33. ETHICS COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE. Human somatic cell nuclear transfer (cloning). Fertil Steril 2000 Nov, 74(5):873-6. Online at: http://www.asrm.com/Media/Ethics/cloning.pdf

34. NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATURES. 2001 Legislative activity: Human cloning. Online at:

35. GREENE A. The world after Dolly: International regulation of human cloning. George Washington J of Internat Law and Econ 2001, 33 341.

36. Council of Europe protocol banning human cloning enters into force. Council of Europe Press Service. 2001 Mar 1. Online at: http://press.coe.int/cp/2001/139a(2001).htm

37. WEBSTER P, HOOPER J. France and Germany seek UN ban on cloning of humans. The Guardian. 2001 Aug 10. Online at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,534794,00.html

38. BARINAGA M. Asilomar revisited: lessons for today? Science 2000 Mar 03, 287(5458): 1584-5.

39. BERG P. Reflections on Asilomar 2 at Asilomar 3. Twenty-five years later. Perspect Biol Med 2001 Spring, 44(2):183-5.

40. CAPRON AM, SCHAPIRO R. Remember Asilomar? Reexamining science’s ethical and social responsibility. Perspect Biol Med 2001 Spring, 44(2):162-9.

41. COULTER J. Asilomar revisited. Science 2000 Mar 31, 287(5462):2421-2.

42. FREDRICKSON DS. The first twenty-five years after Asilomar. Perspect Biol Med 2001 Spring, 44(2):170-82.

43. KABACK MM. The “Asilomar process” and the Human Genome Project. Perspect Biol Med 2001 Spring, 44(2):230-4.

44. SINGER M. What did the Asilomar exercise accomplish, what did it leave undone? Perspect Biol Med 2001 Spring, 44(2):186-91.

45. ROBERTSON JA. Wrongful life, federalism, and procreative liberty: A critique of the NBAC cloning report. Jurimetrics 1997 Fall, 38(1):69-82.

46. FIDDLER M, PERGAMENT D, PERGAMENT E. The role of the preimplantation geneticist in human cloning. Prenat Diagn 1999 Dec, 19(13):1200-4.

47. SKINNER V. STATE OF OKLAHOMA EX. REL. WILLIAMSON, 316 U.S. 535. “Skinner v. Oklahoma”. United States Supreme Court. 1942 Jun 1. Online at: http://www.fedworld.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?waisdocid=3155313761+0+0+0&waisaction=retrieve and http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=316&invol=535.

48. ROSE A. Reproductive Misconceptions: Why cloning is not just another reproductive technology. Duke Law Journal 48 1133.

49. ROBERTSON JA. Liberty, identity, and human cloning. Texas Law Rev 1998 May, 76(6):1371-1456.

50. The Nuremberg Code. Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law. US Government Printing Office. pp.181-182. 1949. Online at: http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/nuremberg.php3

51. World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki: Recommendations Guiding Medical Doctora in Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects. Fifth Revision. 2000. http://www.wma.net/e/policy/17-ce.html

52. ANNAS GJ, The Changing Landscape of Human Experimentation: Nuremberg, Helsinki, and Beyond, Health Matrix J. Law Med. 1992; 2:119-140.

53. SHUSTER E, Fifty Years Later: The Significance of the Nuremberg Code, New Eng. J. Med., 1997; 337:1436-1440.

54. National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Ethical and Policy Issues in Research Involving Human Paricipants. 2001. http://bioethics.gov/human/overvol1.html

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement