ULCA is the latest research center to successfully create induced pluripotent stem cells. From the story:

Researchers at UCLA have become the first in the state to successfully create skin cells that can be used to treat a number of fatal or debilitating conditions without the use of human embryos or eggs. The work, which has broad political and ethical implications, appears today in the academic journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The findings confirm earlier research by Wisconsin and Japanese scientists reported last fall.

The manufacture of these cells provides a potential coup for opponents of embryonic stem cell research, which involves destroying cells that some equate to destroying human life and raises ethical issues associated with regeneration of cells through human cloning. The laboratory cells created at UCLA “were virtually indistinguishable from human embryonic stem cells,” said Kathrin Plath, an assistant professor of biological chemistry at UCLA and lead author of the study. “We’re very excited about the implications of this.”

The reporter gets too much wrong in this story. For example, it isn’t the destruction of the cells that is a problem, but of the embryos. But let’s give her a break: It’s a college newspaper.

Supporters of human cloning are quick to point out that IPSCs can’t be used in human therapies because they cause tumors. Yet, that is the very problem that has kept embryonic stem cells from being used in humans–and we were told then that this would not be a serious impediment in the long term.

As to the difficulty of creating these cells, alluded to in the story, that is being worked on too. There will be a study published later in this week involving mice and rats–currently embargoed–that will indicate continued advances in this technology. You would think “the scientists” would be happy. But as the story mentioned, many seem truculent. Gee, I wonder why.

The plans for women to give birth to their half siblings have, however, been criticised by some ethicists who fear that it could cause the daughters psychological problems, while the resulting children could be confused about their relationship to their mother and grandmother. (Times Online)

Donating a kidney is an act of compassion. Selling one might be a choice. `But once you add poverty and real inequality to the mix, suddenly choice and autonomy starts to look a lot murkier’ (TheStar)

Fertility drugs used by thousands of women to boost their chances of having a baby could double the risk of cancer.

The 23,000 women who take clomiphene every year have twice the chance of developing thyroid cancer, a study suggests. (Daily Mail)

Georgia law leaves the final decision on discontinuing treatment for brain-dead patients to doctors, not family members.

DeKalb Medical Center tried to have the case dismissed, but the Georgia Court of Appeals said no, noting that for “incompetent adult patients” who may have some brain function remaining, the decision to terminate life support rests with the family. (Atlanta Journal-Constitution)

A person wanting to know his or her complete genetic blueprint can already have it done — for $350,000.

But whether a personal genome readout becomes affordable to the rest of us could depend on efforts like the one taking place secretly in a nondescript Silicon Valley industrial park. There, Pacific Biosciences has been developing a DNA sequencing machine that within a few years might be able to unravel an individual’s entire genome in minutes, for less than $1,000. The company plans to make its first public presentation about the technology on Saturday. (New York Times)