Part 1
President Bush’s decision to delay federal funding of embryonic stem cell
research until he had a chance to reevaluate the issue has charged a national
debate on the practical and moral implications of such research. Bush is
expected to announce his decision by the end of summer, but the issue is so
complex that it is difficult for the average person to appreciate all of
the details. It is an important issue that will have far-reaching
implications.
The media has framed the debate to appear to be a simple choice between using
leftover embryos for research or discarding them, between saying "yes"
or "no" to using federal tax monies to fund this research. Who could
argue against research meant to help those suffering with degenerative
conditions like Alzheimer’s disease, cancer, Parkinson’s disease, spinal cord
injuries, heart disease, and diabetes? There are multitudes of people
fighting these tragic disabilities and the promise of healing offered by
this research is a poignant argument in favor of pursuing the technology.
However, there are additional questions which
need to be answered.
Are embryos (fertilized human eggs) the only or the best source
of stem cells? If embryos are the
best source, will discarded embryos be enough or will laboratories mass-produce
to support their research? When does life begin: at conception, at the womb,
or at birth? Are the potential
benefits of the research worth opening the
inevitable Pandora’s box? These questions
should be addressed before we step on the slippery slope from which there is
no turning back. Unfortunately, we may already
be sliding down that hill.
Why Stem Cells?
Scientists studying degenerative diseases are
excited about stem cell research because they hope to implant these baby cells
into damaged tissues and spur them to grow into new, healthy
cells. Stem cells seem promising because
a single cell has the potential to develop into any of 210 different types
of human tissue. As in the case of
an embryo, one cell divides into many and the many cells begin to
specialize, forming the different organs and tissues in the developing baby.
At the same time, because the process of extracting stem cells from embryos
results in the destruction of the embryo, pro-life advocates have opposed the
procedure as well as the even more controversial use of aborted fetuses as a
stem cell source.
Adults and children also have stem cells.
These respond to a special signal protein produced by cells when they are
damaged. These stem cells are rushed to the damage site and work quickly to make repairs. Therefore, embryonic cells are not the
only source for acquiring stem cells. Stem
cells have been harvested from adult bone marrow,
fatty tissue, and umbilical cord blood.
However,
stem cell research is still in its
earliest stages, and at this point it is believed that adult stem cells are only
able to change into a limited number of types of human tissues.
For example, test on mice demonstrate
that stem cells from the adult brains of mice can be nurtured into heart, liver
and muscle tissues. Other
experiments show that umbilical cord blood can be made to grow into brain
cells. Researchers believe that
because embryonic stem cells are more versatile in their ability to grow into
virtually any of the 210 varieties of cells, they offer a greater potential for
success.
Although there may be some limitations in the versatility
of using the stem cells collected from bone marrow, fatty tissue, and umbilical
cord blood, the prospects are good and do not present the type of moral
and ethical issues that embryonic research does. Research has only just begun
to scratch the surface in this area of science and it is
yet to be seen if the arguments for the superiority of embryonic stem cells
will hold up.
What is not mentioned in the federal funding
debate is that the research is already underway in
privately funded laboratories. In these laboratories
there are no doubts about forging ahead
with the research. Not only are
they experimenting with surplus embryos from fertility clinics, but embryos are being created for
the sole purpose of research.
For this very reason some members of Congress have advocated federal
funding as a means of setting standards and controls on the process.
Next week, in part two of our stem cell report, we will discuss
the moral, ethical implications of stem cell research.
We will also describe some of the almost
Frankenstein results of recent embryonic research.
Are these discoveries really a blessing or will they prove
to be a curse?
