Six Stem Cell Facts That We ‘Should’ Be Able to Agree On
From a subscription-only Wall Street Journal op-ed a little over a week ago by Robert P. George and REV. Thomas V. Berg, L.C.:
We propose six facts on which people on either side of the moral debate should be able to agree:
- There is no “ban” on human embryonic stem cell research in the United States. ….. ESC research goes on at labs throughout the country, with no legal barriers to prohibit such research or the private financing of it.
- We are a long way away from therapies derived from embryonic stem cells. ….. There are currently no controlled human clinical trials underway for ESC-derived therapies.
- The human embryo has at least some degree of special moral status. “We believe most would agree that human embryos deserve respect as a form of human life. . . .” So said President Clinton’s National Bioethics Advisory Committee, speaking of ESC research.
- There are non-controversial alternatives worth exploring. ….. Such alternatives include, among others, the reprogramming of ordinary somatic (body) cells, the derivation of stem cells from amniotic fluid, and ….. altered nuclear transfer.
- Concerns about embryo destruction are not only religious. Charles Krauthammer, a former member of the President’s Council on Bioethics, lucidly articulated this point in a Washington Post column: “I don’t believe that life — meaning the attributes and protections of personhood — begins at conception. Yet many secularly inclined people such as myself have great trepidation about the inherent dangers of wanton and unrestricted manipulation — to the point of dismemberment — of human embryos.”
- While the search for cures is an important motive behind ESC research, it is clearly not the only motive. Most scientists acknowledge that ESCs will not provide therapies for many years, if ever. Their therapeutic potential is, at best, speculative. They cannot be used now, even in clinical trials, because of their tendency to produce tumors. So it comes as no surprise that many scientists now admit that their primary interest in pursuing ESC research lies not in the hope for direct cell transplant therapies, but in the desire to enhance basic scientific knowledge of such things as cell signaling, tissue growth and early human development.
Though these seem pretty obvious to me, there is a big vested interest in denying the validity of many of the six items listed.
Mr. George is a professor of jurisprudence at Princeton University. Good thing he’s there, as at least a partial offset to this guy.
While it is true there is no ban on ESCR, Bush and friends are not helping by attempting to limit and even criminalize it. The result has been prolonged fights in the states. Time is running out for those of us with incurable diseases. While I don’t expect a cure for Parkinson’s from anything in my lifetime, it’s all the more reason to get cracking. ESC lines were only isolated in 1998. Research on ASCs has been going on for over 40 years. How can you judge research that hasn’t been done? I guess if you believe in virgin birth and immaculate conception you will believe anything you are told. Nobody has predicted, however, what awful things will happen if research on microscopic undifferentiated cells goes forward. It is time to recognize that science has outdistanced the Bronze Age theology that seeks to limit and control it. hESCR is important for learning the etiology of diseases, the first step before cures are available.
Comment by Rayilyn Brown — March 24, 2007 @ 4:22 pm
#1, you could not be more wrong:
- where are the attempts to “criminalize” ESCR?
- ASCR is making real progress; ESCR, IF IF IF it ever amounts to anything, is at least a decade away from providing something tangible.
- Your ridicule of and hostility towards the most important and influential faith on earth and in the history of mankind is sad and trite, and appears to render you unable to look at things objectively.
Here’s a small sampling of BizzyBlog truth doses:
http://bizzyblog.com/?p=4664
http://bizzyblog.com/?p=4251
http://bizzyblog.com/?p=4249
http://bizzyblog.com/?p=4130
http://bizzyblog.com/?p=3980
http://bizzyblog.com/?p=1607
http://bizzyblog.com/?p=1046
http://bizzyblog.com/?p=1044
I could triple that without breaking a sweat. The hope you are looking for is in non-embryonic stem cells.
Comment by TBlumer — March 24, 2007 @ 6:22 pm
Well said TBlumer. I agree wholeheartedly.
My brother is suffering from a spinal condition known as adhesive arachnoiditis as a result of contrast dye injections for x-rays he had taken of his back 30 years ago and is now finally receiving wonderful pain relief from adult stem cell injections. This is a treatment with proven results.
I believe that life begins at conception. The process of creating a human life (an embryo) with the intention only to destroy it IS murder. That is not an opinion, that is FACT. Let us divert research dollars into treatments that work now and leave the children alone.
Comment by robyn o — March 28, 2007 @ 2:14 am