Advanced search
1 file | 114.60 KB

Complicity in stem cell research: the case of induced pluripotent stem cells

(2010) HUMAN REPRODUCTION. 25(9). p.2175-2180
Author
Organization
Abstract
Many who object to human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research because they believe it involves complicity in embryo destruction have welcomed induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) research as an ethical alternative. This opinion article aims to show that complicity arguments against hESC research are prima facie inconsistent with accepting iPSC research as it is currently done. Those who oppose hESC research on grounds of complicity should either (i) oppose iPSC research as well, (ii) advocate a radical change in the way iPSC research is done, (iii) demonstrate that complicity arguments against iPSC research are weaker than those against hESC research or (iv) reject complicity arguments against both hESC and iPSC research, either by adopting a more limited conception of complicity that allows acceptance of some hESC research, or by accepting that destroying embryos for important scientific research is not wrong.
Keywords
embryo research, moral status, complicity, induced pluripotent stem cells, embryonic stem cells

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 114.60 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Devolder, Katrien. 2010. “Complicity in Stem Cell Research: The Case of Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells.” Human Reproduction 25 (9): 2175–2180.
APA
Devolder, Katrien. (2010). Complicity in stem cell research: the case of induced pluripotent stem cells. HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 25(9), 2175–2180.
Vancouver
1.
Devolder K. Complicity in stem cell research: the case of induced pluripotent stem cells. HUMAN REPRODUCTION. 2010;25(9):2175–80.
MLA
Devolder, Katrien. “Complicity in Stem Cell Research: The Case of Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells.” HUMAN REPRODUCTION 25.9 (2010): 2175–2180. Print.
@article{1855977,
  abstract     = {Many who object to human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research because they believe it involves complicity in embryo destruction have welcomed induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) research as an ethical alternative. This opinion article aims to show that complicity arguments against hESC research are prima facie inconsistent with accepting iPSC research as it is currently done. Those who oppose hESC research on grounds of complicity should either (i) oppose iPSC research as well, (ii) advocate a radical change in the way iPSC research is done, (iii) demonstrate that complicity arguments against iPSC research are weaker than those against hESC research or (iv) reject complicity arguments against both hESC and iPSC research, either by adopting a more limited conception of complicity that allows acceptance of some hESC research, or by accepting that destroying embryos for important scientific research is not wrong.},
  author       = {Devolder, Katrien},
  issn         = {0268-1161},
  journal      = {HUMAN REPRODUCTION},
  keyword      = {embryo research,moral status,complicity,induced pluripotent stem cells,embryonic stem cells},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {9},
  pages        = {2175--2180},
  title        = {Complicity in stem cell research: the case of induced pluripotent stem cells},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deq176},
  volume       = {25},
  year         = {2010},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: