Article Text
Abstract
The Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Clinical Translation, recently issued by the International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR), include a number of substantive revisions. Significant changes include: (1) the bifurcation of ‘Category 3 Prohibited research activities’ in the 2016 Guidelines into ‘Category 3A Research activities currently not permitted’ and ‘Category 3B Prohibited research activities’ in the 2021 guidelines and (2) the move of heritable human genome editing research out of the ‘prohibited’ category and into the ‘currently not permitted’ category. These changes are noteworthy because of the absence of a clear demarcation line between the two categories insofar as, by definition, that which is ‘prohibited’ is ‘currently not permitted’, and vice versa. Permanence is not part of the definition of ‘prohibition’. In principle, a prohibition can be rescinded at any time. This begs the question ‘Why make a policy change that has no apparent practical effect?’ One hypothesis is that the recategorisation of specific ‘prohibited’ research activities as ‘currently not permitted’ is meant to seed intuitions about which prohibited research activities should ‘soon’ be permitted subject to specialised scientific and ethics review and approval.
- ethics- research
- embryo research
- genetic engineering
- policy
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Future of global regulation of human genome editing: a South African perspective on the WHO Draft Governance Framework on Human Genome Editing
- Moral reasons to edit the human genome: picking up from the Nuffield report
- Too early to allow pregnancies with genome edited embryos, says commission
- Research guidelines for embryoids
- The moral argument for heritable genome editing requires an inappropriately deterministic view of genetics
- The stem cell debate continues: the buying and selling of eggs for research
- Genome editing, Goldilocks and polygenic risk scores
- Intergenerational monitoring in clinical trials of germline gene editing
- We need to talk about imperatives
- Researcher who edited babies’ genome retreats from view as criticism mounts