I should have mentioned that the single cell was to be used to develop stem cells.

I can see that it might be possible.....but would you want the embryo?

An egg IS one cell....not sure what you mean.
Linda C

The egg has started it's division. This would be before it began dividing into specific organ systems, i.e. nervous system, digestive system, etc.
Zygote would have been a better term than just calling it a developing egg....'cuse please!

I'd be totally worried, 'course, I worry about walking down stairs when I'm pregnant ;). Schizophrenia and heart disease (fellow in my lab is working on this one) may be linked to cells that didn't "rise" correctly. My first pregnancy problem was that the cells didn't divide correctly, or over divided, they think. So much is unknown about pregnancy processes, I sure as HECK wouldn't touch the cells, or, for that matter, one hair on my baby's head, until proof was found!

Here is a link that might be useful: Schizophrenia article

First thing that came to mind was "it's not nice to fool Mother Nature".

Second thought was "could you eat a genetically altered egg?"

Not sure what the correlation is between the two thoughts, I suppose I just prefer things in my life to be "organic".

Maryanne

It's tough enough to carry a baby for 9 months and worry about whether or not it will be okay.
Too much stress for me, so I wouldn't do it.

I saw this on the news tonight.

I think they have already been doing this
and I have met a few of those people.
Unfortunely the cell they removed
turned out to be the brain.

Pooh Bear

Yeah Pooh, that would be my problem. If the child turned out not too bright or with a lot of health or mental problems, I don't think I would even be able to overlook the fact that it might be the fault of the embryo.

I womder if any woman, that was given the choice, would accept one of these embryos instead of one that had not been used.

So, while it might not be the same as destoying "life," I think the end result would be the same. That "human" would probably never develop beyond the test tube stage.

If it does no damage to remove one....why not remove several while you're in there? Maybe remove ALL except one.

I heard this on the news tonight & I think many people have the same worries you do Agnes. The report I heard said something about having to research this for a long time before it became a viable option. If it proves to be a safe way to get stem cells, it would be wonderful.

This procedure is already being used diagnostically and is called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, something different than stem cell research.

When a person knows they have/may be carriers of certain diseases caused by a defective gene, and are having IVF they can have this done on each embryo and those non-affected ones can then be used for implantation. The product of conception is then implanted, one cell short and the defective prospective embryos disgarded. So, for people like this who have an increased probability of conceiving an affected child ........I'm sure they consider the one cell short implantation a much better risk than proceding with a "natural" pregnancy and playing the odds.

Would I have this done? I dunno because it's difficult to put oneself in the shoes of somebody who is facing those circumstances. If I wanted a guarantee that I would not pass along an hereditary disease to a child, I might. I'd also have to be wealthy. These options are prolly not available to the average person, I suspect.

Youre right you really cant say no I wont do it because you dont know what the future holds...I know Im 51 I need a kidney..If not spend rest of life on dialysis or die????I really dont want either of those, so now what?????