Stem Cell Reviews and Reports

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 315–318 | Cite as

The Practical Consequences of a National Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry

  • Kenneth Taymor
  • Christopher Thomas ScottEmail author


The executive order and issuance of federal guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research are positive developments and will produce long-term benefits by creating a new registry for hESC lines. But there may be short-term costs caused by regulatory uncertainty, procedural delay, and knock-on effects as national policies are adopted at state and local jurisdictions. Policymakers must ensure that national mechanisms of oversight for a new hESC registry are adequately funded, properly organized, transparent, and free of bureaucratic detail.


Embryonic stem cells Embryonic stem cell lines Biomedical ethics Bioethics Policy NIH Guidelines for Embryonic Stem Cell Research Informed consent Barack Obama Executive order Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) National Stem Cell Bank Stem cell registry Embryonic stem cell research oversight (ESCRO) Institutional review board (IRB) 


  1. 1.
    Baylis, F., & Robert, J. S. (2006). Accountability in Research, 13, 207–224.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Daley, G. (2004). New England Journal of Medicine, 351(7), 627–628.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garnett, C. (2009). Final stem cell regulations issued. NIH Record Vol. LXI, (16). Found at
  4. 4.
    McCormick, J. B., Owen-Smith, J., & Scott, C. T. (2009). Who, where, and when: distribution of human embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell, 4, 107–110.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    National Institutes of Health. (2009a). Guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research. Washington. Available at
  6. 6.
    National Institutes of Health. (2009b). Notice Number: NOT-OD-09-123. Status of Applications and Awards under the New NIH Guidelines for Human Stem Cell Research. Available at
  7. 7.
    National Institutes of Health. (2009c). Meeting schedule found at:
  8. 8.
    Rao, M. S. (2006). Stem Cells, 24(6), 1412–1413.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scott, C. T., McCormick, J., & Owen-Smith, J. (2009). And then there were two: use of embryonic stem cells. Nature Biotechnology, 27(8), 697–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Streiffer, R. (2008). Informed consent and federal funding for stem cell research. Hastings Center Reports, 38, 40–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Travis, J. (2009). Lingering concerns remain about NIH stem cell rules. Science Insider. Available at
  12. 12.
    White House Executive Order. (2009). U.S. office of the press secretary. Removing barriers to responsible scientific research involving human stem cells. The White House. Available at
  13. 13.
    Zettler, P., Wolf, L. D., & Lo, B. (2007). Academic Medicine, 82, 6–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Berkeley Center for Law, Business and the EconomyUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.Program on Stem Cells in Society, Center for Biomedical EthicsStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations