Defend embryonic stem cell research
Chuck Graham, a Missouri state senator, is a supporter of embryonic stem cell research.
Stem cell research holds great promise for relieving human disease and suffering. Because stem cells are the source of all tissues of the body, understanding how they develop and work will give scientists a fundamental understanding of human biology in health and in sickness. In addition, stem cells may be a renewable source of replacement cells that could be used to treat a variety of diseases and disabilities.
Both adult stem cells and embryonic stem cells have an enormous therapeutic potential. Adult stem cells already have been used to develop effective treatments. For example, cancer patients who have repressed immune systems as a result of chemotherapy may receive a bone marrow transplant (BMT) that can regenerate the patient’s blood and immune systems. BMTs have been successfully performed since 1970.
Embryonic stem cell research, which only began in 1998, provides insight into the origin of disease and may lead to more effective treatments for serious human ailments such as juvenile diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, ALS, cancer, heart failure and spinal cord injuries. The advantages of embryonic stem cells is that they offer one cell source for multiple indications. They provide the potential for a wider variety of applications than do adult stem cells. Additionally, they theoretically have the possibility of being immuno-privileged, due to their highly undifferentiated state. A privileged immune status would remove one of the main barriers of stem cell therapies, as self-rejection is one of stem cell therapy’s main complications.
Another advantage of embryonic stem cells, is that they appear to be immortal in vitro, while adult and differentiated stem cells cannot be cultured indefinitely in the lab. Once differentiated, these stem cells seem to die off like typical tissue cells.
The ethics of stem cell research are still controversial, despite reports that stem cells cannot grow into complete organisms. The Catholic Church is the largest of several conservative Christian organisations which oppose embryonic stem cell research because they believe that life begins as soon as an egg is fertilised. They maintain that embryonic stem cell research is wrong because harvesting these cells kills the living human embryo. The Catholic Church opposes most forms of in vitro fertilisation and the direct destruction of human life for any purpose, including research.
Medical ethicists in favour of stem cell research continue to argue that stem cells are incapable of growing into a complete person and can at the most be coaxed into growing into an organ. Furthermore, spare embryos from IVF attempts will eventually die, due to operator error or equipment malfunction, or are routinely destroyed by flushing them down a drain, by incinerating them, or by thawing them out and allowing them to die. In such a scenario, scientists have urged that these cells be put to use to humanity.
With the easing of policies brought about by the Obama government, it looks as though the US may accelerate its stem cell research and if anything, give other countries in the world a strong challenge to continue their own research and work into advancing stem cell therapies. In the US, there are ongoing clinical trials using embryonic stem cells for spinal cord injury and a trial for retinal stem cells that also recently gained approval from regulators in Europe.
Despite the ethical issues, embryonic stem cells show an overwhelmingly higher potential to treat disease. However, it is possible that researchers will discover ways to develop adult stem cells with more success as well as find ways to improve how they function once transplanted into the human body. Ultimately, it’s a case where both stem cell sources can be valuable to prolonging and saving human life.
