It could be
this, related to
this.A summary of Grifo's work from
here.
====================================================================
Researchers in China Impregnate Infertile Woman Using Experimental Fertility Method Banned in U.S.
[Oct 14, 2003]
Researchers in China have impregnated an infertile woman using an experimental fertility method that has been banned by the FDA, according to a study scheduled to be presented on Tuesday at the American Society for Reproductive Medicine annual meeting in San Antonio, Texas, the Washington Post reports. Dr. Jamie Grifo of New York University School of Medicine, who had tried a similar technique in the United States in 1998, and researchers at Sun Yat-Sen University of Medical Science in Guangzhou, China, conducted the study using Grifo's theory that some women are unable to bear children because of problems with the cytoplasm surrounding the DNA in their eggs (Weiss, Washington Post, 10/14). The 30-year-old Chinese woman involved in the study had an "unusual" infertility problem in which embryos do not develop past two cells, according to the AP/Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel (Ritter, AP/Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel, 10/14). In order to create healthy embryos for the woman and her husband, the researchers used the husband's sperm to fertilize in vitro one of the woman's eggs and an egg of a fertile, young woman. Then, the nucleus of the younger woman's fertilized egg was removed, while the cytoplasm was retained. The two fertilized eggs were fused, allowing the nucleus of the older woman's egg to be nourished by the healthier cytoplasm of the younger woman's egg. As a result, the subsequent embryos contained DNA of the man and both women (Washington Post, 10/14). Researchers transferred five of the created embryos into the older woman, and she became pregnant with triplets.
No Infants Survive
After one month of pregnancy, doctors aborted one of the fetuses to improve the other fetuses' chances of survival, according to BBC News (BBC News, 10/14). However, one of the fetuses was delivered prematurely at 24 weeks after the amniotic sac ruptured, and the infant died of respiratory failure, according to the Post (Washington Post, 10/14). That delivery opened the woman's birth canal, leaving her susceptible to infection. The woman developed a so-called "silent" infection, with no "fever or other telltale signs" of illness, according to the Journal. As a result, the umbilical cord to the remaining fetus failed, and the infant was delivered stillborn at 29 weeks gestation (Regalado/Leggett, Wall Street Journal, 10/13). Grifo said that there was no evidence of genetic defects or "other problems from the technique" in the two infants that died, the New York Times reports. He said that the infants failed to survive because of premature labor and subsequent infection (Grady, New York Times, 10/14).
U.S., China Bans
In 1998, Grifo in the United States attempted a similar technique, in which he transplanted a woman's genes into the empty egg cells of a younger woman. Although pregnancy was never achieved, Grifo presented his research at the 1998 annual ASRM meeting. As a result, the FDA ruled that the procedure should be regulated in the same way as human cloning because both involve transferring DNA from one cell to another. The FDA "warned" Grifo not to attempt the procedure again without FDA approval, according to the Post (Washington Post, 10/14). Although China's "ligh[t] enforce[ment]" of fertility clinic regulations allowed the researchers to conduct the study there, China's Ministry of Health on Friday announced new "broad" restrictions specifically banning nuclear transfer methods in fertility procedures because of the potential for use in human cloning or "other genetic alterations," the Journal reports (Wall Street Journal, 10/13).
Reaction
Grifo said that it would be "irresponsible to confuse" the method employed in the Chinese experiment with human cloning, according to the Times. He added, "Cloning is making a copy of a human being who already exists. This is nuclear transfer, one element of cloning. It allows a couple to have their genetic baby, not a clone. They shouldn't even be discussed in the same sentence." Dr. Jeffrey Kahn, director of the University of Minnesota Center for Bioethics in Minneapolis, said, "My concern is that people see this as an end run around oversight and restrictions within the United States," adding, "What's next? A ship out in international waters?" (New York Times, 10/14). George Annas, a Boston University ethicist, said that he was concerned because the three fetuses in the experiment died, adding, "This is going to be a bombshell for all kinds of reasons. They have concluded from this it's going to work, but they should have concluded this was a disaster" (Wall Street Journal, 10/13). Sean Tipton, an ASRM spokesperson, said, "This is cutting-edge science on a technique which might help infertile women, particularly older women, have children. It points out the perils of prohibiting rather than funding and regulating fertility research" (Washington Post, 10/14).
====================================================================
Fascinating stuff.
