Sperm created from female stem cells

Well, they're right on schedule in Britian, where they have "coaxed" female stem cells to develop into sperm cells. In England, apparently there is a law against using gametes derived from stem cells, and that article says that "the UK parliament is now debating changes to the 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, and the government is under pressure to include an amendment that would allow the future use of eggs and sperm grown in the lab from stem cells. However, a clause added to this amendment would restrict this to sperm from genetic males and eggs from genetic females." The reason to do that is because converting it to the other gender's gamete requires genetic engineering to reverse the imprinting, and would not be restorative medicine that justifies attempting it.

In America, there is no such law, except in Missouri, where implanting such an embryo is illegal. It would be legal to try this today in Massachusetts and 48 other states.

It is now clear that the words "sperm" and "egg" are going to be used to refer cells that merely act and look like sperm and eggs, whether they come from a male or female won't matter. So, the "Hole In The Massachusetts Egg And Sperm Law" I wrote about last week is definitely there, and surely intentional. I will not bother to change the name of this blog, or of the Egg and Sperm Compromise, because I feel it still conveys the spirit of requiring a man and a woman's gametes. But now I will have to make clear that the "Egg and Sperm Law" is actually a "sperm of a man and egg of a woman law".


Anonymous said...

HHAHAHA!! RIGHT ON, RIGHT ON, RIGHT ON!!! GO BRITIAN!!!! Can't ya just feel the vise closing in Mr. Howard! LMFAOROFL! As usual, Great Britian leads the way. Only a matter of time now Mr. Howard. Gotta just luv EVOLUTION baby. GOTTA LOVE IT!! Musclehipster.

John Howard said...

They lead the way with making it illegal too, according to that article attempting to use those gametes would be illegal. Also, they have equal protections via Civil Partnerships there, too.

Anonymous said...

Okay, now that I've calmed down a bit here from my celebratory carousing(did I spell that right?)and can now think "ANAL"ytically once more, heh,heh,heh, I think it will be necessary to skirt the law when it comes to commencing this type of research. I must say that after reading that article(thanks goes out to YOU Mr. Howard for pointing out that particular article)I truly am somewhat amazed! I've always hypothesized that BOTH sperm and egg "cells" could be "coaxed" from the germ stem cells. Well now it appears that that is indeed the case. HOWEVER....I think that essentially all we're talking about here is basically still a FEMALE EGG CELL(which ultimately still only contains XX chromosomes)merely masquerading as a "sperm" cell. In other words...an EGG cell with a flagellar whip tail which kinda mimics a male sperm cell. Now, seeing as how only males can "naturally" produce only sperm cells, those sperm cells contain only "X" or "Y" chromosomes because, after all, it is us males which determine the gender(and possibly sexual orientation?)of the resulting child. Now if we can "coax" out the female egg cell configuration, basically then we would have a sperm cell masquerading as a "egg" cell. Essentially a convienant "delivery" system, if you will, for the precious genetic info stored inside! The same precious genetic info which powers EVOLUTION! The religious right wing loonies are gonna have just a wee bit of a difficult time in attempting to ban this type of procedure based on the worn out "anti" cloning angle. Without giving away to to much info here I personally believe that even YOUR argument Mr. Howard about outlawing the exchange of genetic material will eventually become mute. cuz..., after all isn't that what happens when "naturally" produced sperm and egg cells unite? I mean let's face it John, if yer gonna outlaw this procedure(how, I'm not quite sure)then you'll pretty much have to outlaw ALL fertility procedures on the grounds that it just simply isn't "natural". Ya know there are LOTS of procedures out there that aren't quite "natural". If yer THAT concerned about aborting a few little UNCONSCIENCIOUS gametes I really REALLY think your argument is going to be a little weak there bud. While yer at it ya may as well just resort back to the ol' "save the fetus" trip Mr. Howard and I'm pretty well sure that that's an old dead horse argument at this point in time. Musclehipster.

John said...

It looks like the UK is leading the way:

"Scientists believe they have made a potential breakthrough in the treatment of serious disease by creating a human embryo with three separate parents.

The Newcastle University team believe the technique could help to eradicate a whole class of hereditary diseases, including some forms of epilepsy.

The embryos have been created using DNA from a man and two women in lab tests.

It could ensure women with genetic defects do not pass the diseases on to their children."


Anonymous said...

Hmmm...one daddy and two mommies. I think these embryos are just for research Mr. Howard. LOL! And hey, if it does help to eliminate certain genetically inherited diseases, then I'm all for it! Once again Great Britian is proving that it is indeed one of the few remaining beacons of hope for western civilization! GOD SAVE THE QUEEN(S)!! LMAO!

Anonymous said...

Although I must add here that the thought of having a child with 3 seperate DNA traits DOES trouble me a bit. Maybe I'm just not fully understanding the procedure here. I need to do a bit more research into the procedure before offering a final opinion. MH.

Anonymous said...

Great Britian does it again!!This time with a possible CURE for type 1 diabetes!! What a fantastic tool science is huh Mr. Howard. We've actually CURED more folks with the use of science than with prancing around them with a flapping bible!! LOL! MH.