INDCJournal: Stem Cell Hope

« Gosh, You'd Think Drudge Would Have It | Main | Weekend Movie Reviews »

June 05, 2005

Stem Cell Hope

Posted by Bill

Can we skirt the ethical debate?

If only human embryonic stem cells could sprout anew from something other than a human embryo. Researchers could harvest them and perhaps harness their great biomedical potential without destroying what some consider to be a budding human life.
But like a low-calorie banana split or the proverbial free lunch, there is no such thing as an embryo-free embryonic stem cell.

Or is there?

In recent months, a number of researchers have begun to assemble intriguing evidence that it is possible to generate embryonic stem cells without having to create or destroy new human embryos.

The research is still young and largely unpublished, and in some cases it is limited to animal cells. Scientists doing the work also emphasize their desire to have continued access to human embryos for now. It is largely by analyzing how nature makes stem cells, deep inside days-old embryos, that these researchers are learning how to make the cells themselves.

Yet the gathering consensus among biologists is that embryonic stem cells are made, not born -- and that embryos are not an essential ingredient. That means that today's heated debates over embryo rights could fade in the aftermath of technical advances allowing scientists to convert ordinary cells into embryonic stem cells.

...

"The president has said it is wrong to destroy a life to save a life," Lanza said. "This might be a way to get some cell lines that the president . . . can get behind."

Fingers crossed.

Posted by Bill at June 5, 2005 09:42 PM | TrackBack (3)

Comments

That would be super!

Posted by: Hans Mast at June 6, 2005 09:33 AM

Why would you want to bypass the ethical debate? Look, I am not religous, I have a BS in biology, I understand the drive of science to do good (and to come up bad), so do not dismiss this post as someone who is against stem cell research. But embryonic stem cell research has tons of ethical questions and zero theraputic results. Adult stem cells have the edge in many cases because they are partially differentiated - - therefore controlling their differentiation is easier, they can in some cases avoid the tissue rejection issues, etc. Embryonic stem cells have a lot of downside beyond ethics as well. But why even have the debate until scientist can show in primates or other animals they have, in a controlled manner, unlocked the potential of embryonic stem cells? Why destroy human life (and it is a human life based on scientific facts) when right now it is all promises? When you harvest a human being for stem cells, why not harvest them for nerve cells, muscle cells, etc? Let the embryo live a while longer and the cell are there for the taking? Oh, right. Once the human takes on a shape you can relate to emotionally it is off limits. The debate is as important as any other in this country.

Posted by: AJStrata at June 6, 2005 01:56 PM

I didn't say dodging the debate would be a good thing (it would certainly be easier). I said (well, to be honest what I said was ambiguous, but what I meant was that) I'm glad that a way might be found to get embryonic stem cells without killing a baby.

"But why even have the debate until scientist can show in primates or other animals they have, in a controlled manner, unlocked the potential of embryonic stem cells?"

Amen! That's what I'm saying! (I said it somewhere in a previous discussion on INDC about ESR.) They always try this stuff on sheep, monkey, etc before they do it on humans, why jump straight to humans on this one?

Posted by: Hans Mast at June 6, 2005 06:51 PM

" But why even have the debate until scientist can show in primates or other animals they have, in a controlled manner, unlocked the potential of embryonic stem cells?"

One of the best questions to ask I think.

One thing that scares me with this issue, is the drive for science going forward without really considering the ethical issues involved.

As to the ethical issues (I think Bill wants to avoid them, because they have been done quite a bit here, and it usually ends in frustration for both sides).

But I think this would be an interesting advance, and could very well be a way to avoid having to touch the ethical issues involved with the destruction of embryonic cells for research.

Posted by: Just Me at June 6, 2005 10:33 PM