A framework for the responsible reform of the 14-day rule in human embryo research

Destroy, Let Die, or Grow the Embryo Further? Puzzles Raised by the 14-Day Rule and Other Time Limits for Embryo Research

Supporting the 14-day rule or other embryo research time limits raises puzzling questions for those wishing to protect older embryos (or indeed, more developed human subjects). What are, or should be, our more immediate aims in setting or implementing such time limits? May death for the research subject be sought as the limit approaches? If the embryo is worth protecting, is it in the embryo's interests to be sustained by a scientist, albeit for instrumental reasons? Should embryo research, including observational research, be prevented, despite the embryo's interest in living further? This paper argues that the aim to prevent more prolonged experimentation, while reasonable, should not be promoted via the means of deliberately arranging the embryo's death. Time limits can encourage such intentions, even if they do not require them. The case is made that while a regulatory status quo should not be amended in favor of a worse alternative, there are several morally preferable options with which the 14-day rule or more permissive alternatives might be replaced.

Survey of Japanese researchers and the public regarding the culture of human embryos in vitro beyond 14 days

The International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) has eliminated its prohibition on research involving the culturing of human embryos beyond 14 days within the updated 2021 guidelines. We conducted a survey of Japanese researchers working in stem cell- or embryo-related research (n = 535) and the public (n = 3,000) about their attitudes toward the 14-day rule. Among the researchers, 46.2% agreed that embryos could be cultured beyond 14 days, a result that was slightly lower among the public (37.9%). Among those that disagreed with embryo culturing beyond 14 days, 9.5% of researchers and 5.1% of the public agreed with culturing embryos within 14 days. Among the public, higher comprehension levels correlated with both agreement and disagreement with the culture of embryos beyond 14 days compared with "cannot judge." Further research and pubic discourse are necessary in order to better understand the factors informing participant decisions regarding the 14-day rule.

Are we ready for the revision of the 14-day rule? Implications from Chinese legislations guiding human embryo and embryoid research

The ISSCR recently released new guidelines that relaxed the 14-day rule taking away the tough barrier, and this has rekindled relevant ethical controversies and posed a fresh set of challenges to each nation's legislations and policies directly or indirectly. To understand its broad implications and the variation and impact of China's relevant national policies, we reviewed and evaluated Chinese laws, administrative regulations, departmental rules, and normative documents on fundamental and preclinical research involving human embryos from 1985 to 2022 in this paper. We have historically examined whether these regulations, including a 14-day rule, had restrictions on human embryo research, and whether and how these policies affected human embryo and embryoid research in China. We also discussed and assessed the backdrop in which China has endeavored to handle such as the need for expanding debates among justice practice, academia, and the public, and the shifting external environment influenced by fast-developing science and technology and people's culture and religions. In general, Chinese society commonly opposes giving embryos or fetuses the legal status of humans, presumably due to the Chinese public not seeming to have any strong religious beliefs regarding the embryo. On this basis, they do not strongly oppose the potential expansion of the 14-day rule. After the guidelines to strengthen governance over ethics in science, and technology were released by the Chinese government in 2022, Chinese policymakers have incorporated bioethics into the national strategic goals using a "People-Centered" approach to develop and promote an ecological civilization. Specifically, China follows the "precautionary principle" based on ethical priority as it believes that if scientific research carries any potential technological and moral risks on which no social ethical consensus has been attained, there would be a need to impose oversight for prevention and precaution. At the same time, China has adopted a hybrid legislative model of legislation and ethical regulations with criminal, civil and administrative sanctions and a 14-day limit specified within its national hESCs guidelines. This would certainly be a useful example for other countries to use when considering the possibility of developing a comprehensive, credible and sustainable regulatory framework.

Progress in modern reproductive biology research in China

Reproductive biology is closely associated with human health and social progress. Modern reproductive biology research in China began in the 1930s. Advances in science, technology, government support and international collaborations spawned the rapid growth of reproductive biology research in China. While the development of reproductive biology has provided both theoretical knowledge and applicable technologies, it has also generated new social and ethical concerns. This review summarizes and highlights the contributions of modern reproductive biology research in China, with a specific focus on aspects that are most related to human reproduction and health.

Responsible governance of human germline genome editing in China

Considerable improvements have been made to gene editing technology, which has been increasingly applied to research involving humans. Nevertheless, human heritable germline genome editing is associated with a series of potential ethical, legal, and social risks, which have generated major controversies and discussions worldwide, especially after the “gene-edited babies” incident. Influenced by this incident, China has realized the importance of ethical governance in the field of life science and technology, has accelerated legislative and policy efforts in this field, and has gradually moved toward the direction of “precautionary” ethical governance. Black letter analysis, big data public opinion analysis, and other research methods are used in this paper. This paper explores the scientific background, ethical debates, and latest developments regarding China’s regulatory framework for human germline gene editing after the “gene-edited babies” controversy and provides several recommendations on the future governance system of human germline gene editing in China. This paper argues that in recent years, the ethics governance of germline genome editing in China has been accelerated and great changes have been made. However, the regulatory system for germline genome editing requires further improvement in three aspects: coordination of legislation and agencies, establishment of an ethics review system at high levels, and public participation and education.