These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

196 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11644484)

  • 1. Mr. Enoch Powell's bill.
    Deitch R
    Lancet; 1985 May; 1(8438):1170. PubMed ID: 11644484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Warnock recommendations: Mr. Powell and his fellow opponents renew their campaign.
    Deitch R
    Lancet; 1985 Jul; 2(8447):166-7. PubMed ID: 11644449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Embryo research: British Commons vote for ban.
    Clarke M
    Nature; 1985 Feb; 313(6004):618. PubMed ID: 11658513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Mr. Powell's bill on the creation and use of human embryos.
    Lancet; 1985 Feb; 1(8424):357. PubMed ID: 11644478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Brave new world.
    Lancet; 1985 Mar; 1(8427):535. PubMed ID: 11644445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. UK embryo research: government stops Powell bill.
    Clarke M
    Nature; 1985 Apr; 314(6012):573. PubMed ID: 11658568
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Pressure for a select committee on human embryo research and genetic engineering.
    McKie D
    Lancet; 1985 Nov; 2(8462):1021-2. PubMed ID: 11644451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An appeal to embryologists.
    Nature; 1985 Mar 7-13; 314(6006):11. PubMed ID: 3974713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. French influence on Britain.
    Walgate R
    Nature; 1985 Feb; 313(6004):618. PubMed ID: 11658514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Powell bites dust: the British government needs to think hard about surrogacy.
    Nature; 1985 Apr; 314(6012):568. PubMed ID: 11658566
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Unborn children (protection) bill.
    Evans HJ; McLaren A
    Nature; 1985 Mar 14-20; 314(6007):127-8. PubMed ID: 3974717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Embryo research. Chances of legislation fade.
    Clarke M
    Nature; 1985 Nov 21-27; 318(6043):197. PubMed ID: 4069194
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Parliament gives overwhelming approval to embryo research.
    Coghlan A
    New Sci; 1990 Apr; 126(1714):29. PubMed ID: 11655969
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 -- a British case history for legislation on bioethical issues.
    Bolton V; Osborn J; Servante D
    J Int Bioethique; 1992 Jun; 3(2):95-101. PubMed ID: 11651386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Warnock versus Powell (and Harradine): when does potentiality count?
    Lockwood M
    Bioethics; 1988 Jul; 2(3):187-213. PubMed ID: 11659014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. House of Commons votes for ban on embryo research.
    Med World News; 1985 Apr; 26(7):30. PubMed ID: 11649605
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Embryonic arguments.
    New Sci; 1985 Feb; 105(1443):2. PubMed ID: 11655664
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Embryos untouched.
    Nature; 1985 Feb 21-27; 313(6004):612. PubMed ID: 3974693
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The start of a long debate on the Warnock report.
    Deitch R
    Lancet; 1984 Jul; 2(8396):238. PubMed ID: 11644288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Science and family in the great embryo debate.
    Mulkay M
    Sociology; 1994 Aug; 28(3):699-715. PubMed ID: 11658100
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.