admin March 19th, 2009
I recently responded to a friend’s post saying that she was mulling over the stem cell issue that has been in the news recently. The topic is far too complex to examine in a simple comment, however, so I decided to expand on it a little in a separate space.
Let me start with the disclaimers: I am a scientist but have never worked with cells. I don’t have a strong opinion on the morality of this and am just putting down what I know. I am not an expert and don’t pretend to be. This is a very complex issue. Some points may be incorrect - if you are an expert feel free to correct me or point me to a reputable source. I don’t mean to start any kind of argument, get into heated discussions, or otherwise alienate myself or anyone else due to posting on this sensitive subject.
In light of the Obama administration changing W’s ruling on stem cells, there has been some discussion about the issue. I think that’s great. Here’s my take:
Stem cell research has enormous potential for the treatment and prevention of incredibly debilitating, life altering, and life threatening diseases for which we currently have very few treatments. Two of these off the top of my head are Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. Though these diseases commonly afflict older people, this research will potentially also do much to treat diseased children and young people. Millions of fully formed humans are suffering and this research could put this suffering to an end. Right now it is our best shot. This is why there is such a push to do this work.
A stem cell is a cell that has not yet been “told” what kind of cell it is. It could be a bone cell or a muscle cell or a red blood cell. A stem cell has not yet been programmed and this makes it very flexible, and it allows us to study how these things work, and to create treatments.
Under his administration, GW enacted a law stating that the federal government would not fund work with embryonic stem cells created after a certain date. All cells created before this date were fair game, but none of those created afterward. States like CA passed legislation to allow this work to continue there, funded by the state, and private companies could do what they pleased, but federal funds were held back. Obama is working to undo these restrictions and open up the research again. Georgia, by the way, is working to limit such work within the state.
I wrote back to my friend pondering the issue, that fortunately for all, scientists have recently come up with ways to force most any kind of human cell back into the stem cell state, eliminating much of the moral and ethical concerns of embryonic stem cells. And yes, this was in large part to W’s legislation. Why then, would anyone want to start up embryonic stem cell research again?
Scientists are more comfortable with what they know. Using what you know reduces variables and strengthens the results of experiments. What they know are embryonic stem cells. It is likely much quicker, cheaper, and easier to work with these cells. Other cells may have different characteristics that they haven’t yet identified. Money spent on teasing a skin cell to be a stem cell could be spent on something else - say getting the technology to the market. The same goes with the time issue. There may be some other key reasons that I am missing as well. Maybe these other cells don’t work as well, all the time, etc.
Why then can they not just use the ones created before W’s arbitrary date? It seems that in order to do the best research one needs stem cells with different genetic material, and limiting the cells to such a finite pool in some cases limits the research. I’m a little fuzzy on this one, but this is what I gather.
My friend’s actual question was “then why would anyone destroy life…” which opens up the question of what these cells really are, and where they come from.
Some people believe that these embryonic stem cells represent human life. Some people see them (morally) just the same as some cells you might scrape off of your skin or the inside of your mouth. I’m not going to argue with that, but let’s think about what happens to these cells when they are not used for research (research with the goal of saving numerous human lives let’s remember). These cells most often come from IVF clinics. These clinics create and discard numerous “waste” cells in the hopes of getting a very small percentage to be viable enough to make a baby. The fate of the other cells is one of three: disposed of as bio-waste, frozen indefinitely, or research. What to do with these cells really is a problem, and many see important research is the answer. Perhaps destroying or freezing (forever?) is better, I don’t know, but the fact remains that these cells are being created whether or not they are used and something has to be done with them.
(I am not going to judge IVF treatments, but it has always puzzled me how you can be in full support of IVF and against embryonic stem cell research when it is the IVF creating the cells to be destroyed in the first place. )
These new technologies (creating stem cells from adult human cells) also shine a new light on the moral and ethical value of embryonic stem cells in general. If an adult muscle or kidney or blood cell can look and act and *be* exactly the same as an embryonic stem cell, then are these as special as we thought? Are all cells then just as much a potential human life?
Complex. I told you.
The reason why Obama is opening up this research again is that whether or not you agree with it, federally funding embryonic stem cell research is, right now, the most direct route to treating and preventing diseases that (fully formed human) people have and are dying from every day. Maybe this is morally wrong. I don’t know and am not going to weigh in on that, but this fact remains.
Please don’t flame me.