IVF 14-day rule: Scientists and ethicists reconsidering how many days an embryo can be studied outside the womb

Credit: Adobe
Credit: Adobe

As early as 1979, regulators responded to [in-vitro fertilization ethical] concerns by establishing the ‘14-day rule’. It soon became an internationally accepted regulation in reproductive medicine: a legal and ethical guideline that prohibited scientists from sustaining human embryos in the lab beyond 14 days. But now the voices calling for the rule to be extended are growing ever louder. In the past three years, scientists in diverse fields of medical science, ranging from fertility to cancer biology, are asking today’s regulators to reconsider whether the rule should be revised.

Although the 14-day rule doesn’t directly affect the process of IVF, which usually involves embryos being grown artificially for up to seven days after fertilisation, it does impact researchers’ ability to investigate the reasons why IVF can fail, which happens on average 70 per cent of the time.

Mis- and disinformation are distorting science and public policy. Subscribe to our Daily and Weekly Digests for incisive coverage of ‘disruptive’ innovations in AI, agricultural biotechnology, food, chemicals, nuclear energy, vaccines, and other disruptive innovations.

Reproductive experts argue that extending the 14-day rule to 28 days would provide a window for understanding how IVF can go wrong, and why some women are more prone to this misfortune than others. They also point out that extending the 14-day rule would allow for more research into how to put unused embryos from IVF clinics to use for the greater good, rather than seeing them destroyed as can happen now.

Read the original post

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot-2026-09-17-at-1.07.08-PM
'We are dangerously addicted to antidepressants': Should we heed RFK Jr.’s sobering warning?
Screenshot-2026-09-03-at-10.51.20-AM
Viewpoint: Why do online health lies outlive the evidence that debunks them? Read "Everyone Else Is Lying to You"
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-2-2026-02_03_32-PM
How much of a problem is AI’s water use?
Screenshot-2026-09-23-at-3.15.09-PM
Anti-GMO activists in Pakistan rev up their campaign of dire warnings
Screenshot-2026-09-22-at-11.40.28-AM
After Idaho criminalized abortion providers in 2022, one-third of obstetricians fled. Health care advocates are making rural health the case for repealing the ban
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-23-2026-01_52_03-PM
Viewpoint: 4 very real AI doomsday scenarios
Screenshot-2026-09-10-at-12.20.19-PM
'Jet fuel didn't melt the steel': 9/11 conspiracy theories debunked
Screenshot-2026-09-23-at-11.55.01-AM
How can we know if social media bans actually help teens?
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-26-2026-12_46_16-PM
Viewpoint: The fake controversy over whether combining childhood vaccines is dangerous— a debate science resolved 25 years ago
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.