I am still a little confused, because there are two issues here. First, is the tetraploid complement embryo actually human at the point at which the hon. Gentleman envisages it would be implanted, bearing in mind that the embryo itself does not include the animal-derived trophectoderm that forms the placenta, in which case the Minister is right and it would be covered? I see the Minister nodding. In any event, does the hon. Gentleman accept that in order for appropriate implantation, there would have to be a close species match? Would that not require a licence from the Animal Procedures Committee that it would be extremely unlikely to give? Is not the hon. Gentleman's amendment therefore unnecessary in both those cases?
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Evan Harris
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 22 October 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
481 c352-3 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:28:04 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_506424
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_506424
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_506424