New England Journal Editorial: Good Luck Dodging Stem Cell Science with the Hurlbut Trick

I've already been awfully critical of William Hurlbut's idea that the stem cell debate can be obviated by an artful dodge in embryo creation. I noted too that just a few days after Hurlbut's idea was celebrated by the superconservative religious scholars whom he had bless his idea, they turned on him. Today the circle is truly complete, as scientists put to rest the idea that Hurlbut has figured out what counts as an embryo: New England Journal of Medicine has today published an editorial entitled "Altered Nuclear Transfer in Stem-Cell Research * A Flawed Proposal" by Melton, Daley and Jennings, that reads in part:

Hurlbut's argument for the ethical superiority of altered nuclear transfer rests on a flawed scientific assumption. He argues, on the basis of supposed insights from systems biology, that it is acceptable to destroy a CDX2 mutant embryo but not a normal embryo, because the former has "no inherent principle of unity, no coherent drive in the direction of the mature human form." But these are ill-defined concepts with no clear biologic meaning, and an alternative interpretation would be that embryos lacking CDX2 develop normally until CDX2 function is required, at which point they die. Philosophers may debate these and other interpretations. We see no basis for concluding that the action of CDX2 (or indeed any other gene) represents a transition point at which a human embryo acquires moral status.

-GM