backtop


Print 25 comment(s) - last by Nyu.. on Oct 20 at 2:47 PM


  (Source: newsone.com)
European scientists worry that their research will instead flourish overseas

Embryonic stem cells have shown that they could eventually be very useful in the treatment of a range of currently incurable diseases such as diabetes, stroke and heart disease. But such research may be threatened, or even halted, in Europe due to a recent court decision.

Embryonic stem cells have the ability to transform into any human body tissue. For instance, earlier this year, the first eye was grown from embryonic stem cells in mice. But to grow these tissues, stem cells must be removed from a human embryo at the blastocyst stage, which destroys the embryo, and this has raised ethical questions regarding the process.

Greenpeace in Germany triggered a lawsuit saying that it is unethical to issue a patent based on stem cells from a human embryo that is destroyed afterward.

The Court of Justice, Europe's highest court, ruled in favor of the group. The ruling focused on a technique involving the conversion of human ambryonic stem cells into nerve cells.

"The use of human embryos for therapeutic or diagnostic purposes which are applied to the human embryo and are useful to it is patentable," said the European Court of Justice. "But their use for purposes of scientific research is not patentable. A process which involves removal of a stem cell from a human embryo at the blastocyst stage, entailing the destruction of that embryo, cannot be patented."

The decision has many European researchers outraged. This ruling could either halt stem cell research in Europe or send it overseas.

"This unfortunate decision by the court leaves scientists in a ridiculous position," said Professor Austin Smith of the Wellcome Trust Centre for Stem Cell Research at the University of Cambridge. "We are funded to do research for the public good, yet prevented from taking our discoveries to the marketplace where they could be developed into new medicines. One consequence is that the benefits of our research will be reaped in America and Asia."

Source: BBC



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Researchs
By Strunf on 10/19/2011 11:50:35 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe I'm talking to a wall, but most researchers work in Universities and other public institutions, I wonder why should they be outraged by this... let's all be honest a bit the outraged people are the investors who seek profit at whatever cost, then again I always thought Monsanto and the like were like some kind of cartel ready to beat you up if you don't follow their rules!




RE: Researchs
By geddarkstorm on 10/19/2011 12:40:37 PM , Rating: 2
Indeed, their "outrage" is ridiculous. For a researcher, this ruling doesn't affect us. Not if we are doing science for the "public good", or for the sake of science and research -- you know, the common forces that drive us scientists and keep us honest. If we are only doing it so we can get rich fast, then and only then would this put a kink in ones plans.

The ruling is completely sound and reasonable, just like the one in the US stating that genes themselves could not be patented. The "outrage" by supposed "researchers/scientists" says more about their motives than anything else.


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki