Now his results have been confirmed by two other teams, at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts and the Harvard Stem Cell Institute. The reprogrammed cells meet all the tests of pluripotent cells -- they form colonies, propagate continuously and form cancerous growths called teratomas, as well as producing chimaeras. "Its unbelievable, just amazing," says Hans Schöler, a German stem cell expert. "For me, it's like Dolly. It's that type of an accomplishment."

What Yamanaka did was to take a mouse skin cell and introduce into it four proteins which trigger the expression of other genes to make it pluripotent. He calls the result induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS cells). "It's easy. There's no trick, no magic," he says.

Naturally, it's easy only for experts at the moment. In practice, the four transcription factors reprogram cells inefficiently -- only 0.1% of the cells in a skin biopsy. Then these cells have to be isolated. But Yamanaka has developed a technique for this as well. And there are some worrying issues to contend with: one of the proteins seems to contribute to cancers in 20% of the chimaeric mice.

But Harvard researcher Chad Cowan says that it will change the field: "The most amazing thing about these papers is you now take this whole idea of reprogramming out of the hands of cloning specialists and put it into the hands of anyone who can do molecular and cell biology." Now the race is on to apply the technique to human cells. "We are working very hard -- day and night," says Yamanaka.

Executives from embryonic stem cell companies were not optimistic about the new technique. Because it involves tinkering with the genome, it could be dangerous, in the opinion of Thomas B. Okarma, of Geron. Getting approval from regulatory authorities would become far more complicated. And the head of the team at the Whitehead Institute, Rudolph Jaenisch, still insists that therapeutic cloning remains "absolutely necessary".

Was it just a coincidence? Some legislators thought not. "It is ironic that every time we vote on this legislation, all of a sudden there is a major scientific discovery that basically says, 'You don't have to do stem cell research,'" says Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel. "Convenient timing," said bioethicist Arthur Caplan.

The Kevordian charm offensive failed on Mitch Albom, a well-known columnist for the Detroit Free Press: "I couldn't imagine a suffering so bad that I would want Kevorkian to be the last person I'd see on Earth."

Here are the highlights:

"He didn't seem to think much of the human race. He likened life to 'a tragedy'. He quoted famous people saying they wouldn't bring babies into this world. When I said that would wipe out mankind, he said, 'What's wrong with that?' "I began to sense a man who was more interested in death than life. Death was his academic passion, and sick patients were part of that academic pursuit, like lab rats. Is there a meaning to our lives? I asked. 'No,' he said. Was he happy? 'I don't expect the object of life is happiness. That's why I'm happy.' Set the bar low, in other words? 'That's the way to go,' he said."

"This has somehow slipped through the net of any regulation," Dr Moffett told Nature Medicine. "It is bizarre that women who may be in early pregnancy are exposed to this sort of risk." Immunoglobulin has a number of potential side effects, including kidney failure and hepatitis. The UK's fertility regulator only deals with the creation and handling of embryos, not drug regimes for fertility patients.

Premier Morris Iemma, a Catholic, voted for the bill. "I've already thought seriously about this legislation and it passes all the ethical and moral issues that I need passed, and gives people hope," he said. Emergency Services Minister Nathan Rees even suggested that Pell's intervention might constitute contempt of parliament. This was also mooted on the other side of Australia, in Perth, where similar remarks made by Catholic Archbishop Barry Hickey were referred to that state's parliamentary privileges committee. Speaker Fred Riebeling said they had been "threatening" to MPs.

Thomas Schramme calls self-mutilation "an ultimate test-case for liberal bioethics" since it pushes the envelope of two of its key presumptions: anti-paternalism and neutrality. "The easy dismissal of the body modification community as a bunch of eccentrics or pathological cases ought to be rejected".