Embryonic Stem Cells - Research Paper Example

? Embryonic Stem Cells Introduction Ever since medical science has known about stem cells and its peculiar property of self-renewal, it has generateda great hope in providing treatment and permanent solution to the patients that suffer from some of the genetic diseases such as type I diabetes, Parkinson, multiple sclerosis, stroke, spinal cord lesions and numerous other diseases. Human embryonic stem cells (hES) can generate pancreas, liver, cardiac, neural cells in tissue culture or through other technique and can be of immense help for therapeutic purposes; however, the moot question is whether it is ethical to use hES for research purposes. Embryonic stem cell research has become a topic of controversy because removing the stem cells leads to destruction of the embryo (Wert & Mummery, 2003). Many associate this act to the destruction of a human being while others say human life does not begin at embryonic stage. The paper attempts to explore various views and arguments favoring and opposing the embryonic stem cells research along with the legal standing that applies to the topic in the US; the paper finally concludes with the position that can be taken on the subject of embryonic stem cells research keeping in mind the overall benefit to mankind. Catholic Church Opposing Embryonic Stem Cell Research The Catholic Church is strongly opposed to the idea of embryonic stem cell research. Taylor (2011) elaborates the view point of the Catholic Church on this controversial topic. Accordingly, egg fertilization is construed as a beginning of life and the human life must be treated with dignity. In Ten Commandments, God told Moses not to kill humans that means God values every human life and forbids any kind of killing or destroying human life; that is what precisely happens in hES research and that is a sin. According to the Catholic Church, "Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life" (Taylor, 2011). The Church further argues, "The embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being" (Taylor, 2011). Identical Ethical Framework Desired for Human Embryos and Organ Transplantation Landry and Zucker (2004) argue that there may not be a consensus when human life begins but there is a consensus on when life expires. A human being considered dead when his or her brain stops functioning regardless of the status of other organs. Similarly, a 4-or 8-cell human embryo when its capacity of division, growth and differentiation is lost should be considered dead. During the process of in-vitro fertilization, it is known that many embryos are not viable for implantation because they cannot divide and grow; they are virtually dead as organisms. In real life scenarios, the current ethical norms allows using organs and tissues from deceased humans for transplantation purposes and there is nothing wrong if the same ethical framework is extended further that allows stem cells from the dead human embryos for research purposes. Human Lives to be Respected at All Stages As per the arguments put forward by the proponents of ethical values, fertilized eggs needs to be protected simply because they are potential humans. When human lives are worthy of honor at any point of time, it cannot be decided that at an early stage or at embryonic stage the life is not worthy of honor. If one does not accept the moment of fertilization as a significant moment to extend full protection then there cannot be any other significant moment in the human life. Right from embryonic stage to fully grown human state, it is a phenomenon of physical growth and arbitrarily, it cannot be decided that at one particular point of time, individuality is acquired. In fact, individuality is acquired at the very moment when egg gets fertilized. In one of the argument it is said that providing permission to ruin pre-implant embryos or fertilized eggs is more or less akin to destroying newborns or a human being that has lost its cognitive capacities (Hug, 2006). Furthermore, extending the same logic, it is said, "Human embryos differ from other human beings not in what they are, but in their stage of development. A human embryo is a human being in the embryonic stage, just as an infant or an adolescent is a human being in the infant or an adolescent is a human being in the infant or adolescent stage" (Hug, 2006, p. 208). Human Embryo to be Safeguarded for its Own Worth Some other arguments are also proposed by moral and ethical value supporters. In one of the contention, it is argued that protection to species is not provided because universe values them but they are to be protected for the sake of species itself. Extending the same logic, human embryo needs to be protected for its own sake. Even the more radical argument given is: “By directing an embryo to become certain cells, the embryo is prevented from developing in its normal complete fashion. It is completely reprogramming an embryo and thus preventing it from becoming what it was programmed to become – a human being" (Hug, 2006, p. 210). Accordingly, one needs to be cautious and should not damage a fertilized egg even if one is not sure about its worth. Another dimension of argument can be seen in this statement: “Simply because being uncertain as to whether a particular organism is a human being, it would be more reasonable to refrain from destroying it. For example, a hunter refrains from shooting if he is not sure whether the particular object at which he is aiming is a deer or a man" (Hug, 2006, p. 210). In the above argument, moral and ethical values can be seen approaching its celestial point. Human Embryo Grows only in Uterus– No Independent Existence Welin (2002) argues that the embryo on its own cannot evolve into a human unless it is planted to a woman's uterus. Embryo needs external support for its growth and even with the external support – as in case of in-vitro fertilization, its success rate to transforming into a fully grown human is low. Several factors of external support such as degree and quality come into play for its growing into humans. The point is that its inherent potentiality to grow in humans cannot be treated as if it were a person. Moreover, embryo loss is a certainty that often occurs during in-vitro fertilization techniques; accordingly, let there be some embryo loss for research purposes because that is for the benefit of masses. Embryonic Stem Cell Research vs. Adult Stem Cell Research James (2008) argues that the self-respect of the human person lies in not treating others as a commodity or as a tool to attain something that is desirable. James (2008) further emphasizes that embryonic stem cell research when compared with adult stem cell research does not offer any promise. In support, he cites several examples in which embryonic cells implantation failed miserably. First and foremost, at Columbia University's college of Physicians and Surgeons, patients who were given embryonic cells implant had uncontrollable movements to the extent that doctors called them devastating. James further argues that adult stem cells rather offer much more promise and he presents several examples that can be presented as per the following. Adult Stem Cells Offer More Promise than Embryonic Stem Cells As per Harvard Medical School’s finding, adult stem cells can eliminate the need, if there is any, of embryonic stem cells. The researchers could achieve a permanent cure for Type 1 diabetes in mice by simply eliminating the cells that were causing diabetes. In this case, adult stem cells simply provide the solution to produce insulin and cure the disease. The results obtained from adult stem cells looked promising for lupus, multiple sclerosis, arthritis and more than 50 ailments. In another experiment at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, a patient with fatal skin disorder was cured through his own adult stem cells. At Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago, the patients suffering from Crohn's disease were cured by their own adult stem cells acquired from their blood (James, 2008). Why Not Experiment with Only Adult Stem Cells where Evidence Available At the University of South Florida in Tampa, researchers could detect that adult stem cells acquired from the umbilical cord could cure the damaged tissue in brain of a stroke patient. At the Northern Kentucky Eye Laser Center, Dr. Edward Holland uses adult stem cells to significantly improve the eyesight of his patients. This is also endorsed by the doctors from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York. Researchers at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of NJ could discover that bone marrow cells may be used to treat nerve and brain injuries. They could convert a large proportion of the bone marrow cells into nerve cells (James, 2008). Adult Stem Cells – a Better Alternative than Embryonic Stem cells Based on the above findings and according to Diane Irving, a professor at Georgetown University, adult stem cells are better than embryonic cells because they are closer to the cells that require replacement. The important thing needs to be noticed is that chances of genetic errors with adult stem cells are much fewer. Therefore, there is no need to continue with embryonic stem cell research and all focus should be directed to adult stem cell research where the possibilities of success to finding cure for many genetic diseases are much stronger (James, 2008). Double Standard of Moralists and Ethicists Glick (2011) argues that law does not punish the IVF practitioners who discard spare embryos nor ethicists and moralists take objection to it. The creators of embryos very well know that these embryos are going to be destroyed. Does that mean that they should be charged with homicides? Surprisingly, no moralists has ever raised objection to this act of IVF practitioners. This clearly shows the double standard of ethicists. The point is that embryonic stem cell research needs to be accepted by the moralists in the same way as they accept IVF practices for last over one decade. Countering the argument that recommends only adult stem cell research, Glick argues that knowledge and understanding required for working with adult stem cells has a lot to do with prior art of hES cells research and any advances in the hES research will certainly help promote the adult stem cell research for overall benefit of mankind. Federal Laws It will be interesting to see how the US government views and supports the embryonic stem cell research. President Clinton, in 1995, first enacted a law imposing ban providing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. The ban was renewed every year until 2001 when the President Bush restricted federal funding to just 21 viable hES cell lines. However, President Obama, through an executive order, cancelled earlier constraints and allowed federal funding for researches on any hES lines meeting the National Institute of Health's (NIH) ethical policies. Informed consent from the donors is an essential condition for NIH approval. By July 2010, total 64 hES cell lines were supported by US federal funding (Federal Policy, 2011). California State Initiative In November 2004, California State took initiative and established the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) with initial outlay of USD 3 billion to support research on hES and adult stem cells. Unlike NIH, CIRM permitted research on new hES lines and provided funds for the lines that has not been yet approved by the NIH. Moreover, the CIRM developed partnerships with other institutions around the world (Nature Cell Biology, 2010). Other State Initiatives in the US Some other states such as New Jersey, Maryland, Illinois, Massachusetts, Ohio and New York have shown inclination for hES cell research though their voters are reluctant to support funding for hES research. It is pertinent to note that countries such as Japan, China, Sweden, and Belgium have more liberal policies in the creation of new hES cell lines (Nature Cell Biology, 2010). Conclusion From the above study, it is quite evident that researchers, scientists and ethicist all have varied views and arguments on the subject of embryonic stem cell research; however, most of them acknowledge therapeutic advantages of such research in the long run. Diversity of views on the subject is going to remain due to differences in perceptions and ultimate objectives. It will be most appropriate, at this juncture, to continue with the research on those hES lines that are already open and approved by NIH and depending upon the actual success achieved in curing certain diseases, the scope of further research on other lines can be expanded. References Hug, K (2006). Therapeutic perspectives of human embryonic stem cell research versus the moral status of a human embryo – does one have to be compromised for the other? http://medicina.kmu.lt/0602/0602-03e.pdf [Accessed 2 November, 2013] Glick. J. L. (2011).Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News. Genengnews.com http://www.genengnews.com/gen-articles/arguments-in-support-of-embryonic-stem-cell-funding/3577/ [Accessed 2 November, 2013] James, C.D. (2008). An ethical Debate on Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Human Dignity or Research Freedom? Grin Verlag. Germany. Landry, D. W.; Zucker, H. A. (2004). Embryonic death and the creation of human embryonic stem cells. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC524233/ [Accessed 2 November, 2013] [also available at The journal of clinical Investigation. http://www.jci.org/articles/view/23065 [Accessed 2 November, 2013] Nature Cell Biology (2010). Human Embryonic stem cell research in the US: Time for Change? http://www.nature.com/ncb/journal/v12/n7/full/ncb0710-627.html [Accessed 2 November, 2013] Taylor, R. (2011). Why Does The Catholic Church Oppose Embryonic Stem Cell Research? Lifenews.com. http://www.lifenews.com/2011/11/16/why-does-the-catholic-church-oppose-embryonic-stem-cell-research/ [Accessed 1 November, 2013] Welin, S. (2002). "Ethical Issues in human embryonic stem cell research". Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1034/j.1600-0412.2002.810501.x/abstract [Accessed 2 November, 2013] Federal Policy (2011). Stem Cell Information. nih.gov. http://stemcells.nih.gov/policy/Pages/Default.aspx [Accessed 2 November, 2013] Wert, G.; Mummery, C. (2003). “Human embryonic stem cells: research, ethics and policy”. oxfordjournals.org. http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/18/4/672.full [Accessed 2 November, 2013] Read More