Sentences with phrase «destruction of a human embryo»

The fundamental impediment to our acceptance of embryonic stem cell research has to do with destruction of the human embryo.

For that matter, even when perfected, this method will always involve the destruction of a human embryo, the one whose nucleus is removed.

ANT - OAR accomplishes this same goal, however, by using an approach that does not involve the generation and destruction of human embryos.

It is in this sense» and only this sense» that the stem - cell wars are over: The central cause of battle, the destruction of human embryos, is no longer necessary or even most useful.

Thus, ESC research necessarily depends upon the destruction of a human embryo.»

The field has been dogged by political and religious opponents, who object to the destruction of human embryos during the harvest of cells.

Dickey - Wicker prohibits the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which encompasses NIH, from funding the destruction of human embryos or funding research in which embryos are destroyed.

In August, federally funded work on stem cells was temporarily suspended after a judge ruled that work on hESCs violates a legal amendment in 1995 forbidding funding of any experiments that involve destruction of human embryos.

Faith and the embryo Biochemist Paul Berg suggests in April's Discover Dialogue [«Bio Brain Backs Stem Cells»] that only religious faith makes the judgment that the destruction of a human embryo destroys a human individual.

In the past few years, scientists have proposed several alternatives to deriving human ES cells that would not require destruction of a human embryo (Science, 24 December 2004, p. 2174).

In vetoing the measure, Bush said it would be «a grave mistake» for «American taxpayers [to] be compelled to support the deliberate destruction of human embryos.»

The court also ruled that if «the subject matter of the patent application requires the prior destruction of human embryos or their use as base material,» the application is not patentable.

Five days earlier, 70 House members led by abortion opponent Jay Dickey (R - AR) had written an equally harsh letter to Shalala, complaining that HHS is misreading a recent law that bans U.S. funding of research that involves the destruction of human embryos.

But the process means that US scientists - already stymied by years of government funding freezes linked to controversy over the destruction of human embryos - often find themselves blocked because other universities or private companies have already secured exclusive rights.

That may well be a defensible position, but if so, it challenges the principle that the inevitable destruction of human embryos should be avoided at all costs, no matter what the potential benefits.

The process transforms the adult cells into pluripotent stem cells, which seem to share the key characteristics of embryonic stem cells but do not require the creation, use, or destruction of a human embryo.

But not even this fourth will mark the death knell for this deadly science: while the ruling temporarily halts the federal funding of embryo - destructive stem - cell research, it does nothing to prevent the destruction of human embryos in privately funded research.

At first blush, these words, known as the Dickey - Wicker Amendment, might appear to prohibit government funding of ESC research altogether, because ESC research necessarily involves the destruction of human embryos.

He could have left the funding of research involving cell lines created by the destruction of human embryos in place, and led the charge to promote ethically unproblematic non-embryo-destructive forms of stem cell science.

«Nothing in this bill allows the destruction of a human embryo destined for life,» said Rep. Phyllis Kahn, DFL - Minneapolis, the chief House author.

The administration also restricted the use of embryonic stem cells in scientific research, maintaining that they were derived from the destruction of human embryos.

Not exact matches

The research needed to make the embryo develop to term will require trial and error, with the resulting destruction of countless embryonic human lives.

But the report acknowledges that human embryology does not of itself give the moral answers: «For example, a recognition of biological continuity might in some measure undermine the argument that embryo destruction is permissible when certain biological markers or states of development are absent.

«There are perfectly ethical ways of obtaining stem cells to cure disease, which do not involve embryo destruction, so no matter what moral value one places on the human embryo, we do not need to use it.»

«Advancements in science and research have moved faster than the debates among politicians in Washington, D.C., and breakthroughs announced in recent years confirm the full potential of stem cell research can be realized without the destruction of living human embryos,» House Minority Leader John Boehner, R - Ohio, said Sunday.

Former Senator Rick Santorum (R — PA) is a strong backer of adult stem - cell research, and opposed to embryonic stem - cell research because he views destruction of embryos as destruction of human life.

Many observers who are otherwise opposed to human embryo research have argued, however, that despite the likely ultimate destruction of excess embryos after IVF, the desire of a couple to have a child is such a strong moral good that it justifies the procedure.

But his pick holds conflicted views about the human embryo and will oversee a department that, under new rules, is outsourcing the destruction of human life.

In 2007, scientists demonstrated that they could transform human skin cells into iPS cells, bypassing the destruction of embryos.

Some pro-lifers thought that even this policy fell short of full respect for human life, but Bush was attempting to make the best of a bad situation: for embryos that had already been destroyed, funds would be made available for research that tried to salvage some value out of their destruction.

By Young Chung, Irina Klimanskaya, Sandy Becker, Tong Li, Marc Maserati, Shi - Jiang Lu, Tamara Zdravkovic, Dusko Ilic, Olga Genbacev, Susan Fisher, Ana Krtolica, and Robert Lanza To date, the derivation of all human embryonic stem cell (hESC) lines has involved destruction of embryos.

Removing the stem cells requires the destruction of the embryo, which some people liken to destruction of a human being.

The process of obtaining embryonic stem cells results in the destruction of an early - stage human embryo.

Thomas Hungar, of the Washington law firm Gibson, Dunn, argued for the plaintiffs that «it is undisputed in this case that human embryonic stem cell research always entails the destruction of embryos.»