Final Report of The National Academies' Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Advisory Committee

... and 2010 Amendments to The National Academies' Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research:

In 2005, the National Academies released the book, Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research, which offered a common set of ethical standards for a field that, due to the absence of comprehensive federal funding, was lacking national standards for research. In order to keep the Guidelines up to date, given the rapid pace of scientific and policy developments in the field of stem cell research, the Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Advisory Committee was established in 2006 with support from The Ellison Medical Foundation, The Greenwall Foundation, and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

As it did in 2007 and 2008, the Committee identified issues that warranted revision, and this book addresses those issues in a third and final set of amendments. Specifically, this book sets out an updated version of the National Academies' Guidelines, one that takes into account the new, expanded role of the NIH in overseeing hES cell research. It also identifies those avenues of continuing National Academies' involvement deemed most valuable by the research community and other significant stakeholders.

Nineteen bucks at the NAS book store (click here) or free in PDF form (click same place and follow the links)

More like this

A month after the Obama Administration lifted Bush era restrictions on federal funding for human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research, the NIH has now announced its
The Washington Post's Jane Black gives us a heads-up about the forthcoming update to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
Now, there is another element in the controversy.  What happens if a corporation essentially buys an undue degree of influence in the formulation of treatment guidelines? Treatment guidelines have always promoted controversy in medical
On a lower post, Jen Shroder seems to think that I've blocked her from commenting. She's wrong.