如何以及为何要取代14天规则。
How and Why to Replace the 14-Day Rule.
作者信息
Chan Sarah
机构信息
1Usher Institute for Population Health Sciences and Informatics, Old Medical School, Teviot Place, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG UK.
2Centre for Biomedicine, Self and Society, University of Edinburgh, 23 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9LN UK.
出版信息
Curr Stem Cell Rep. 2018;4(3):228-234. doi: 10.1007/s40778-018-0135-7. Epub 2018 Jul 16.
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.
综述目的
“14天规则”将人类胚胎研究限制在受精后的头14天内，长期以来一直是这一争议领域监管的支柱。最近，发育生物学的进展引发了对重新思考该规则及其应用的呼声。在本文中，我探讨了是否应取代“14天规则”以及如果要取代应如何取代的问题。
最新发现
引发这个问题的两条研究路线是，新技术使胚胎至少能培养到14天，以及用多能细胞进行的模式实验表明它们可能形成类胚胎结构。我结合该规则的基础和功能对每一项进行考量，以审视它们是否需要改变。
总结
我认为胚胎研究的“14天规则”应该开放变革，但这种可能性必须通过广泛的公众和其他利益相关者参与的早期深入讨论来解决。
Zotero 插件