Don’t abandon 14-day limit on embryo research, it makes sense



Don’t abandon 14-day limit on embryo research, it makes sense

As supporters of human-embryo research, we are troubled by the recommendations from the International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) to allow some in vitro studies of human embryo-like entities beyond the 14-day limit (see and Nature 593, 479; 2021).

There are 4 compelling reasons for the 14-day limit. Its clarity leaves little room for misinterpretation. It corresponds to important biological events, including the beginning of ectoderm/neural progenitors. In marking the end of the possibilities of twinning or chimaerism, it is the start of a unique biological identity. There is no later relevant nexus of events.

The guidelines recommend instead case-by-case approval for integrated embryos that are based on stem cells. This would permit research up to the “minimum time necessary” for scientific questions deemed “highly meritorious” through a “rigorous review process”.

We caution that these utilitarian objectives are limitless. Furthermore, the questions deemed “highly meritorious” can be addressed using in vivo murine or non-human primate models.

The ISSCR must offer more-compelling arguments for abandoning the 14-day limit.

Nature 594, 333 (2021)

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Nature Briefing

An essential round-up of science news, opinion and analysis, delivered to your inbox every weekday.

Articles You May Like

Weather key issue for Starliner launch
Pinterest lost users in the second quarter, and the stock is plunging
There could be a new explanation of underground ‘lakes’ on Mars, but it’s not water
Inmarsat unveils multi-orbit Orchestra constellation
Are electric cars ‘green’? The answer is yes, but it’s complicated

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *