|
Home 
Community
Speak Out!
Stem Cell Research
8/26/01-This week's topic and opinion
from Tom Lee, PhD.:
Stem Cell Research
The heated
controversy over the use of stem cells in medical research involves a
complicated mixture of science, ethics, business, and politics. Does
this have anything to do with arthritis? It certainly does.
Think of a stem cell
as a seed - not an ordinary seed that is destined to become a marigold,
or perhaps an apple tree, but a magical seed that can grow into any kind
of plant on Earth. Just give the seed the precise mix of nutrients for a
particular fate, and the seed will become whatever you wish. Based on
experiments that have been going on since the early 1980's with animal
stem cells, and since 1998 with human stem cells derived from early
embryos, fetuses and adults, these tiny cells are, in fact, magical
"seeds" that appear
to have the capacity to grow into all types of cells and tissues in
animals and humans, once provided with the proper growth
conditions. I need to emphasize that we as yet know very little about
what those conditions are - and need lots of research to find out.
The science behind
this kind of extraordinary control over cell development is in its very
early stages. However, in the last few years there have been a series of
discoveries that show tremendous potential for using these cells to
replace and repair tissues in disorders like diabetes, Parkinson's,
spinal cord injury, and both osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.
Since 1996, 191 patents have been issued for developing stem cells for
uses from repairing cartilage to creating artificial skin.
Well, if stem cells
are such potent allies against disease and suffering, what's the
controversy all about? It has to do with research involving one source
of stem cells - the human embryo. (Other sources are adult tissues such
as bone marrow, or fat tissue, to name only a few). About 6 days after a
sperm fertilizes an egg, the resulting embryo is a cluster of 100 to 300
cells. Within that cluster is a ball of cells - the "embryonic stem
cells" (ESCs) which will develop further into the entire human
body. If these cells are removed at that early stage, they can be grown
in a laboratory flask in the primitive, unspecialized stage. Then they
can be transferred into other growth conditions which may trigger them
to develop into mature cell types - like cartilage, bone, brain cells,
etc.
Scientists and others
debate whether or not stem cells taken from the embryo are more useful
than those from other sources. The truth is, we do not yet know which
will be more useful - and the only way to find out is to experiment. ( I
should add here that there are recent reports which suggest that
"adult" stem cells might someday be manipulated to return to
their embryonic state and become, in effect, ESCs).
So it is more than a
question of scientific technique - the use of ESCs brings us right back
to the abortion controversy. In one sense, the issue is simple. If one
considers the human embryo, as soon as fertilization has occurred, as a
human individual whose deliberate destruction is equivalent to killing a
person, then removing ESCs, which kills the embryo, is morally
unacceptable. If one does not regard the embryo as having such a
protected status, the use of these cells could be permitted within
certain ethical constraints. For
example, on the latter point, even those who argue for the use of ESCs
might not condone creating embryos in the laboratory strictly for this
purpose, but would support what is now done - removing the ECSs from
embryos left over from in vitro
fertilization (IVF) clinics.
Of course, the issue
is not simple at all. For example, many scientists regard President
Bush's recent decision to restrict ECS research to only stem cells that
have already been extracted from IVF embryos as impeding progress
towards treatments and cures. They maintain that the decision was an
attempt to avoid offending his more conservative supporters. Others
applaud the decision, having feared that he might have banned Federal
support for all ESC research.
It is entirely
possible that scientists may find that stem cells derived from sources
other than embryos are equal or superior to ESCs. It is also possible
that they may determine that ECSs are indispensable tools for cell and
tissue repair and regeneration. Whatever happens, the controversy over
stem cells, involving people with differing ethical standards, as well
as political motives, business interests, and health issues, will
continue to rage. Where do you stand? Let your Congressperson know.
(The author, Thomas
F. Lee, Ph.D., has rheumatoid arthritis. He has written on stem cells
for the Encyclopedia Americana. His latest book is "Conquering
Rheumatoid Arthritis: The Latest Breakthroughs and Treatments",
published in June, 2001 by Prometheus Books.)
Tell us how you feel about Stem Cell
Research! Speak
Out!!!
Find email and snail mail addresses for
your Representatives
and Senators.
|
