I found this article after last week's class discussion where Dr. E mentioned that there are stem cells in the ovaries that can develop into eggs. I have always heard that women have a set number of eggs, and no more can be made after birth. This research possibly disproves this long believed theory. It's been known for awhile now that sperm can be produced using stem cellls, but not eggs. A group of Japanese scientists have created eggs using stem cells, fertilized them, and produced mouse pups with no father involved. This research could potentially lead to the treatment of infertility in women. However, it may be a long time before this procedure is used in humans because of the many ethical issues involved. Either way I thought this research was very interesting and remarkable. It has the potential to change the lives of many women who are unable to have their own children for various reasons. The actual research article can be found in the Science magazine and is titled "Offspring from Oocytes Derived from inVitro Primoridal Germ Cell-like Cells in Mice."
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/251219.php
That experiment was great! I can't believe what scientists are able to do. I can see the pros and cons to both sides of the argument. After reading the article, I read some of the posts from visitors on the page. They were brutal! Some backlash God, while others backlash science. I hate that with every new advancement comes a debate on ethics.
ReplyDeleteI understand, Nancy, but it is a good thing that people are taking at least a consideration of the ethics that this experiment entails, especially concerning humans in the future. But I agree--I don't like to the degree in which these bloggers argued underneath the article; those who were brutal--their behavior was immature and ludicrous. That is what I hate about debates on ethical issues: the extreme and rude.
ReplyDeleteAnyways, this is really crazy that these scientists managed to produce mouse offspring without a father. Too strange. Honestly, concerning human beings, I would have to side with preservation for natural reproduction. Even in light of the infertile woman out there. A human being has so much more value and purpose; to me, producing a human being under such procedures seem to take away that integrity in the human race--more specifically for that produced person. Today, we still have issues with just the racial differences--how would we expect for the world to be accepting of that person? The world, including those who are like those immature bloggers, it would be likely they wouldn't accept that person.
Not to be such a downer in difference of opinion, but this is too strange to consider for humans. I guess it's just something from my heart that I sense something too wrong about this.