The Empty Promise of Embryonic Stem Cell Research
There is no right more fundamental than the right to life. There is no realm in which more exciting progress has been made than that of science. And the two are not inherently opposed to one another.
I am a Christian who believes that life begins at conception and that a human embryo is human life. Therefore, I believe it is morally wrong to create human life to destroy it for research. Not only that, I believe it is morally wrong to take the tax dollars of millions of pro-life Americans, who believe that life is sacred, and use it to fund the destruction of human embryos for research.
As a Christian and pro-life member of Congress, I have consistently supported and advocated for ethical stem-cell research that is consistent with the cherished axiom of Western civilization: that all human life is valuable regardless of where it may fall on the continuum of life.
Millions of pro-life Americans believe that life is sacred, and I along with them was deeply troubled by President Obama's executive order eliminating restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research not only because it destroys human life, but particularly because it ignores the advances that have been made in adult stem-cell research. Privately funded embryonic stem-cell research has always been — and remains — legal in the United States. What makes this executive order so unconscionable and offensive to so many is the fact that, thanks to science itself, there are better alternatives that uphold the sanctity of life.
Over the past two years, scientific breakthroughs have rendered embryonic stem-cell research obsolete, effectively removing any perceived need to destroy human embryos in the name of science. Adult stem cells have been used to treat an estimated 11,000 patients in the United States in the past two years alone, and over 70 diseases, including Parkinson's and diabetes, have been treated using adult stem cells.
But that's not all. By adding strands of genetic material to adult skin cells, researchers were able to turn normal skin cells into cells that are biologically identical to embryonic stem cells. These altered cells are known as induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells, and unlike embryonic stem cells, iPS cells do not require the destruction of human eggs or embryos. These reprogrammed cells have equal or greater potential to heal unhealthy tissue or combat disease in human organs. One of the greatest advantages of using pluripotent stem cells over embryonic stem cells is the ability to generate stem-cell lines from patients with specific genetic diseases, allowing scientists to use customized, patient-specific stem cells when researching and treating diseases.
Although iPS cells were originally discovered in 2007, science has continually extended the scope of their potential. Just this month, an international team of researchers in Canada and Scotland accomplished yet another major breakthrough when iPS cells were created without any cancer-causing enzymes or proteins, effectively and decisively removing any need for embryonic stem-cell research from the realm of publicly financed experimentation.
Ethical stem-cell research is a marvelous and wonderful exploration of human cells that will lead to more life-saving discoveries. However, it makes little sense to spend the tax dollars of scores of Americans to fund morally divisive and increasingly outdated methods. Not only are iPS cells more easily obtainable, but they are also more cost-efficient and effective.
Grieving with the Good Friday God
La complejidad hispana: Todo cambió en el 2012
(on articles open to the public, you must at least register for a free account).
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Newsletters
Google
Comments
Displaying 1–3 of 13 comments
See all comments
surfingirl
Easy for drjay1941 to say. His mother gave him an opportunity to speak his mind. So likened to the old commercial, "everyone stop and listen to sound advice" Just remember Governor Huckabee holds a picture of a little girl who is five years old in his wallet. She too would or could have been any one of these frozen embryo's. As Governor Huckabee tells us the story, the mother decided to share it, the little girl was a frozen embryo. Change is not a hand in changing a person's fate.... if you play GOD ...know it is "human fate" in history you play with. That privilage isn't ours. And when you want to OWN IT . BE PREPARED for science to abuse the executive order you gave to allow it. For man and woman have abused the right to abort a child through to the child's birth.
ronda
Thanks, Mary M., for reminding us that IVF plays a role in this discussion. One recent argument I've heard in favor of ESC is that "all those embryos are going to go to waste anyway." What a horror! The same person argued that by our current science we don't know when life begins. My answer: since we don't know, let's err on the side of caution. To "inadvertently" murder someone because we didn't know he/she was alive is a horrible thing to do! And to willfully create possibly alive persons but then keep them frozen in perpetual embryonic form -- well . . . .
drjay1941
The argument that federal support of stem-cell research using embryos to come rather than lines currently available is strangely equivalent to the exempting of religious organizations from propery and other taxes--whcih effectively places the burden of tax income on those tho do not belong to an organization so exempted, do not desire to belong, are opposed to the organization for any number of cogent reasons. There is a difference, however: the results of stem-cell research can indeed be clearly and reasonably made known in ways that offere inquirers the oportunity to check results. This is not quite the case with religious, tax-exempt organizations apart from the social effects which are, in the end, comparable to non-religious organizational efforts to work for the common good. Ideology of any sort, whether faith-based or non-faith based, is a poor basis for opposing research.