Debate on the regulation of human stem cells needs to bring together scientific, ethical and policy considerations if it is to be adequately informed. Scientific issues of importance include the relevance of the environment in appreciating the extent of stem cell plasticity, and the relative potential of embryonic and adult stem cells to produce other cell types. An awareness that blastocysts (early embryos) and stem cells in the laboratory are pluripotential and not totipotential has implications for ethical and policy debate. The regulations on stem cell research are reviewed, showing that four positions have emerged. Position A corresponds to the prohibition of all embryo research, position B confines the use of embryonic stem cells to those currently in existence and therefore extracted prior to some specified date, position C allows for the use and ongoing isolation of embryonic stem cells from surplus in vitro fertilization embryos, and position D approves of the creation of human embryos specifically for research. Position B which has been adopted by the United States, Germany, and Australia (with subtle differences between them) and which is regarded as a compromise position, is critiqued. This is principally on the basis that, in spite of claims made about it, the ongoing destruction of human embryos will continue. This is because these countries allow in vitro fertilization programs, inherent within which is embryo destruction. It is argued that position C would be a more consistent ethical position for these countries. The possibility of moving to position D is also raised.