|
Imagine a twenty-three year old college graduate, Anjali, with
nothing to lose and everything to gain. Anjali is receiving job
offers left and right, has an apartment in the city, and has her
whole life in front of her. All of a sudden, during an annual
blood test, her doctor discovers that she tested positive for
genetic disorder known as hemachromatosis. This is a
genetically inherited blood disorder involving an iron overload,
which is known to lead to diseases such as diabetes, abnormal
heart rhythms, and liver cancer [1]. This would be
devastating for anyone, especially someone so young. Until recently, patients
with genetic disorders and defects were treated only for
improvement of their quality of life by suppressing the disease
with drugs and medication. Usually, this would lead to a lifetime
of treatment and chronic recurrences of the disorder.
 However,
with the introduction of stem cell research, a potential for
eliminating these disorders before they have any affect at all
at a person has been presented and people in the same situation
as Anjali would like to explore every potential option available
to cure her ailment [2].
The vast majority of people agree that the medical advancements
possible through stem cell research could lead to revolutionary
breakthroughs, but the controversy lies in the use of embryonic
stem cells as opposed to adult stem cells. Religious activists
that disagree with the idea of embryonic stem cell research
claim it to be unethical and scientifically unnecessary. These
arguments, however, cannot be held true because there are ways
of obtaining embryonic stem cells without crossing ethical
barriers and scientists advocating both sides of the argument
all claim that embryonic stem cells hold the most breakthrough
potential of all the other types of stem cells. The methods for
the alternate forms of obtaining stem cells will be discussed
further in depth below. Even political leaders such as Tony
Blair, prime minister of Great Britain, agree that embryonic
stem cell research is necessary to “create material that could
one day treat diabetes, cancer, [and] Alzheimer's disease”
[3].
Thus, embryonic stem cell research must be allowed to proceed
because it stays within ethical boundaries of society and it
will allow for a more thorough scientific study, leading to
greater medical benefits, than research of adult stem cells
alone.
One of the most popular claims for those that oppose embryonic
stem cell research is that it is unethical. They assert
that the embryo is a human life and that destroying that embryo
would result in the destruction of that life, which ethically
wrong to do in the name of science because we are not God and we
do not have the power to kill for what we claim to be to the
benefit of humanity. Supposing, for a moment, that this
statement is accepted, then how is it that destroying an embryo
is ethically and morally wrong, but at the same time conception
outside of the womb to help infertile parents is not a major
source of controversy? If a life can be conceived artificially
without a problem, then a life nearing inevitable death should
also for use in scientific experiments, which also leads to the
next point. The embryos used for embryonic stem cells are not
taken from just any random person; rather, they are extracted
from abortions and unused embryos from fertility clinics, both
of which are sources where the embryos already going to be
destructed. Thus, embryonic stem cell research cannot be
deemed
unethical
because it does not destruct a new, healthy embryo for research,
but it actually makes use of embryos that were already to be
wastefully destroyed. Opponents of embryonic research also
claim that current practices will eventually lead to more
unethical procedures. One such example that they mention
is that embryos could be produced for the sole purpose of
obtaining stem cells. Realistically, this is almost an
outlandish claim as there is a surplus of embryos sitting in
fertility clinics that are continuously being discarded.
These embryos are the ones to be used for research and due to
the sensitivity of the subject, the federal government is sure
to have strict regulations and mandates to ensure that this is
the only way that stem cells are obtained.
Another
argument made by opponents of embryonic stem cell research is
that adult stem cells can be used in place of embryonic stem
cells because both of them are precursors to other somatic
cells. Although this is true, this statement is often present
in a heavily distorted point of view to indicate that adult stem
cells and embryonic stem cells function in the same way and can
differentiate into the same kinds of cells. This, however, is
not true. Every scientist, including Dr. Maurice Rickard, who
explained the ethical issues of embryonic stem cell research to
Australian senators while they were debating about legality stem
cell research in Australia, will agree to the fact that embryonic stem
cells are known as pluripotent, meaning that they are able to
differentiate into all types of cells, while adult stem cells
are known as multipotent, meaning that they can differentiate
into a limited number of cells [4]. This significance of
this is that due to the versatility of embryonic stem cells,
there is a greater range of disorders to be studied, which could
allow medical breakthroughs that simply are not possible with
adult stem cells. As aforementioned some of these break
through could be a cure for cancer, prevention of diabetes, and
even organ generation [2].
Although recent studies have shown that stem cells can be
extracted from other parts of the body other than the bone
marrow and embryos [2],
these cells also pose the same problem as adult stem cells:
limited variety in differentiation capabilities. Sometimes stem
cells are extracted from babies’ teeth or from umbilical fluid.
The idea behind using these stem cells is so that there can be
some middle ground to avoid the controversy. According to the
International Society for Stem Cell Research, the cells drawn
from umbilical chords and bone marrow are not known to be
pluripotent, meaning that these cells are not known to be able
to differentiate into every other type of cell in the body
[5].
The cells are extracted from infants, thus the stem cells will
have a greater, but still limited, variety of differentiation
than that of adult stem cells. Thus
even though these cells
extracted from infant stem cells and umbilical fluid are more
versatile than adult stem cells, they cannot become the primary
source for stem cell research due to their inability to
differentiate into an unlimited variety of cells such as those
of embryonic stem cells.
Another, more recent study, performed by researchers from Duke
University, has found that human fat contain some stem cells,
which were transformed into nerve cells
[6]. Many of those that oppose
embryonic stem cell research seize the opportunity and claim
that fat can now be our savior from the more controversial
embryonic method of research. This, however, is nothing but
wishful thinking. Sure it would be great to use a cheap,
expendable resource for the benefit of stem cell research, but
these cells are also adult versions of stem cells, which lack
the great versatility of embryonic stem cells. A reason adult
stem cells lack pluripotent embryonic stem cell capabilities is
that they are set to differentiate according to their
surroundings. For example, the stem cells found in the bone
marrow differentiate into lymphocytes where antigen is
presented. [2] There will be no point in that cell’s life
that it will directly interact with certain tissues of the body,
such as the tissues in the eye. Because of this, this adult
stem cell will
not have the capability to differentiate into an
eye. Thus, adult stem cells, even though they can differentiate
into other cells, are a specified form of stem cells and because
of this specificity they have a limited number of cells into
which they can transform. Embryonic stem cells are
unrestricted, non-specific stem cells. Thus, they can transform
into any tissue of the body, including eye tissue.
One of the
key ideas discussed so far about embryonic stem cells is that
they have the ability to differentiate every other type of stem
cell in the body, whereas all the other cells cannot. The
reason this is such an important
feature about embryonic stem cells is that it leads to potential
benefits that far greatly outnumber those from adult stem cells.
One of the greatest potential benefits of stem cell research as
a whole is that stem cells can be used to differentiate into
other types of cells, which can lead to tissue replacement
therapies and possibly even organ replacement procedures.
The reason embryonic stem cell research is so important is that
these types of stem cells, as mentioned earlier, can transform
into tissues that any of the adult cells cannot
[7]. If embryonic research is
allowed to continue, then this could lead to some breathtaking
breakthroughs. Today, when people are in need of a new heart,
they are placed on a list and may have to wait many years before
finding a suitable donor. With the potentials of embryonic
stem cell research, this process could be eliminated.
Rather than looking for a donor, hearts could be created in the
lab specifically designed for that particular person,
eliminating the necessity to find a matching donor. Also,
because of the fact that embryonic stem cells can differentiate
into tissues that adult stem cells cannot, they can be used to
possibly create brain tissue [2]. Currently, there are no known
ways to replace parts of the human brain; however, with the
possibilities offered through embryonic stem cell research, a
human brain can be created and studied further, which could,
with some luck, lead to something to the nature of a brain
transplant procedure.
Throughout
history all great scientific breakthroughs, such as the
astronomic discoveries of Galileo and Columbus’ notion of a
round earth, have faced tremendous opposition. Stem cell
research is on the brink of making discoveries previously
thought unimaginable to save millions lives and improve the
qualities of life for many more. For all people in Anjali’s
situation, embryonic stem cell research could be the key to
saving lives.
References:
1. Toland, Ewart Amanda. "What is
Hemachromatotis?" Genetic Health. September,
2000. <http://www.genetichealth.com/HCROM_What_Is_Hemochromatosis.shtml>
2.
Abbas, Abul K. and Lichtman, Andrew. Basic Immunology.
Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders Company, 2001.
3. "Britain could become
world leader in stem cell research." Yahoo! News.
November 18, 2004. <http://story.news.yahoo.com/>
4. Rickard, Maurice. "Key
Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research."
Information, Analysis, and Advice for the Parliment.
Australia: Department of the Parlimentary Library, 2002.
5. International Society
for Stem Cell Resarch. "Frequently Asked Questions."
Date Accessed: November, 2004. <http://www.isscr.org/science/6>
6.
DukeMedNews. Date Accessed: November, 2004. <http://news.mc.duke.edu/news/article.php?id=5543>
7.
Campbell, Reece. Biology,
6 ed. San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education, Inc., 2002.
|
