[MHGinTN]

Have there ever been parthenogenically conceived mammalian organisms born?... Yes. I happen to have gone to the trouble of researching this line of assertion by these scientists. They do not intend to implant the parthenogenic conceived embryos (and that's what these will be, embryos), so they see no ,oral conflict in doing the science. Then they further add that too often anomalous organisms are born from such a methodology. Ask yourself, would they use these embryos for treating humans, if there were anomalies? Wouldn't they work to eliminate the anomalies and in so doing bring these embryos conceived via parthenogenesis to a gestatable state? You can count on it!... but they still vow to not allow these so conceived embryos to grow to birth age.

[general_re]

Have there ever been parthenogenically conceived mammalian organisms born?... Yes. I happen to have gone to the trouble of researching this line of assertion by these scientists.

How many normal mammalian organisms been developed? A few rabbits, out of tens of thousands of attempts. Parthenote mice invariably die after implantation - zero successes there. How many parthenogenetically-created primates have turned out to be viable? Zero. Why? At the moment, it looks as though without the complement of male genes, a placenta can't form, even if you implant it.

These are organisms that are truly not viable, and since the only way to test it - by implanting a human parthenote and seeing what happens - looks to be completely unethical because of what the evidence so far indicates is the likely outcome, we're just going to have to settle for that indirect evidence from other higher species for now and for the foreseeable future. The odds are very much against these being viable human embryos, and to treat them as such is not something supported by the evidence.