In late September 2001, I was asked to serve on the President'sCouncil on Bioethics. My initial instinct was not to accept,because I was concerned that the Bush Administration would notbe interested in considering fully the potential of certaincontroversial advances in basic biomedical research. Indeed,the administration was already on record as opposing federalfunding for somatic-cell nuclear transplantation and therapeuticcloning. (Therapeutic cloning involves making early-stage preimplantationembryos for use as sources of stem cells, whereas reproductivecloning is the creation of cloned babies through the transferof cloned embryos into a woman's uterus.) Two factors, . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Source Information
This article was published at www.nejm.org on March 12, 2004.
From the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine.
This article has been cited by other articles:
Intemann, K. K., Inmaculada de Melo-Martin,
(2008). Regulating scientific research: should scientists be left alone?. FASEB J.
22: 654-658
[Abstract][Full Text]
Rest, K. M., Halpern, M. H.
(2007). Politics and the Erosion of Federal Scientific Capacity: Restoring Scientific Integrity to Public Health Science. Am. J. Public Health
97: 1939-1944
[Abstract][Full Text]
Lockwood, A. H.
(2004). Human Testing of Pesticides: Ethical and Scientific Considerations. Am. J. Public Health
94: 1908-1916
[Abstract][Full Text]
Huckins, D. S., Mareiniss, D. P., Meeks, D. W., Dresser, R., Blackburn, E. H.
(2004). Bioethics, Science, and Politics. NEJM
351: 298-300
[Full Text]
Wolf, S. M.
(2004). Law & Bioethics: From Values to Violence. J Law Med Ethics
32: 293-306
Steinbrook, R.
(2004). Science, Politics, and Federal Advisory Committees. NEJM
350: 1454-1460
[Full Text]
