Ms Ryan's business is based on the economies of scale of creating a large number of embryos from a few women. She charges US$2,500 for each implantable embryo -- far cheaper than a normal IVF procedure. She also guarantees high quality embryos: sperm donors must have PhDs and egg donors at least a college degree.

In a perceptive column in Slate, William Saletan predicts that the profit motive will extend the range of reproductive services that Ms Ryan and others like her will offer. "The logic of what Ryan is offering -- more control, more customisation, higher quality, fewer hassles, lower cost, and lower risk -- won't end here." He foresees higher prices for higher IQs and integrating surrogacy into the process. "PhD embryos will cost more than BA embryos," he says.

Media coverage has provoked a storm of controversy. Complaints have been filed with the federal Office for Human Research Protections, although the agency says that it has no authority to investigate it. Steven Taylor, of Syracuse University, said that "it is unethical and unacceptable to perform intrusive and invasive medical procedures on a person or child with a disability simply to make the person easier to care for."

However, other doctors said that the procedure is "not really ready for prime time". Doctors in Saudi Arabia attempted it in 2000 on a 20-year-old woman, but the womb survived for only 99 days. The technique is still unproven in animals, for instance. A similar operation with a Rhesus monkey failed recently. Bioethicist Arthur Caplan asked whether it is right to remove a womb without securing the consent of the donor. "It's got symbolic importance that's far different from a pancreas or a liver," he said. The operation would probably cost about US$500,000.

Senator Lyn Allison called for a Senate inquiry, saying that she had long been concerned about growing Catholic influence in the health sector. Church control could influence the provision of many services, including abortion, sterilisation, fertility and genetic testing for severe foetal abnormalities.

The issue of Catholic involvement in health is particularly sensitive at the moment. Health Minister Tony Abbott recently enlisted two Catholic pregnancy support groups to help draft a pregnancy counselling manual. Abortion supporters have denounced this as a tragedy. This was followed by the news that a Canberra IVF clinic felt unwelcome in a private hospital after a Catholic hospital group bought it.

The New York Times noted that some scientists actually view the politicians' inflated oratory about medical miracles with alarm. They "may generate public disenchantment with such research if its promise is not quickly fulfilled," it said.

Meanwhile the White House released a defence of the President's policy on stem cells which argued that "the dramatic advances in stem cell research since 2001 are evidence that the President's balanced policy is working."

The report restated the Administration's ethical stand on embryonic life: "The destruction of embryos for experimental purposes could also open the way to more general and profound manipulations and re- engineerings of human life. Without an understanding that life begins at conception, and that an embryo is a nascent human being, there will always be arguments that other uses, takeovers, and makeovers of embryos are justified by potential scientific and medical benefits. Crossing this line would needlessly encourage a conflict between science and ethics that can only do damage to both, and to our nation as a whole."