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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16102276)

  • 1. No country is an island: comment on the House of Commons report Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law.
    Dahl E
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2005 Jul; 11(1):10-1. PubMed ID: 16102276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Are we talking about the butterflies or a butterfly effect? Comment on 'No country is an island'.
    Kahraman S
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2005 Jul; 11(1):14-5. PubMed ID: 16102279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Response to 'No country is an island: comment on the House of Commons report Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law'.
    Bhargava PM
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2005 Jul; 11(1):12. PubMed ID: 16102277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Concerns of sex selection and regulation in the report on Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law.
    Bahadur G
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2005 Jul; 11(1):13-4. PubMed ID: 16102278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Further comment on the House of Commons' report Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law.
    Schulman JD
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2005 Aug; 11(2):158-60. PubMed ID: 16168208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Procreative liberty, or collective responsibility? Comment on the House of Commons report Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law, and on Dahl's response.
    Shenfield F
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2005 Aug; 11(2):155-7. PubMed ID: 16168207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Questioning the assumptions in the debate on assisted reproduction: comment on the House of Commons report Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law.
    Pennings G
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2005 Aug; 11(2):152-4. PubMed ID: 16168206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A feminist is a person who answers "yes" to the question, "are women human?": an argument against the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for gender selection.
    Downing KK
    DePaul J Health Care Law; 2005; 8(2):431-60. PubMed ID: 16538759
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Where have all the young girls gone? Preconception gender selection in India and the United States.
    Farrell K
    Indiana Int Comp Law Rev; 2002; 13(1):253-81. PubMed ID: 15233121
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The power to choose.
    Grayling AC
    New Sci; 2005 Apr 9-15; 186(2494):17. PubMed ID: 16007761
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. WHAT ROLE SHOULD PUBLIC OPINION PLAY IN ETHICO-LEGAL DECISION MAKING? THE EXAMPLE OF SELECTING SEX FOR NON-MEDICAL REASONS USING PREIMPLANTATION GENETIC DIAGNOSIS.
    Fovargue S; Bennett R
    Med Law Rev; 2016; 24(1):34-58. PubMed ID: 26811500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The presumption in favour of liberty: a comment on the HFEA's public consultation on sex selection.
    Dahl E
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2004 Mar; 8(3):266-7. PubMed ID: 15038888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Consultation on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act.
    Bull Med Ethics; 2005; (210):10-3. PubMed ID: 16471005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Community concerns about sex selection: research as a way forward - response to Edgar Dahl's 'The presumption in favour of liberty'.
    McMahon CA
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2004 Mar; 8(3):272-4. PubMed ID: 15038893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Human reproductive technologies and the law: a select committee report.
    House of Commons Science and Technology Committee
    Bull Med Ethics; 2005 May; (208):13-21. PubMed ID: 17115496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Gender variety as a valid choice: a comment on the HFEA - response to Edgar Dahl's 'The presumption in favour of liberty'.
    Robertson JA
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2004 Mar; 8(3):270-1. PubMed ID: 15038891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sexism, sex selection and 'family balancing'.
    Wilkinson S
    Med Law Rev; 2008; 16(3):369-89. PubMed ID: 18628347
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Beyond IVF: should parents be free to decide what is acceptable?
    New Sci; 2006 Oct 21-27; 192(2574):5. PubMed ID: 17165217
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Birds, bees and laser beams: the idea of parents choosing the sex of their children is no longer science fiction.
    Shakespeare T
    New Sci; 2002 Nov; 176(2369):23. PubMed ID: 12731519
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Gender choice: is it playing God?
    O'Keefe M
    Christ Century; 2004 May; 121(9):12-3. PubMed ID: 15543673
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.