Public attitudes in Japan toward the creation and use of gametes derived from human-induced pluripotent stem cells.
assisted reproductive technologies
concerns
degree of acceptance
ethics
expectations
human-induced pluripotent stem cells
in vitro derived-gametes
in vitro gametogenesis
public survey
Journal
Future science OA
ISSN: 2056-5623
Titre abrégé: Future Sci OA
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101665030
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2021
Dec 2021
Historique:
received:
12
05
2021
accepted:
30
09
2021
entrez:
29
11
2021
pubmed:
30
11
2021
medline:
30
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To ascertain to what extent the Japanese general public accept the creation and use of We conducted an online survey and obtained answers from 3096 respondents. 78.6% of the respondents answered that they would accept the creation and use of IVD-gametes for research purposes, 51.7% answered that they would accept the creation and use of embryos with IVD-gametes for research purposes, and 25.9% answered that they would accept childbirth using embryos with IVD-gametes. The results that approximately half of the respondents answered that they would accept the creation of embryos with IVD-gametes, which has not been allowed in the current Japanese research guidelines, is astonishing.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34840812
doi: 10.2144/fsoa-2021-0066
pmc: PMC8610011
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
FSO755Informations de copyright
© 2021 Misao Fujita.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Financial & competing interests disclosure This study was funded by the JSPS KAKENHI Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) (grant no.: 17K13843), the JSPS KAKENHI Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) (grant nos: 18K10000 and 21K10326), the Uehiro Foundation on Ethics and Education, and the World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI), MEXT, Japan. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed. No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.
Références
Theor Med Bioeth. 2004;25(3):199-208
pubmed: 15529806
J Med Ethics. 2014 Nov;40(11):759-61
pubmed: 25012847
Science. 2012 Nov 16;338(6109):971-5
pubmed: 23042295
Science. 2004 Sep 17;305(5691):1719
pubmed: 15375251
Regen Med. 2017 Apr;12(3):233-248
pubmed: 28332949
Bioethics. 2005 Apr;19(2):146-66
pubmed: 15943023
Science. 2018 Oct 19;362(6412):356-360
pubmed: 30237246
Monash Bioeth Rev. 2012 Sep;30(2):29-48
pubmed: 23409535
Cell Stem Cell. 2013 Aug 1;13(2):145-8
pubmed: 23910081
Sci Transl Med. 2017 Jan 11;9(372):
pubmed: 28077678
J Med Ethics. 2014 Nov;40(11):725-31
pubmed: 23557913
Cell Stem Cell. 2015 Aug 6;17(2):178-94
pubmed: 26189426
Cell. 2015 Jan 15;160(1-2):253-68
pubmed: 25543152
Trends Mol Med. 2017 Nov;23(11):985-988
pubmed: 29032005
Cell. 2011 Aug 19;146(4):519-32
pubmed: 21820164
J Med Ethics. 2005 Jun;31(6):366-70
pubmed: 15923489
EMBO Mol Med. 2017 Apr;9(4):396-398
pubmed: 28279974
Science. 2005 Jan 28;307(5709):515c-517c
pubmed: 15684020
Ann Biomed Eng. 2017 Jul;45(7):1620-1632
pubmed: 28091967
Cell Stem Cell. 2009 Jul 2;5(1):11-4
pubmed: 19570509
Stem Cell Rev Rep. 2016 Aug;12(4):377-84
pubmed: 27276914
Hum Reprod. 2016 Aug;31(8):1738-48
pubmed: 27130613