The Stem Cell Research Controversy

Stem cell research, the cover story of the July 2005 National Geographic magazine, has been in the news repeatedly during the past year. The death of Ronald Reagan in June of 2004, the passing of Christopher Reeve in October and the different views on the subject held by the presidential candidates last fall, have all served to underscore the fact that this issue has moral as well as medical implications.

Definition

Stem cells are unspecialized cells that replicate themselves for long periods. Under certain conditions, they can become specialized, that is, turn into specific cells such as heart cells, brain cells, nerve cells, etc. This characteristic is known as pluripotency.[1]

History and Significance

In the 1960’s, doctors began using bone marrow transplants in the treatment of their leukemia patients. In 1988 the first umbilical cord blood transplant was done to treat an inherited bone marrow disease. Only later was it realized that stem cells were the reason for the success of both of these types of treatments.[2] It is because of the unique property of stem cells to morph into specialized cells, that they are looked to by many as the answer to currently incurable diseases.

Types of Stem Cells

There are 2 types of stem cells which scientists are primarily interested in, adult stem cells (ASC) and embryonic stem cells (ESC). Differences between them are outlined below:[3]

The Scientific Controversy

Originally, it was believed that embryonic stem cells were preferable over adult stem cells because they are like blank slates which can be programmed to become any type of cell that is needed. Adult stem cells, it was thought, were less versatile. However, recent findings indicate that is not the case.

In 2002, scientists at the University of Minnesota discovered a new kind of bone marrow cell that can develop into all of the different body tissues.[4] German researchers in 2004 discovered umbilical cord blood stem cells which can turn into all major body tissue types.[5] Stem cells found in multiple other adult tissues have shown this same ability.[6]

Adult stem cells are currently the only stem cells commonly used to treat humans. Many of the therapies involve the use of an individual’s own stem cells, thus avoiding the problem of rejection. Over 65 diseases, some of which are listed in the chart on the previous page, are being successfully treated with adult stem cells.[7] Embryonic stem cell studies have not resulted in the benefits people had hoped for. Despite some positive results in animal studies, there have been no cures, and in some instances, the implanted embryonic stem cells have become cancerous causing the death of the test animals. So to date, the score is adult stem cells: 65, embryonic stem cells: 0 in the successful treatment of human diseases.[8]

The Moral Controversy

A further problem faced by those advocating human embryonic stem cell research, is the ethical aspect. Harvesting of embryonic stem cells results in the death of the host embryo. Most people would agree that it is wrong to take the life of an innocent human being, but is an embryo really a human being? An objective scientific appraisal of the embryo reveals that it meets all the necessary requirements (see The Pro-Life Position by Matt Zion). That being the case, human embryonic stem cell research is morally indefensible.

Some have claimed that embryonic stem cell research is a good way to utilize unwanted frozen embryos from in vitro fertilization clinics. As of August 2005, 86 babies have been born and 12 more are due to families who have adopted these so-called unwanted embryos. These “snowflake” babies, as they have come to be known, are very much wanted and loved by their new families, and could be an answer for thousands of infertile couples who yearn for children of their own.[9]

The Political Controversy

Politicians and celebrities have made mis-statements on this subject, confusing the general public as to the facts. In October 2004, 57 scientists and professors of medicine, including 4 from Mayo Clinic and 1 from Harvard Medical School, wrote a letter to presidential candidate John Kerry. The letter expressed alarm at statements he had made during the campaign regarding embryonic stem cell research, statements which they deemed to be scientifically irresponsible.[10]

Scientists have also expressed dismay at Senator Bill Frist’s recent inaccurate statements that embryonic stem cells are unique in their pluripotenty and capacity to multiply. They cite more than 15 recent publications in leading and peer-reviewed scientific journals which confirm that adult stem cells have these same qualities.[11]

Both of these situations remind us that we can’t believe everything we hear, and that as responsible citizens, we have an obligation to keep informed on issues that have an impact on society. With access to the internet available to virtually everyone today, we can find accurate information from credible sources that can help us take a logical and ethical stand on controversial subjects such as stem cell research.

Conclusion

After almost 25 years, embryonic stem cell research has not resulted in any successful treatments for human beings. It is additionally burdened with serious ethical concerns. Adult stem cell research, devoid of any moral impediments, has yielded success in treating many conditions. Should human embryonic stem cell research be continued and expanded? Based on the lack of embryonic stem cell success, the moral implications and the efficacy of adult stem cell treatments, wouldn’t resources be better spent on furthering adult stem cell research?