UK Parliament / Open data

Embryology

Written question asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench) on Monday, 23 March 2009, in the House of Lords. It was answered by Lord Darzi of Denham (Labour) on Monday, 23 March 2009.

Question

To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord Darzi of Denham on 29 October 2008 (WA 167–68), what non-reproductive applications would benefit from nuclear transfer that have not been superseded by the use of induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells.

Answer

The Government believe that the question of whether one technique in stem cell research has superseded another is, at this stage, entirely premature. Advances over the past decade in embryonic stem cell research have fed into advances in induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells. Therefore, it is impossible to predict what the relative contributions of nuclear transfer and PS cell technology might ultimately be to medical needs. That is why the Government continue to support all forms of stem cell research.

Type
Written question
Reference
2052; 709 c92WA
Session
2008-09
Embryology
Monday, 20 April 2009
Written questions
House of Lords
Embryology
Monday, 15 June 2009
Written questions
House of Lords
Embryology
Wednesday, 7 April 2010
Written questions
House of Lords
Embryology
Wednesday, 1 April 2009
Written questions
House of Lords

Show all related items (7)
Embryology
Wednesday, 1 April 2009
Written questions
House of Lords
Embryology
Wednesday, 1 April 2009
Written questions
House of Lords
Embryology
Wednesday, 29 October 2008
Written questions
House of Lords
Back to top