Artificial Sperm and Eggs?

Stanford Scientists Claim They've Made Discovery That Might Lead to Them One Day; It Involves Discarded Embryonic Stem Cells

(CBS)  Scientists at Stanford University claim they've found a way to make human embryonic stem cells turn into the types of cells that ultimately form sperm and eggs.
The study, which appears in the journal Nature, may shed light on human reproduction, development and infertility.

CBS News medical correspondent Dr. Jennifer Ashton explained how the scientists did it: "They took unused embryonic stem cells ... and then they put them in a lab, gave them some special cocktail of nutrients, proteins, some chemicals, and coaxed them into developing into early sperm and early eggs."

However, the sperm weren't perfect.

"They had little, short tails," Ashton said, "and the eggs were much earlier than those that could actually be fertilized. But they are hailing this as a major breakthrough because it was really the first time that stem cells were used to achieve this purpose."

"Early Show" co-anchor Maggie Rodriguez pointed out, there are ethical concerns with this possible fertility development. The stem cells, for instance, were used from embryos that were discarded and not used for fertility treatments.

Ashton added there are biological questions, as well, because this is the first time anything like this has been done.

"It will lend a lot more information, not only into the treatment of fertility problems, but also just overall human development," she said. "But of course, there are moral and ethical issues that are sure to be causing quite a commotion."

How could this actually play out for people seeking help with fertility?

"One-in-six couples suffers from infertility," Ashton said. "And while there are a lot of causes, ranging from infections like STDs, to problems with anatomy, a large percentage of couples are infertile because there are actual problems with either the sperm and/or the eggs. So potentially, this is a major therapeutic breakthrough -- with a lot of issues attached, of course."

As for putting this development into practice for patients, Ashton said it's going to take a while. "Just because something is done in a lab means, of course, it could be years, if not decades, until it could be brought to an actual patient," she said.

Rodriguez also mentioned possible quirks of the development, asking, "If you take the stem cells from a female embryo, you get an egg. If you take it from a male embryo and make a sperm, babies that come from those sperm and eggs will be the biological children of that embryo?"

Ashton said that's right, adding, "The big thing here is that, in order to create an egg right now, you need female DNA and with a sperm, you need male DNA," she said. "So, again, in the future, this is going to be very complicated, but there's the potential to develop an egg from a man's DNA. And that's what they're going to be looking at."

[Sloughfoot]

"....you pick your children from a long black tube..." Zager and Evans, In the year 2525

[dragon8me]

It could lead to the first artificially "created" being. Once DNA is figured out. My daughter tells me we need to prepare for the zombies, maybe she's right.
Seriously, any new technology can be used for good or ill, it just opens new areas that need to be looked at as far as ethics go. It's too bad so many people are afraid of science to even learn a little.

[cidaia]

I would not like to know I was made out of leftover aborted fetuses.

I believe that would not be pleasant self-knowledge to have.

But science doesn't care about such "irrational" things as how its experimental subjects feel, does it?

Why should we "trust" science when science has repeatedly indicated that it wants sole control over all the ethical questions of what life is and what it means and who deserves it and when and why?

And then science abuses that power.

The ethics of this situation WILL be resolved. There's no way to avoid the debate: if there is to be artificially created life, there WILL be a debate that will last until there is a resolution of ALL the fundamental issues.

It's just that some of us want to resolve the issues responsibly (that is, BEFORE experimenting on live people) while scientists, as has been true for the entire history of the scientific method, is willing to show an absolutely disregard for the lives, the interests, the feelings, of the people it needs to experiment on.

All scientists care about is their own Faustian glory. And, gee, now nobody trusts them. Can't imagine why.

You know, if science as an institution apologized for some of its past crimes, as the Church has had to apologize for its atrocities, that would be a start.

But science won't do that, because admitting that the desire to perform unethical experimentation is systemic and institutional - rather than a few rogue individuals - would mean they'd have to stop DOING it.

[casionova]

Artificial Sperm and Eggs?

It'll never replace bacon

[mkrafft1]

Sperm lite (a third less tail) and egg beaters, makes cholestoral free babies....