Leading article: Mixed emotions at another milestone

The implications for the new form of cloning developed by scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which The Independent reports on today, are as worrying as they are momentous.

In a nutshell, they have succeeded in reprogramming skin cells into cells that enjoy all the properties of embryonic stem cells without the controversial use of embryos or eggs.

Related articles

• 'Now we have the technology that can make a cloned child'
• Click here to have your say
• Steve Connor: One day, cloning may be accepted by society

That these cells can be "prodded" into becoming every cell type found in the body opens up almost limitless possibilities for new treatments for people requiring organ transplants or who suffer from such diseases as diabetes, Parkinson's, leukemia and other cancers.

While hailing what looks like a milestone in stem cell-based research, the public will want to see these experiments kept under the closest possible scrutiny. People understandably regard these types of medical breakthroughs with mixed emotions; awe and excitement jostling for supremacy with suspicion and the age-old fear of "playing God", behind which lurks a subliminal expectation of downfall. The Frankenstein scenario, in other words.

Worries are understandable, because the ramifications of this breakthrough spill over from finding new regenerative treatments for diseases to the more emotionally charged area of human reproduction. Potentially, reprogrammed skin cells could indeed be used to help couples, one of whose partners is infertile, have children that bear the genetic imprint of both parents. As we report, scientists have already inserted an adult mouse's skin cells into an embryo to produce offspring genetically identical to that adult.

That raises concerns – however far they appear down the line – about the potential to create "designer babies" and so on. There is no real answer to these fears beyond the usual formula of scientific vigilance and public involvement. Legislation is an imperfect tool here; science is now moving so fast that the law is invariably one step behind.

On one level, skin cell reprogramming may be less controversial than traditional stem cell research, however. Because it does not involve the destruction of human embryos, it gets the Catholic Church out of a cloud of moral difficulties.

But even were the Vatican to attack the latest developments with full force, it would be foolish to imagine these advances would somehow be curtailed.

In the long run, knowledge will out in our globalised world, pressured by popular hunger for cures from painful illnesses. We may one day reach a real tipping point, where painful questions about whether to continue scientific exploration present themselves. But we are not yet there.