitz, and W. Steurer. 2016. An update of public perceptions of synthetic biology: Still undecided? Nanoethics 10(3): 309–325.

5. Ankeny, R.A., and S. Dodds. 2008 Hearing community voices: Public engagement in Australian human embryo research policy, 2005–2007. Critical Studies of Contemporary Biosciences 27(3): 217–232.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3