Suppr超能文献

生物伦理学的14天限制:关于人类胚胎研究的辩论。

A 14-day limit for bioethics: the debate over human embryo research.

作者信息

Cavaliere Giulia

机构信息

Department of Global Health & Social Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.

出版信息

BMC Med Ethics. 2017 May 30;18(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s12910-017-0198-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This article explores the reasons in favour of revising and extending the current 14-day statutory limit to maintaining human embryos in culture. This limit is enshrined in law in over a dozen countries, including the United Kingdom. In two recently published studies (2016), scientists have shown that embryos can be sustained in vitro for about 13 days after fertilisation. Positive reactions to these results have gone hand in hand with calls for revising the 14-day rule, which only allows embryo research until the 14th day after fertilisation.

MAIN TEXT

The article explores the most prominent arguments in favour of and against the extension of the 14-day limit for conducting research on human embryos. It situates these arguments within the history of the 14-day limit. I start by discussing the history of the 14-day limit in the United Kingdom and the reasons behind the decision to opt for a compromise between competing moral views. I then analyse the arguments that those who are generally in favour of embryo research put forward in support of extending the 14-day rule, namely (a) the argument of the beneficence of research and (b) the argument of technical feasibility (further explained in the article). I then show how these two arguments played a role in the recent approval of two novel techniques for the replacement of faulty mitochondrial DNA in the United Kingdom. Despite the popularity and widespread use of these arguments, I argue that they are ultimately problematic and should not be straightforwardly accepted (i.e. accepted without further scrutiny). I end by making a case for respecting value pluralism in the context of embryo research, and I present two reasons in favour of respecting value pluralism: the argument of public trust and the argument of democracy.

CONCLUSION

I argue that 14-day limit for embryo research is not a valuable tool despite being a solution of compromise, but rather because of it. The importance of respecting value pluralism (and of respecting different views on embryo research) needs to be considered in any evaluation concerning a potential change to the 14-day rule.

摘要

背景

本文探讨了支持修订和延长当前人类胚胎体外培养14天法定时限的理由。包括英国在内的十几个国家都将这一时限写入了法律。在最近发表的两项研究(2016年)中,科学家表明,受精后胚胎能够在体外维持约13天。对这些结果的积极反应引发了修订14天规则的呼声,该规则仅允许在受精后第14天之前进行胚胎研究。

正文

本文探讨了支持和反对延长人类胚胎研究14天时限的最主要论点。并将这些论点置于14天时限的历史背景中。我首先讨论英国14天时限的历史以及在相互竞争的道德观点之间选择折衷方案的背后原因。然后,我分析了那些总体上支持胚胎研究的人提出的支持延长14天规则的论点,即(a)研究的有益性论点和(b)技术可行性论点(本文将进一步解释)。接着,我展示了这两个论点在英国最近批准的两种用于替换有缺陷线粒体DNA的新技术中所起的作用。尽管这些论点广受欢迎且被广泛使用,但我认为它们最终存在问题,不应被直接接受(即未经进一步审查就接受)。最后,我提出在胚胎研究背景下尊重价值多元主义的理由,并给出支持尊重价值多元主义的两个理由:公众信任论点和民主论点。

结论

我认为胚胎研究的14天时限并非一个有价值的工具,恰恰是因为它是一个折衷方案。在任何有关14天规则潜在变化的评估中,都需要考虑尊重价值多元主义(以及尊重对胚胎研究的不同观点)的重要性。

相似文献

1
A 14-day limit for bioethics: the debate over human embryo research.
BMC Med Ethics. 2017 May 30;18(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s12910-017-0198-5.
2
Embryo experimentation: is there a case for moving beyond the '14-day rule'.
Monash Bioeth Rev. 2020 Dec;38(2):181-196. doi: 10.1007/s40592-020-00117-x.
3
How to Rethink the Fourteen-Day Rule.
Hastings Cent Rep. 2017 May;47(3):5-6. doi: 10.1002/hast.698.
4
Uses of respect and uses of the human embryo.
Bioethics. 2007 Sep;21(7):370-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00565.x.
7
ETHICS, EMBRYOS, AND EVIDENCE: A LOOK BACK AT WARNOCK.
Med Law Rev. 2015 Fall;23(4):588-619. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwv028. Epub 2015 Aug 1.
8
Modelling human embryogenesis: embryo-like structures spark ethical and policy debate.
Hum Reprod Update. 2020 Nov 1;26(6):779-798. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmaa027.
9
The Baroness's Comittee and the President's Council: ambition and alienation in public bioethics.
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2005 Sep;15(3):251-67. doi: 10.1353/ken.2005.0022.

引用本文的文献

1
Artificial Uterus and Artificial Embryos: Unsolved Tasks.
Reprod Sci. 2025 Aug 27. doi: 10.1007/s43032-025-01939-y.
2
Stem Cell and Synthetic Embryo Models: Advances, Applications, and Ethical Considerations.
Stem Cell Rev Rep. 2025 May 20. doi: 10.1007/s12015-025-10890-z.
3
The proteomic landscape and temporal dynamics of mammalian gastruloid development.
bioRxiv. 2024 Sep 7:2024.09.05.609098. doi: 10.1101/2024.09.05.609098.
4
The beginning of becoming a human.
Aging (Albany NY). 2024 May 6;16(9):8378-8395. doi: 10.18632/aging.205824.
5
'Ceci n'est pas un embryon?' The ethics of human embryo model research.
Nat Methods. 2023 Dec;20(12):1863-1867. doi: 10.1038/s41592-023-02066-9.
6
Derivation of Human Extraembryonic Mesoderm-like Cells from Primitive Endoderm.
Int J Mol Sci. 2023 Jul 12;24(14):11366. doi: 10.3390/ijms241411366.
7
Grave-to-cradle: human embryonic lineage tracing from the postmortem body.
Exp Mol Med. 2023 Jan;55(1):13-21. doi: 10.1038/s12276-022-00912-y. Epub 2023 Jan 4.
8
Are we ready for the revision of the 14-day rule? Implications from Chinese legislations guiding human embryo and embryoid research.
Front Cell Dev Biol. 2022 Oct 24;10:1016988. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2022.1016988. eCollection 2022.
9
100 plus years of stem cell research-20 years of ISSCR.
Stem Cell Reports. 2022 Jun 14;17(6):1248-1267. doi: 10.1016/j.stemcr.2022.04.004.
10
Responsible governance of human germline genome editing in China†.
Biol Reprod. 2022 Jul 25;107(1):261-268. doi: 10.1093/biolre/ioac114.

本文引用的文献

1
Emerging ethical perspectives in the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats genome-editing debate.
Per Med. 2016 Nov;13(6):575-586. doi: 10.2217/pme-2016-0047. Epub 2016 Oct 28.
2
The Mitochondrial Replacement 'Therapy' Myth.
Bioethics. 2017 Jun;31(5):368-374. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12332. Epub 2016 Dec 30.
5
Illusory fears must not stifle chimaera research.
Nature. 2016 Sep 15;537(7620):281. doi: 10.1038/537281a.
6
Mitochondrial replacement techniques: egg donation, genealogy and eugenics.
Monash Bioeth Rev. 2016 Mar;34(1):37-51. doi: 10.1007/s40592-016-0059-x.
7
Embryology policy: Revisit the 14-day rule.
Nature. 2016 May 12;533(7602):169-71. doi: 10.1038/533169a.
8
Self-organization of the human embryo in the absence of maternal tissues.
Nat Cell Biol. 2016 Jun;18(6):700-708. doi: 10.1038/ncb3347. Epub 2016 May 4.
9
Self-organization of the in vitro attached human embryo.
Nature. 2016 May 12;533(7602):251-4. doi: 10.1038/nature17948. Epub 2016 May 4.
10
Ethical and legal issues in mitochondrial transfer.
EMBO Mol Med. 2016 Jun 1;8(6):589-91. doi: 10.15252/emmm.201606281. Print 2016 Jun.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验