|
The issue of stem cell
research is not a topic that comes up often in regular
conversation with friends. As a senior in college, the topic has
often been lectured about in science courses, but only general
information was given. I have taken the time and effort to do my
own research on the topic of stem cell research this year and
have learned that this type of research is not as simple as was
taught by my professors. By no means do I mean that stem cell
research is a bad form of research that should be immediately
put to a halt, but the types of stem cell research allowed need
to be regulated.
The types of stem cell research
sparked many moral and ethical questions that cause me to
question the ethical validity of this type of medical research.
Adult stem cell research and embryonic stem cell research are
two distinct methods of conducting experimental research with
stem cells. As an individual who holds strong beliefs in the
value of human life, I believe that stem cell research should be
restricted to one type of medical research. After doing my
research, I believe that adult stem cell research is an ethical
alternative to embryonic stem cell research, because it has
never caused fatalities and avoids many of the ethical and moral
debates.
Allowing embryonic
stem cell research to continue is comparable to allowing
genocide.
According to
the United Nations, article 1 state’s that genocide, whether it
is committed in a time of war or peace, is a crime committed
under international law which they allow to prevent and to
punish. Article 2 goes on to say,
"...genocide
means any of the following acts committed with intent to
destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethical, racial or
religious group as such: killing members of the group, causing
serious bodily or mental harm to
 members of the group,
deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life
calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or
in part, imposing measures intended to prevent births within the
group and forcibly transferring children of the group to another
group" [1].
There are a few problem with this definition that keep it from
being complete in its meaning, one of which it is too
indistinct. If genocide can only happen with the four distinct
groups mentioned above, than it can easily be argued that none
of the past mass killings that took place fall within this
definition including the Hitler Nazi camps. The definition fails
to include other groups such as minority groups, different age
groups, etc. furthermore, there is no clear definition of how
many must be killed in order for it to be considered genocide
and can a sector of a group population be the target of
genocide. Another problem with this definition is whether the
groups have to be fully developed individuals. Further research
led the investigation on the definition of genocide led to two
other definitions that, though may not answer all of the
concerns mentioned earlier, help clear some of the confusion
that the United Nations definition leaves unexplained. Vahakn
Dadrian defined genocide in 1975 as,
"...the successful attempt by a dominant group [scientists],
vested with formal
authority [government laws and
possibly funding] and/or with preponderant access to the overall
resources of power [laboratories and
equipment], to reduce by coercion or lethal violence the number
of a minority group [embryos] whose
ultimate extermination [removing the stem cells] is held
desirable and useful [for the sake of medical
research] and whose respective vulnerability [embryos cannot
protect themselves from our destruction]
is a major factor in contributing to the
decision..." [2].
This definition
includes any minority group whether it is race, sex, ethnicity,
or any other form of a minority which would include embryonic
stem cells. The continuing existence of these embryos is in
government and scientists hands, making these two groups
dominant. There is another definition of genocide that was given
by Helen Fein in 1988 which states,
"Genocide is a
series of purposeful actions by a perpetrator to destroy a
collectivity
through mass or selective
murders of a group member and suppressing the biological and
social reproduction of the collectivity.
This can be accomplished through the imposed proscription or
restriction of reproduction of group
members, increasing infant mortality, and breaking the linkage
between reproduction and
socialization
of children in the family or group of origin."
[3]
This definition
gives a better understanding of the amount of people killed it
takes to be considered genocide-not many. This definition also
helps explain that the group can be any collectivity in which
reproductivity would be seized which would definitely include
embryos because they are in the beginning stages of reproduction
and when full adults, will also be able to participate in the
act of reproducing more human lives ( with the exception of a
few special cases).
I believe that a human being is created once
the ovum of a woman is fertilized by male sperm; this is the
very beginning of a human life. The process of fertilization can
take place in the womb or in a Petri dish, yet the result is
still the same: the beginning of a human life. Embryonic stem
cell research requires the removal of stem cells from an embryo,
therefore killing the embryo that is usually around five to
seven days old. At this stage of the development of an embryo,
it contains around five to seven human cells-called a blastocyst-
that would continue to multiply, forming the body of the human.
In both cases of embryonic stem cell research and genocide,
innocent lives are taken away for unethical reasons, one of
which is selfishness. The Nazi’s had prisons filled with
thousands of people who were tortured constantly with unethical
experimentation for the “sake of research.” Many horrifying
medical experiments were performed on human beings, eventually
leading to their deaths. Eventually, enough people realized that
these experiments were unethical and worked to stop them from
happening. Thousands of lives were unethically taken and to this
day, there are thousands of tears cried for those victims. Many
victims of this genocide were subjects in experiments. They were
part of experiments that could and should have been conducted in
different ways and on different subjects, preventing the loose
of innocent human lives; lives that can never be regained. Many
embryos are being destroyed, and their small, but still human
lives can never be regained by killing embryos, we are allowing
the murder of those who could potentially be our next leaders,
but we will never know because we allowed for its destruction;
we allowed the ending of any lives for the sake of medical
research.
It is unethical to
destroy many innocent lives in order to “potentially” save one
in the future. According to John F. Wagner Jr. in an article,
“Adult Stem Cell Research Offers Hope with Mortality,” “A
desired increase in medical knowledge can never justify means
that are immoral in themselves” [6]. No
matter how much we may want to gain more knowledge in a medical
field, it does not override the unethical practice of destroying
human lives. With embryonic stem cell research, thousands of
lives will be prevented from ever fully developing and may never
result in sufficient medical knowledge. Embryonic stem cell
research –also done with mice- has taken place for eighteen
years and still is not ready for clinical research
[4].
An ethical alternative
to embryonic stem cell research is adult stem cell research.
Adult stem cell research requires the removal of stem cells from
any mature tissue including blood from an umbilical cord
[4]. Adult stem cell research began with
bone marrow in the 1960’s. Adult stem cell research has had
almost four decades of research over embryonic stem cells, which
is even more reason for science to continue their focus on adult
stem cells. Beginning in 2000, medical trials using adult stem
cells have been done, while embryonic stem cell research is
still not reliable enough to be tested outside of the laboratory
[5]. Science should continue to focus on
adult stem cell research, a research that does not destroy human
lives and that has shown positive results in the advancement of
science.
Adult stem cells have
shown great potential and avoid much moral objection. Adult stem
cells are found in all tissues of humans and have the potential
to transform themselves into practically all other types of
cells according to Dr Wolfgang Lillge on , “ The Case for Adult
Stem Cell Research” [6]. There are those
who argue that embryonic stem cell research is the only type of
research that offers the possibility to cure all the presently
incurable diseases, because of its ability to create any type of
cell. The fact is, given the slow and elementary state in which
embryonic stem
 cell research is in today, this promise is not
easily foreseen to happen sooner than with adult stem cell
research. Adult stem cell tissue was assumed to be limited in
the cells it could form, thus making the reprogramming of these
cells impossible [6]. Yet, it has
recently been discovered by Alexei Terskikh at Standford
University School of Medicine in California, that adult stem
cells are mutually interchangeable. This means that an adult
stem cell of blood forming tissues can activate the same genes
in order to preserve the status of an existing stem cell.
Furthermore, adult stem cells may be taken from bone marrow and
convert to cells for a kidney or liver [6].
These are the type of results that science is looking for and
getting without having to kill human embryos.
Many people can make
various arguments about why embryonic stem cells should be used,
but how many of those people would still make the same arguments
if the embryos were their own? Many people who make the argument
that embryos are not human lives are those who are not having
their embryo killed to have what most likely will be a failed
attempt at furthering medical research. As human beings we need
to stop being so desensitizes and re-evaluate our morals and
moral responsibilities to our kind, no matter how small and
undeveloped it may be. Embryonic stem cell research is not the
only way to advance in stem cell research and should be put to
an end to save the lives of thousands of innocent human embryos.
Sources
1) Dadrian,
Vahakn N. "Children as Victims of Genocide: The Armenian case."
Journal of Genocide Research 5, no. 3. September 2003. 421-437.
2)United Nations General
Assembly on December 9, 1948. “The International Convention of
the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime and Genocide.”
3)
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html. Searched 11/27/04.
4)
www.aaas.org/spp/sfrl/projects/stem/main.htm.Searched
11/10/04.
5) Rosenwald, Michael S, “Researchers Turn To Adult Stem Cells.”
Washington Post, Aug, 22, 2004. Online at:
http://www.wahingtonpost.com
6)Wagner,
John F. “Adult Stem Cell Research Offers Hope with Mortality”
The Free Lance Star. October 29, 2004. |
