“If men could reproduce themselves, they would.”—Bella Abzug, Women’s Foreign Policy Council Directory inner circle meeting, New York, 1987
If the transcript of the recent National Academies of Sciences meeting titled: “In Vitro Derived Human Gametes as a Reproductive Technology” is any reflection of the state of the art of said reproductive technology, FDA lawyers should indeed have “trepidations.”
To see what nightmares lie ahead with In Vitro Gametogenesis—including Bella Abzug’s vision of men reproducing themselves—I recommend slogging through some of the vimeos of the NAS meeting linked here, featuring: (1) several cutting-edge Japanese scientists, (2) lawyers for the FDA, (3) an openly gay, non-scientist who heads a company pushing human primordial stem cell sex conversion (claims company will have”1st proof of concept egg” in one to two years), as well as (4) dozens of other IVG “experts.”
Yes “reconstitution of male germline development” has been demonstrated in mice resulting in pups that grew into fertile adults. But mice and humans don’t share enough DNA to convince that the experiment is advisable in humans.
As one NAS presentation revealed—early on in embryogenesis the difference between humans and mice is dramatically apparent, with humans forming a bilaminar disc and mice an egg cylinder.
And it’s, of course, NOT genotype to phenotype. As other NAS presenters argued: Timing is a critical issue. Scientists don’t understand signaling in oogonia to oocyte. Don’t understand what’s going on in the testis. Etc.
Nevertheless, the following milestones were cited, accompanied by obnoxious remarks that we’re well on the way to human application. (One speaker compared IVG to development of the cell phone.)
Neither is the way forward relying on closer-to-human-DNA monkey models.
WHY DO IT AT ALL? Why make a skin cell to human-like “biological product”? Aren’t there enough damaged humans walking around? What self-interest politics is behind IVG?
One official at the NAS-IVG meeting representing the Center for Biologics Evaluation Research at FDA—an agency that is supposed to protect public health and ensure safety of biological products—told the audience he wants IVG to move forward and thinks it’ll just be “one or two [US] presidential cycles” before the technology is realized!
It is delusional for the scientific/corporate/political establishment to think there is intergenerational public consensus for development of human-like biological products. Hopefully, the Supreme Court is watching . . .
OSCILLATIONS 
I would not know how to even begin to stop this very nutty and values-threatening research. And as Suzan says, “Aren’t there enough damaged humans walking around?” This research is proof. Who knows where this will lead, if it is allowed to continue.
LikeLike