A child is born when the male reproductive cell called sperm fertilises an egg, the female reproductive cell. It results in the formation of a zygote that attaches to the lining of the uterus and grows into a baby.
What if somebody told you that in future a child could be born even if the sperm or egg isn’t available, by reprogramming other cells, such as the embryonic stem cells or skin cells, in the laboratory?
According to a recent report by UK’s fertility watchdog Human Fertilisation and Embryo Authority (HFEA), some scientists believe this could be possible in two to three years, while others think more like 10 years. “To date, reproductive in-vitro gametogenesis (IVGs) – the process of creating lab-made eggs and sperm – has been achieved only in mice, but not in non-human primates,” HFEA report says.
IVGs, the report adds, have the potential to vastly increase the availability of sperm and eggs for research and, if proved safe, effective and publicly acceptable, to provide new fertility treatment options for men with low sperm counts and women with low ovarian reserve.
Peter Thompson, chief executive of the HFEA, said research on IVGs is progressing quickly but it is not yet clear when they might be a viable option in treatment. “IVGs raise important questions and that is why the HFEA has recommended that they should be subject to statutory regulation in time, and that biologically dangerous use of IVGs in treatment should never be permitted,” he said.
Thompson added that currently, Human Fertilisation and Embryology (HFE) Act prohibits the clinical use of IVGs. Nonetheless, two countries, namely the Netherlands & Norway, have sought to legislate to cover the use of IVGs.
In a workshop held by US-based organisation National Academies Board on Health Sciences Policy (NABHSP) in April 2023, scientists argued that if ever available clinically, IVG could expand the use of prenatal selection.
Such a capacity raises concerns about the possibility of eugenic practices and potential implications for disability communities. Therefore, the scientists noted, future discussions on continued development and potential use of IVG ought to be grounded in a disability justice framework. They recommended that the patient community and the public need to be involved, engaged, and empowered from early stages of technological development.
Furthermore, conversations on identifying and prioritising which prospective parents might be selected to participate in any first-to-human trial of IVG would need to be conducted equitably and center the patient community, because people with many different diseases and conditions could benefit from or have concerns about its use, the NABHSP workshop suggests.