Stem Cell Reviews and Reports

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 640–646 | Cite as

Peering from the Shadows: Stem Cell Research and the Quest for Regulation in Argentina

  • Shawn H. E. HarmonEmail author


The pursuit of scientific knowledge is not amoral. It is not neutral. So science has long been contentious and disruptive. While the nature and range of socio-moral questions that are raised by scientific pursuits are diverse and context-specific, its destabilising effects increase when it fails to serve the political interests of entrenched powers [1, 2]. In such cases, science has been muzzled, discredited, or simply outlawed. Consider the Catholic Church’s reaction to Galileo, [3] or the varied responses by a range of organisations, including government, universities and industry, to environmental science [4]. One might also take notice of the suppression of, and assault on embryonic stem cell research, which has some reproductive medicine applications, by the religious and political right. While this antagonism is particularly visible in the US, [5] it is not exclusive to the US, and can be seen in various states around the world, including Italy and Germany [6].



Regenerative Medicine Stem Cell Research Assisted Reproduction Science Culture Embryonic Stem Cell Research 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This project was funded by the generous support of the Economic and Social Research Council, Responsive Grant No. RES-000-22-2678. The author also acknowledges the support of SCRIPT, the AHRC Centre for Research in Intellectual Property and Technology Law, and Innogen, ESRC Centre for Social and Economic Research on Innovation in Genomics. The author would like to thank Prof. Graeme Laurie and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier drafts.


The author declares no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Jasanoff, S. (1987). Contested boundaries in policy relevant science. Social Studies of Science, 17(2), 195–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Michaels, D., & Monforton, C. (2005). Manufacturing uncertainty: contested science and the protection of the public’s health and environment. American Journal of Public Health, 95(S1), S39–S48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Langford, J. (2003). Galileo, science and the church (3rd ed.). Ann Arbor: Ann Arbor Paperbacks.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kuehn, R. (2004). Suppression of environmental science. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 30, 333–369.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Degette, D. (2008). Sex, science and stem cells: Inside the right wing assault on reason. Connecticut: The Lyons Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pigliucci, M. (2005). Science and fundamentalism. EMBO Reports, 6, 1106–1109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Governing Emerging Technologies: Social Values and Stem Cell Regulation in Argentina, ESRC Grant No. RES-000-22-2678. See
  8. 8.
    Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovative Production. See,, and
  9. 9.
    Harmon, S. (2010). Regulation of stem cell and regenerative science: stakeholder opinions, plurality, and actor space in the Argentine social/science setting. Law, Innovation & Technology, 2, 95–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Friedman, J. (1992). The past in the future: history and the politics of identity. American Anthropologist, 94, 837–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rock, D. (1995). Authoritarian Argentina. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kreimer, P. (1996). Science and politics in Latin America: the old and the new context in Argentina. Science, Technology & Society, 1, 267–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stekolschik, G., Draghi, C., Adaszko, D., & Gallardo, S. (2010). Does the public communication of science influence scientific vocation? Results of a national survey. Public Understanding of Science, 19(5), 625–637.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harmon, S. (2011). Ambition and ambivalence: encouraging a ‘Sci-Tech’ culture in Argentina through engagement and regulatory reform. Studies in Ethics, Law & Technology, 5(1), 1–26.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mignone, E. (1988). Witness to the truth: The complicity of church and dictatorship in Argentina, 1976-1983. New York: Orbis Books.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ivereigh, A. (1995). Catholicism and politics in Argentina, 1810-1960. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Barrancos, D. (2006). Problematic modernity: gender, sexuality, and reproduction in twentieth-century Argentina. Journal of Women’s History, 18(2), 123–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Luna, F., & Salles, A. (2010). On moral incoherence and hidden battles: stem cell research in Argentina. Developing World Bioethics, 10(3), 120–128.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Macklin, R., & Luna, F. (1996). Bioethics in Argentina: a country report. Bioethics, 10, 140–153.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Acero, L. (2006). Gender and the new reproductive technologies in Latin America. Development, 49, 135–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Miller, J. (2004). Public understanding of attitudes toward scientific research: what we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science, 13, 273–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bauer, M., Allum, S., & Miller, S. (2007). What can we learn from 25 years of PUS survey research? Liberating and expanding the agenda. Public Understanding of Science, 16, 79–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bickerstaff, K., et al. (2010). Locating science citizenship: the institutional contexts and cultures of public engagement. Science, Technology & Human Values, 35, 474–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Blofield, M. (2006). The politics of moral sin: Abortion and divorce in Spain, Chile and Argentina. NY: Routeledge.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vaggione, J. (2011). Sexual rights and religion: same-sex marriages and lawmakers’ catholic identity in Argentina. U of Miami Law Review, 65, 935.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Figueiredo-Cowen, M., & Gvirtz, S. (2009). The church and the state in Argentina and Brazil: Knowledge, religion and pedagogy. In R. Cowen & A. Kazamias (Eds.), International handbook of comparative education (pp. 837–855). Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gogna, M., et al. (2002). Abortion in a restrictive legal context: the views of obstetrician-gynaecologists in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Reproductive Health Matters, 10, 128–137.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fleishman, R. (2000). The battle against reproductive rights: the impact of the catholic church on abortion law in both international and domestic arenas. Emory International Law Review, 14, 277–314.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of EdinburghEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations