Talking to Students About Stem-Cell Research

On July 13, 2005, at a rally urging Senate support for the House’s bill to increase federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, actor Michael J. Fox, who has suffered from Parkinson’s Disease since at least age 30, said,

I take issue with those who would say that these other methods are somehow more ethical. Most embryos left over from in-vitro fertilization are destroyed and thrown away. To my thinking, it is the highest form of ethics for them to be donated for medical research to help save lives and to allow federal funding of this research. Bringing up these alternatives at this stage is just more of the "wait and wait" attitude that is deeply frustrating to anyone who is suffering, or who has a loved one suffering from disease. . . . I urge members of the Senate: Send a strong message of hope to the 110 million Americans whose families are affected by disease.1

Stem-cell research is an important issue, and it is an emotional one, particularly, as Fox notes, for anyone who suffers from certain diseases or has a loved one who does. It is important for us as well as our students to be knowledgeable about this issue and to support good public policy concerning it.

What Is Stem-Cell Research?

Stem cells are cells that have the ability to form other types of cells.2 For example, a stem cell could be manipulated to generate nerve cells, muscle cells, or kidney cells. Of course, such cells have great potential in scientific research. Could stem cells someday be used to regenerate the brains of patients with Alzheimer’s disease? the spinal cords of patients with paraplegia or quadriplegia? specific organs, such as kidneys, livers, or even hearts, thereby eliminating the need for organ transplants (and the inevitable long waiting list to obtain one) and a lifetime of immunosuppressants? It is easy to see the benefit that could come from such research.3

There are two basic sources of stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are cultured from the inner linings of very young embryos, called blastocysts—the blastocysts themselves being destroyed by the culturing process.4 These stem cells are pluripotent—that is, they can develop into nearly any type of cells.5 Adult, or somatic, stem cells 6 are taken from a living organism’s tissues7 without resulting in the death of the organism.

History of the Issue

The medical use of stem cells goes back further than many people think.8 The first successful bone-marrow transplant, the effectiveness of which depends on stem cells, was performed (using nonisolated adult stem cells) in 1956.9 By the 1970s treatment of a few diseases, such as leukemia, with nonisolated adult stem cells was fairly routine.10 The use of stem cells from umbilical-cord blood began in 1988.11 Ten years later James Thomson at the University of Wisconsin in Madison first isolated human embryonic stem cells;12 it was then that the controversy began since before that time the use of stem cells had not necessarily resulted in the death of an organism. A number of people and organizations began pressing for more widespread research into the use of embryonic stem cells and in particular for federal funding of that research.13 By 2001 the issue had come to the front burner politically, and President Bush ordered carefully restricted federal funding for research on a few lines of embryonic stem cells that had already been produced (the source embryos already having been destroyed).14 He denied federal funding for the further destruction of embryos. This narrow policy has been opposed by many Americans.15 In 2005 Congress considered a bill to lessen the restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research; the House passed the bill on May 24, 2005, and the Senate in March 2006.16

Issues

It is important to remember that the controversy actually involves two distinct issues: the morality of embryonic research itself and the question of whether it should be federally funded. President Bush did not ban embryonic stem-cell research;17 the president simply said that the federal government would not pay for it, beyond certain fairly narrow limitations.18 There are no legal restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research, but it is expensive, and the researcher must obtain funding from an interested sponsor.

It is also important to remember that Bush’s funding limitations do not restrict research using adult stem cells; only embryonic stem-cell research faces the funding limitation.19

Arguments for Funding Embryonic Stem-Cell Research20

  • The potential benefit from embryonic stem-cell research far outweighs the cost of the destruction of the embryos.21 Embryonic stem cells are potentially far more powerful and flexible than adult stem cells.
  • Blastocysts do not have legal standing as persons, and there is no scientific evidence that they should.22
  • The blastocysts that are destroyed in the process would be discarded, and thus destroyed, anyway.23

Arguments Against Funding Embryonic Stem-Cell Research24

  • The blastocyst contains all the genetic material of a complete human being and so should be considered a person. To do otherwise is to encourage disrespect for human life.
  • Embryonic stem-cell research holds no promise not already promised by adult stem-cell research.25
  • Embryonic stem cells are subject to immune rejection by the recipient, while adult stem cells, since they come from the recipient himself, are not.
  • Ample private funding is available for embryonic research.26
  • Surplus embryos from fertility treatments need not be discarded; they may be donated to couples who wish to have a child.
  • If the research is encouraged, some would be tempted to produce embryos in order to sell them for research.27

The embryonic stem-cell controversy suffers from two significant characteristics: first, it is highly emotional because of the fact that research suggests that great suffering may be alleviated; and second, it is difficult because we have no unambiguous authoritative source on precisely when life begins.28 Your students should be encouraged to bring to their analysis of this issue their biblical knowledge and their scientific knowledge and to augment that knowledge with reliable experts in those fields. In the end, the decision should be driven not by emotion but by careful discovery of and logical extrapolation from the available facts, both theological and scientific. And of course, since truth is internally consistent, good theology and good science will not contradict one another.

top

1http://www.michaeljfox.org

2Authoritative sources for information about stem-cell science include the National Institutes of Health (NIH) site at http://stemcells.nih.gov/ and the National Bioethics Advisory Commission site at http://www.bioethics.gov/topics/stemcells_index.html. The latter is a particularly rich source of information. See also a lay explanation at http://www.clearlyexplained.com/nature/life/ cells/stemcells.html

3On December 2, 1998, the director of the NIH testified before Congress on the potential benefits of stem-cell research. The full text of his testimony is available online at http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/t981202a.html.

4Embryonic stem cells can also be derived from the tissue of aborted fetuses.

5Stem cells that can develop into a complete organism are called totipotent. Pluripotent stem cells can develop into any type of cell except placenta cells and certain other cell types required for fetal development. Stem cells that can develop into all of the cell types associated with the tissue type from which they are taken, but no others, are called multipotent. See more details at http://www.stemcellresearchfoundation.org/About/FAQ.htm#10.

6Adult stem cells are multipotent but are alleged not to be pluripotent. For evidence of pluripotency in adult cells, see http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/ASCpluripotency.pdf.

7And from the brains of cadavers (http://www.nature.com/cgitaf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v411/n6833/full/411042a0_fs.html[subscription required]). Umbilical-cord blood seems to have particular promise as a source for adult stem cells for two main reasons: first, this blood is unusually rich in multipotent stem cells, and second, these cells are less susceptible to immune-based rejection (http://cordblood.cryosite.com/faq.asp#4).

8For up-to-date news on developments in stem-cell research, see http://www.stemcellresearchnews.com/ and http://www.stemnews.com/

9http://www.medhunters.com/articlestransplantTimelineBMT.html

10Little was known about stem cells at the time, and they could not be isolated.

11The first transfer cured a rare kind of anemia, but since then cord-blood stem cells have been used to cure 80 different diseases (http://www.leukemia-lymphoma.org/all_mat_toc.adp?item_id=9622#_q-4).

12The story was first written up in Science on November 6 of that year. The full text of the article is available online at http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/282/5391/1145.

13See, for example, http://www.stemcellresearchfoundation.org/; http://www.isscr.org/; http://www.camradvocacy.org/; http://www.agi-usa.org/; http://www.amaassn.org/ama/pub/category/13594.html; and a 2004 editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/351/17/1789).

14His primetime speech setting forth the policy was delivered on August 9, 2001. The full text of the speech, which is an excellent summary of the issues and arguments, is available online at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20010809-2.html.

15Perhaps the most famous Americans who campaigned for greater federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research were Nancy Reagan, the former first lady, whose husband, former president Ronald Reagan, died on June 5, 2004, after a decade of Alzheimer’s disease (http://www.alz.org/Research/Reagan/overview.asp); Christopher Reeve, the actor, who died on October 10, 2004, after being paralyzed in a horseback riding accident in 1995 (http://www.christopherreeve.org/); actress Mary Tyler Moore, who suffers from type 1 (once called "juvenile") diabetes and acts as a spokesperson for the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (http://www.jdrf.org/); and actor Michael J. Fox, who suffers from Parkinson’s disease and heads the largest private source of funding for Parkinson’s research (http://www.michaeljfox.org/; Fox is Canadian-born but became a U.S. citizen in 2000). In addition, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a physician (heart/lung surgeon), announced on July 29, 2005, that he favored modifying the president’s policy to include research using embryonic stem-cell lines that had not been included in the 2001 speech.

16The bill is officially called the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, HR 810 and S 471. The full text, which is quite brief, is available online at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h810eh.txt.pdf. In his speech mentioned above, Senator Frist identified what he viewed as several weaknesses in the legislation as of the day of the speech.

17In fact, Bush was the first president to propose allowing limited federal funding for any embryonic stem-cell research. To be fair, however, Clinton was president for only two years after the first isolation of embryonic stem cells in 1998. But his administration had already opposed federal funding for the creation of human embryos for research purposes in 1994 (Statement, 30 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 2459, Dec. 2, 1994; see also http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/cloning_directive.htm).

18As a result of this action, some states have moved to fund embryonic stem-cell research at the state level. See a very helpful and up-to-date chart summarizing the position of each state that has addressed the issue at http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/genetics/embfet.htm.

19http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2004pres/20040714b.html

20For the statements of several (mostly liberal or of similar stripe) theologians on the ethics of embryonic stem-cell research, see http://www.georgetown.edu/research/nrcbl/nbac/stemcell3.pdf. The International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) maintains a web page linking to original texts on both sides of the question at http://www.isscr.org/scientists/ethics.htm. For another list of arguments on both sides of the issue, see http://www.spinneypress.com.au/178_book_desc.html.

21The blastocysts have no central nervous system and so can almost certainly feel no pain.

22The pro-life movement consistently argues that human life begins at conception—or that, in the absence of definite knowledge, we should assume, out of respect for human life, that it begins at conception until we are convinced otherwise. It has been noted that twinning can occur in an embryo as much as 14 days after conception; some suggest that this implies that individual human life must develop at some point after that. See an opposing analysis of this argument at http://www.equip.org/free/DH245.htm.

23The source embryos are usually those developed during the infertility treatment IVF (in-vitro fertilization). Because the implantation of embryos has a high failure rate, clinics routinely create more embryos in vitro than they think they will need, and they eventually discard the unneeded ones. For this reason, some pro-life groups view IVF as unethical/ immoral as well (unless all embryos are implanted). See, for example, http://www.catholicqanda.com/StemCell.html.

24See, for example, http://www.catholicplanet.com/articles/article95.htm; http://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/bioethics/facts/a0027739.cfm; and http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3826.

25See, for example, http://www.lifenews.com/bio984.html, and a government white paper evaluating this question at http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/white_paper/text.html. Opponents of embryonic stem-cell research have frequently observed that while adult stem-cell research has generated successful treatments for scores of diseases, embryonic stem-cell research has yet to yield any treatment for even one disease (e.g., http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm). Proponents of the latter, however, note that adult stem-cell research has had a forty-year head start. Some cite a Korean treatment that allowed a paralyzed woman to walk again, but this was done with umbilical-cord cells, not embryonic cells (http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/200411/kt2004112617575710440.htm). At least two other paraplegics have responded to treatment with adult stem cells (http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1268&wit_id=3671).

26One proponent of embryonic research, Dr. Myron Genel of the Yale University School of Medicine, argues that "pluripotent stem-cell research is so promising that it will inevitably take place in the private sector" (http://www.physweekly.com/archive/99/10_04_99/pc.html). One might wonder, then, why the need for federal funding at all. He argues that federal funding would produce a higher quality of research and would be more open to avenues of research that might not promise immediate financial profit. In his 2001 speech, President Bush himself noted that many believe that federal funding will speed the process, thereby potentially saving lives.

27The bill considered in 2005 (see note 16 above) specifically forbids the use of embryos produced for any other reason than infertility treatment and also embryos for which money was paid. Incidentally, another argument against embryonic research is that the results of such processes could be patented and the use thereby limited; while adult stem cells, since they come from the recipient himself, would not be subject to patent ( http://www.policyalmanac.org/health/archive/crs_stem_cell.shtml; http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/hl888.cfm).

28The question of when life begins is ruled by our definition of life in the sense of personhood. For a summary of major positions, see http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_when.htm.

Dan Olinger teaches in the Seminary at Bob Jones University.