The End Of Men?

Researchers, specifically, sperm biologists, (who knew there was such a field?) claim that eliminating human males from the reproductive process is not their goal.  In fact, quite the opposite is the case.  In attempting to create viable human sperm outside the testicles from embryonic stem cells, they insist they’re trying to help infertile men produce children who are genetically their own.  However, without letting one’s imagination run too wild, it’s possible to envision a new Amazonian master race capable of reproduction without the assistance of men.  Especially if some intrepid scientist were to resume research into developing sperm from XX chromosomes, previous attempts at which were unsuccessful, and prevail.  Of course, attempting such a thing would be unethical, probably immoral, and currently illegal.

However, British scientists are claiming success at creating quasi-sperm from stem cells in spite of the current restrictions in place:

A team of British scientists claimed Wednesday to have created human sperm using embryonic stem cells, in a medical first that they say will lead to a better understanding of fertility.

Researchers led by Professor Karim Nayernia at Newcastle University and the NorthEast England Stem Cell Institute (NESCI) developed a new technique that allows the creation of human sperm in the laboratory.

They stressed that the sperm, developed from stem cells with XY chromosomes (male), would not be used for fertility treatment, as this is prohibited by law and in any case is not their main interest.

“This is an important development as it will allow researchers to study in detail how sperm forms and lead to a better understanding of infertility in men — why it happens and what is causing it,” said Nayernia.

“This understanding could help us develop new ways to help couples suffering infertility so they can have a child which is genetically their own.”

Nyernia’s team did try to develop XX chromosome in-vitro derived (IVD) sperm, lest you think the Amazonian master race thing is just a figment of my fevered imagination:

The scientists tried to develop cells with XX chromosomes (female) in the same way but they did not progress beyond early stage sperm, called spermatagonia. The team concluded that the genes on a Y chromosome are essential for sperm maturation.

Not all scientists are on board this particular love train, however.  Some are skeptical that what Nayernia has created can even be called “sperm:”

“As a sperm biologist of 20 years’ experience, I am unconvinced from the data presented in this paper that the cells produced by Professor Nayernia’s group from embryonic stem cells can be accurately called ’spermatozoa’,” said Dr Allen Pacey, senior lecturer in andrology at the University of Sheffield.

“While the cells produced may possess some of the distinctive genetic features and molecular markers seen in sperm, fully differentiated human spermatozoa have specific cellular morphology, behaviour and function that are not described here.”

Others are more concerned with the ethical implications:

This research also raises ethical issues. Josephine Quintavalle from Comment on Reproductive Ethics (Corethics) said: “This is an example of immoral madness. Perfectly viable human embryos have been destroyed in order to create sperm over which there will be huge questions of their healthiness and viability.

“It’s taking one life in order to perhaps create another. I’m very much in favour of curing infertility but I don’t think you can do whatever you like.”

Funny, but for some reason, the appropriately named, Gene Wilder (genes…gone wild…get it?  Never mind) yelling, “Give my creature…life!” in Young Frankenstein keeps coming to mind.  Are we talking shades of Mary Shelley and golems, here?  Whether you agree with Dr. Quintavalle or not, there’s something a tad unsettling about the whole idea of creating life out of body parts, no matter how infinitesimally small.  And, while I’m not suggesting Frankensteins, (though early experiments with lab-made sperm and mice have produced less than viable offspring) I find it interesting that the Jewish word for the kind of “creature” upon which Shelley’s fictional work was based, has an “embryonic” component to its definition, according to Wikipedia:

The word golem is used in the Bible to refer to an embryonic or incomplete substance: Psalm 139:16 uses the word גלמי, meaning my unshaped form. The Mishnah uses the term for an uncultivated person (“Seven characteristics are in an uncultivated person, and seven in a learned one”, Pirkei Avot 5:6 in the hebrew text, varies in english translations). Similarly, golems are often used today in metaphor either as brainless lunks or as entities serving man under controlled conditions but hostile to him in others. Similarly, it is a Yiddish slang insult for someone who is clumsy or slow.

Time.com also explores the ethical implications, and describes exactly what these lab-created “sperm” are, and are not:

Nayernia’s in vitro–derived sperm, or IVD sperm, are not exactly like naturally occurring sperm, though they do bear four important similarities to the cells created in the testes. They contain half the number of chromosomes of other human cells (somatic cells contain 46 chromosomes, but egg and sperm cells have only 23, since they combine their genetic payloads during fertilization); they possess a head and a tail; they contain proteins essential for activating the egg during fertilization; and they swim, or move as sperm do in seeking out eggs to fertilize.

On the outside, however, IVD sperm are not identical to normal sperm. “We think, for normal structure development, sperm needs the testes environment,” says Nayernia. It takes 15 to 16 years in the testes before the primordial germ cells that morph into spermatogonia, or a primitive precursor of the germ cells, are able to mature into sperm cells that can successfully fertilize an egg.

So, while the research looks promising in assisting scientists in their quest to assist infertile men to become “natural” parents, the questions about the possible misuse of potentially runaway technology will continue to provide obstacles, as well as necessary checks and balances.  As things stand now, new regulations allow only embryonic stem cells destined to be discarded to be used for experimentation in this country, and similar restrictions exist under British law.  However there is some evidence that the most exciting advancement in the technology lies in the use of adult stem cells, some cloned from skin:

But what will not be allowed is therapeutic cloning, which is a “controversial practice in which scientists obtain stem cells by cloning a human embryo. But scientists now think they may be able to one day use skin cells — not embryonic stem cells — to create cloned human tissue or even a complete human organ.

So, if science progresses to the point that they can make sperm from a woman’s skin…uh-oh.  They might wanna apply the brakes there.  Already we have cases where women are having each other’s biological babies, so to speak, as in the case of Food Network chef, Cat Cora and her missus, Jennifer, parents of four:

All four kids were conceived using the same sperm donor, with Jennifer carrying Cat’s biological child and vice versa.

Can a future Amazonian She-Ra colony be far behind?  Will women, gay and straight, ever be tempted to forgo the whole courtship/marriage ritual, procreate as, and with whom they please, using men only as available sex objects when the Goddess spirits thusly move them so?   Probably not.  But the mere fact that such a thing can be envisioned might behoove the “sperm biologists” to be careful what they wish, and work, for.

Tee hee.

*UPDATE: Now they’re making stem cells from blood samples, too.  What will they think of next, huh?