Search

Letter to the Editor [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International discussion must guide research, urge Nicolas Rivron, Martin Pera and colleagues. International discussion must guide research, urge Nicolas Rivron, Martin Pera and colleagues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, authors discuss various aspects of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) research and research ethics regulations that resulted due to controversies associated with human embryonic stem cells. Potential policy challenges associated with iPSC work in different countries including Canada, Japan and Great Britain are discussed. A table highlighting several common themes in among iPSC research regulating policies, is also presented.

Few areas of recent research have received as much focus or generated as much excitement and debate as stem cell research. Hope for the therapeutic promise of this field has been matched by social concern associated largely with the sources of stem cells and their uses. This interplay between promise and controversy has contributed to the enormous variation that exists among the environments in which stem cell research is conducted throughout the world. This variation is layered upon intra-jurisdictional policies that are also often complex and in flux, resulting in what we term a 'patchwork of patchworks'. This patchwork of patchworks and its implications will become increasingly important as we enter this new era of stem cell research. The current progression towards translational and clinical research among international collaborators serves as a catalyst for identifying potential policy conflict and makes it imperative to address jurisdictional variability in stem cell research environments. The existing patchworks seen in contemporary stem cell research environments provide a valuable opportunity to consider how variations in regulations and policies across and within jurisdictions influence research efficiencies and directions. In one sense, the stem cell research context can be viewed as a living experiment occurring across the globe. The lessons to be gleaned from examining this field have great potential for broad-ranging general science policy application. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4015 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on the need to adopt measures to govern the generation of human embryos made for research by the U.S. as of may 2014. Topics discussed include production of domestic animals via embryo-cloning technique called somatic-cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), regulatory oversight for the reproductive cloning by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and declaration of creating embryos for research as criminal offense in Germany and Canada.

The article reports a study on human pluripotent stem cells with the use of somatic cells and oocytes wherein it explores fertilized embryos without ethical concerns.

The author argues that women who donate their eggs for stem-cell research should be compensated in the same way as other healthy research volunteers. It was stated that there is a strong and presumptive reason to compensate healthy women who provide oocytes for basic research. Stem-cell banks rely on ocyte donations to further embryonic stem-cell research.