*OK, let me be the first to say: This is some scary stuff. All of that aside though, scientist say they have found a way for women to have babies — wait! — for babies to be created without men.
According to them, a particular “cocktail of chemicals” acting as artificial sperm can “trick a human egg into forming an embryo.”
Reports say medical ethics campaigners are beyond themselves; saying this new development turns nature of its head.
But researchers look at it differently. They say the groundbreaking technology could be used to help women whose husbands are infertile but who do not want to use donor sperm.
If you think that sounds a bit peculiar, listen to this.
Scientists say that any and all babies born using this process will not only be female, but also “identical to their mother.”
Researchers from the Institute for Reproductive Medicine and Genetics in Los Angeles actually stumbled upon the shocking discovery while investigating new ways of genetically modifying embryos to grow into brain nerve cells. This would make it possible for patients with Parkinson’s Disease to receive transplants.
This news, as you can only imagine, has been met with mixed feelings.
Dr. Jacqueline Laing, an expert in medical ethics from London’s Guild Hall University, said last night: ‘This is alarming. Just because scientists can do something, it does not mean that they should.
Dr. Michael Soules, president of the ASRM, said: ‘If this works with human eggs, there could be tremendous opportunities for clinical applications. I think everyone is going to find this work to be very exciting.’
Dr. Laing continues…
‘This process does not respect human life, in seeking either to procreate without the male or to use human eggs to turn them into some other part of the body for transplants.
‘It doesn’t respect reproduction and ordinary relations between men and women and the natural functions we have to protect human beings from arbitary creation. What are we expecting that any children born of this process will feel? If we go down this avenue, what else will be permissible?’
She raises a good point, that no one can deny. Scientists are doing their job: pushing the limits to make new discoveries. This is true. But at what cost is the question? Especially when it comes to the natural order of things.
Should there be a limit to what is permissible?
This news source was Daily Mail.
