Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday June 30 2015, @03:02PM   Printer-friendly
from the but-think-of-the-children? dept.

The US House of Representatives is wading into the debate over whether human embryos should be modified to introduce heritable changes. Its fiscal year 2016 spending bill for the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would prohibit the agency from spending money to evaluate research or clinical applications for such products.

In an unusual twist, the bill—introduced on June 17—would also direct the FDA to create a committee that includes religious experts to review a forthcoming report from the US Institute of Medicine (IOM). The IOM's analysis, which considers the ethics of creating embryos that have three genetic parents, was commissioned by the FDA.

The House legislation comes during a time of intense debate on such matters, sparked by the announcement in April that researchers in China had edited the genomes of human embryos. The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) moved quickly to remind the public that a 1996 law prevents the federal government from funding work that destroys human embryos or creates them for research purposes.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/u-s-congress-moves-to-block-human-embryo-editing/

[Source]: http://www.nature.com/news/us-congress-moves-to-block-human-embryo-editing-1.17858

We covered a related story, Three-Person Babies Could Be Possible in Two Years just over a year ago.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by deathlyslow on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:21PM

    by deathlyslow (2818) <wmasmith@gmail.com> on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:21PM (#203415)

    If that last link was directed at me and I offended you sorry, I thought I was asking out of ignorance not malice. That's why I listed the things that I could see and asked for you/someone else to fill me in on those I couldn't. Damn it Jim, I'm an IT manager not a doctor... - it's a joke get it... I'm a doctor not a (insert profession here) kind of funny. :)

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by ikanreed on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:41PM

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:41PM (#203426) Journal

    I read your tone as harsher than it was. I think my point is still relevant to the larger discussion, but it didn't need to be so pointed in the conversation we were having.

    An apology is due. Sorry.

    • (Score: 1) by deathlyslow on Tuesday June 30 2015, @11:12PM

      by deathlyslow (2818) <wmasmith@gmail.com> on Tuesday June 30 2015, @11:12PM (#203557)

      No problem. There's no inflection on typed words. I appreciate the apology though. It never hurts to be civil to each other. I appreciate the link to. I always enjoy learning things. I'm actually an odd ball in that I have Ehlers-Danlos and can see some of the benefits of adjusting for if not outright removing it from the genepool. My poor sister has it much worse than I do in that it affects her heart as well as her connective tissue. Mine only really affects my skin and joints. I've already had both knees done twice both shoulders done once each and about ready to get them done again. I bruise easily as it is. I actually have low pressure glaucoma due to it and have minir optic nerve damage as well.