Skip to main content

Special Feature: Participate in our stem cell cloning discussion

The deadline for contributing your comments on how to shape our next feature on stem cell research is fast approaching, we need to hear from you by May 1st

Brought to you byThe editors of The Scientist
| 3 min read

Register for free to listen to this article
Listen with Speechify
0:00
3:00
Deriving a stem cell line from a cloned human embryo still represents one of the most formidable scientific barriers in biology. Challenged with deep ethical questions, misled by high-profile research fraud, and obfuscated in the eyes of the public, it's fair to say that in the race to overcome this hurdle no one's close to being at the starting blocks. At a recent high-level meeting on reproduction, several experts in the stem cell field said it is time we rethought our approach to cloning. But for a challenge of this scale, success requires input from a broad section of the scientific community and the public at large. This is where you can help. In the June issue of The Scientist, we will be publishing a special feature that re-casts the scientific approach and public image for the process that has become known under several guises, including "stem cell cloning" "somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT)," "research cloning," or "therapeutic cloning." Taking a page from groundbreaking social media experiments like Wikipedia and OhMyNews, we want to hear your thoughts on the questions we pose below, any questions you have, and your ideas for what you think should appear in this feature. Post them as comments to this page or Email your thoughts to experiment@the-scientist.com. Also, take part in the opinion polls that we will be running on The Scientist Web site over the next few weeks. We'll be inviting leading experts in the field to provide their thoughts, and we'll be regularly updating this page with their answers. We especially welcome novel ideas from scientists outside of the fields generally associated with this kind of work. And for a topic of this weight and importance, feedback from the public is critical. Everyone is invited to share in sculpting the discussion. Here are three questions that we hope will get the conversation started. Please join in the discussions, offer your thoughts, and add questions of your own here. Is the nuclear transfer challenge one of understanding or technique? It would seem that the scientific community presumes successful stem cell cloning is a matter of resources and technical skill. Put enough technicians on a problem and eventually it will be overcome. This isn't the way we normally perceive scientific challenges and there seem to be too many gaps in our understanding to proceed this way. How might we approach the situation as a scientific, rather than a technical, challenge and who has ideas for new approaches? Click here and let us know your thoughts. Is it time to reevaluate the ethics of stem cell cloning? The ethical quandaries about reproductive cloning have evolved from discussions that took groups like the Raelians seriously. Nevertheless, the idea that cloning for reproductive purposes might at some point be possible warrants discussion, and the debate about the status of an embryo is not something to take lightly. Moreover, the rights of egg donors need to be considered. What are the most pressing ethical concerns about proceeding with a nuclear transfer research program and who has novel ideas on how to address them? Click here and let us know your thoughts. Does stem cell cloning need new terminology? The terminology for stem cell cloning has become so obtuse that it strains public understanding and may also obscure the best scientific approaches. The avoidance or attenuation of the word cloning has left us with names that describe a technique, not the study of a phenomena that includes such fascinating biological puzzles as nuclear programming, development, and pluripotency. Is there a better name for this type of research program? Click here and let us know your thoughts. We hope the questions above spark discussions and debate here, on other Web sites, and in labs and universities around the world. That's enough from us for now, over to you. By The editors of The Scientist mail@the-scientist.com
Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

The Scientist Logo
Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member?
Add The Scientist as a preferred source on Google

Add The Scientist as a preferred Google source to see more of our trusted coverage.

Related articles background image
The Scientist Digest cover September 2026
September 2026

Multiplex Microscopy Becomes Easier with Encoded Antibodies

A new system that enables researchers to uniquely tag monoclonal antibodies for use in microscopy could help simplify complex imaging studies.

View this Issue
Essential Genes Are Dominantly Activated by Single Transcription Factors

Essential Genes Are Dominantly Activated by Single Transcription Factors

EpiCypher Logo
Rethinking ALS Biomarkers: From Discovery to Clinical Impact

Rethinking ALS Biomarkers: From Discovery to Clinical Impact

Alamar Biosciences logo
Engineering CAR-Neutrophils In Vivo to Target Glioblastoma

Engineering CAR-Neutrophils In Vivo to Target Glioblastoma

Miltenyi
Best Practices for qPCR Assay Design and Optimization

Best Practices for qPCR Assay Design and Optimization

Bio-Rad

Products

Closeup image of a multi channel pipette dispensing pink liquid into a 96-well plate.

The ASSIST PLUS pipetting robot for affordable workflow automation

Integra Logo
Single cells in suspension

Rapidly isolate primary cells and make uniform single-cell suspensions with Corning® Cell Strainers

Corning logo
Abstract image representing cell membranes linked together.

CellBrite® Steady Membrane Stain: Cell surface staining built for real-time imaging

Biotium
sino biological logo

Monod Bio Licenses AI-designed Protein Technologies to SignalChem Biotech for Custom Discovery Assays