Research on Stem Cells is one of the most interesting areas of modern biology- but as we see in all expanding fields, the more we discover the more there is to question. To consider the question of the Ethics of Stem Cell Research we must first have a clear understanding of what are Stem Cell Research and its potential and what is ethics.
I have decided to present this discussion in the form of a multi-media blog post as it will allow me to use different resources that i have found on the internet to illustrate the question and controversy at hand.
Stem Cell Research:
We all have developed through growth and differentiation. Growth is very rapid during the embryonic stages, as the embryo divides cells are ‘set aside’ that will transform into different parts of the body. After fertilization the embryo moves down the fallopian tubes and into the stage of the Blastocyst (the 3-5 day old embryo). At this stage the inner cells begin to form the entire body of the organism. These transformations come out of the Germ Layers. These layers are like the ‘primary colours’. The Ectoderm will become the brain, the nervous system, the skin. The Mesoderm will become the muscles, the kidneys, and the heart. The Endoderm will become the whole gut tube. These are stem cells as they have the ability to continually divide and differentiate (develop) into various other kind(s) of cells/tissues. They have the potential to remain a stem cell or to transform into a cell with a more specialized function.
From Fertilization to Embryo:
From Fertilization to Embryo:
Stem Cells have two main characteristics, firstly that they are ‘unspecialized’[1] cells and even after a long time of inactivity can renew themselves. Under specific conditions they can become specific cells with specific functions, as they do when they become tissue or organ specific cells. Also in the gut and bone marrow these stem cells divide and repair regularly replacing the damaged and worn out tissues. It is because of the unique qualities and characteristics of stem cells that they have so much potential for treating dieses.
Studding stem cells continually advance our knowledge and understanding of how our entire self develops from a single meeting. This expanded knowledge allows us to further understand how we can use this knowledge to better people suffering from conditions that were previously thought to be ‘incurable’. For example scientist now compare cells that do and don’t have birth defects to try to understand what might have causes them.
The Stem Cells with the greatest potential is the ‘Totipotent’ (‘capable of forming a new fetus and its associated membranes’[2]), this stem cell is created at the earliest stages of development, soon after the union of the sperm and the egg, or the ‘pluripotent’ because they can make new tissues thou not a full organism. However scientists can also use stem cells that occur in the adult organism in tissues. Understanding stem cells and studying stem cells allows for the possibility of cell therapy, where scientists can grow stem-cells in a laboratory and use them to replace and repair tissues that have been destroyed. For example ‘Pluripotent stem cells stimulated to produce a myriad of different specialized cell types could, in theory, be used to replace tissues destroyed by diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, retinal degeneration, muscular dystrophy, spinal cord injury, and so on, without the need for transplanted organs. Successful cell therapy could revolutionize the treatment of a wide range of injuries and degenerative diseases.’[3]
Adult Stem cell research has already shown its successes, however embryonic stem cell research, although there is much hope, has not. This could be possibly caused by a lack of funding, as it appears that the ethical divided on the question mainly comes when we consider stem cell research on embryonic or germ cell-derived cells. Leading us to question our ethics and how they apply to this question.
Ethics:
French philosopher, Andre Comte-Sponvilles defines ethics as applying not only to the ‘first person singular’ but applying universally as we are all human beings and in such all ‘I’s’. He states that it is clear that in ‘practice ethics may differ depending on ones education’ and in such there is ‘no absolute ethics, or at least one that anyone can fully know.’ I agree fully with him when he says that ethics is what we do to survive as a race.
‘But when I abstain from cruelty, racism or murder, it is not simply a question of personal preference; something with depends on individual tastes. It is, essentially, a question of the survival of- and the dignity of- society as a whole, in other words of humanity, of civilization.’[4]
It is a very controversial issue because there are many different standpoints. For example in first cartoon below we see that Stem Cell research did not cure the old man, but the embryo died because of it, the following cartoons highlights the different opinions on the topic.
In Obama’s video listed below he speaks of an old man who to was waiting for a cure that might be found in Embryonic stem cell research and why his government decided to support Embryonic Stem Cell Research. However the video directly after it shows another point of view which argues that embryonic research is destruction of life.
It is also a question of the value of different stages of life and whether life at that scale is more important then life of a ‘conscious’ human being. An interpretation of the perspective of this question is posed in the cartoon below which shows the point of view from The Bush administration. (Image: http://www.esoterically.net/weblog/2007/12/04/the-stem-cell-spin-part-deux)
This video also highlights why theses ideas held by the Bush administration seem absurd.
This very long video includes professors and ministers from all over America who speak on the issue from both stand points- they all make extremely intellectual points and it is a very valid ethical debate that is extremely interesting and comprehensive if you have the time to watch.
The ethical debate seems to be over the ‘destruction’ of human embryos and in the question of when does the life of a human being begin. People are divided on their beliefs on the ethical stance of this research, so i will refer us back to our definition: ‘ethics may differ depending on ones education’ and in such there is ‘no absolute ethics, or at least one that anyone can fully know.’ Which leads us to his further point ‘It is, essentially, a question of the survival of- and the dignity of- society as a whole, in other words of humanity, of civilization.’ This here leaves us divided, as some believe that from the moment of fertilization an embryo has the full moral status of a human being and therefore any research on theses embryos is ethically wrong.
Robert P. George writes in his paper A Distinct Human Organism for NPR (MLA Source 2) “The human embryo is not something different in kind from a human being, nor is it merely a 'potential human being,' whatever that might mean. Rather the human embryo is a human being in the embryonic stage.” We should believe that “The adult that is you is the same human being who, at an earlier stage of your life, was an adolescent, and before that a child, an infant, a fetus and an embryo. Even in the embryonic stage, you were a whole, living member of the species Homo sapiens. You were then, as you are now, a distinct and complete — though, of course, immature — human organism.” He justifies his argument by saying that we must resort back to the texts of when life beings and “In these texts, we find little or nothing in the way of scientific uncertainty: "…human development begins at fertilization…" write embryologists Keith Moore and T.V. N. Persaud in The Developing Human (7th edition, 2003), the most widely used textbook on human embryology.” To this argument we must question, as Laurie Zoloth does: “Beyond the question of life's biological beginning, we need also to decide when our moral obligations to others begin — in this case, to others who suffer and whose own lives are at stake.”[5]
People of faith also argue against research as it taking the life of a ‘baby’ a human being.
The following video 'slams on religion' arguing that religion is suppressing reaserch which has the potenital to allow many people who could be cured.
Some groups consider that in the early stages of the embryo it has no more worth than any other cell. It is then a middle ground that seems to offer the most grounds for governments and scientists to move forward on whilst still respecting the differences in public opinion. This middle ground view seems to believe that a embryo does not have the whole moral status of a person, though it has more worth than any other cell because of its potential to develop into a human being, but does not have the ‘absolute right to life’ or rather that this right can be superseded by the potential it has to help society in general. It is here that we see clearly the link back to our definition of ethics: ‘It is, essentially, a question of the survival of- and the dignity of- society as a whole, in other words of humanity, of civilization.’ Allowing this allows for the better survival of our society as a whole. It is for this reason that most research is allowed up to 14 days after formation of the zygote.
New developments however have allow for there to be less controversy as Scientists from the Medical Research Council Centre for Regenerative Medicine at the University of Edinburgh, have found a way of “a way of delivering foreign genes to reprogrammed the cells without using viruses in mouse and human cells.” Josephine Quintavalle, of Comment on Reproductive Ethics, said: "This is ethical stem cell research at its best, with embryonic-type stem cells derived successfully from adult tissue without involving human embryos." There is still of course a lot to learn about the human embryonic stem cell in order for scientists to be sure whether or not stem cells that are ‘reprogrammed from adult cells’ can be successful or not, but for the time being theses developments provided ‘ethical stem cell creation hope.’ [7]
Conclusion:
Personally I support embryonic and adult stem cell research. We allow in our society for the treatment of our infertility, creating blastocysts in our labs, and knowing that there is a high likelihood that none of theses will make it to term. We leave them or depose of them. It seems wrong to me to question what is at stake.The possibility, yes acknowledging experimentation, trial and error; that theses blastocysts have the possibility to treat diseases like spinal cord injury, Parkinson’s, diabetes- diseases thought to be incurable. Through stem cell research there is possibility to end ‘conscious’ human suffering - how can we not move forward, not try to succeed?
As Dr. Laurie Zoloth writes ‘We have our duties toward all of life, to be certain. We have duties toward the uncertain microscopic world, duties toward the blastocysts we create. But we have duties as well toward the millions of patients who might be cured by regenerative medicine, just as we did toward infertile women. It is the strong belief in many religious and philosophic traditions that the ethical appeal for healing the suffering neighbor is far more important than the appeal for the blastocyst.’[8]
As Dr. Laurie Zoloth writes ‘We have our duties toward all of life, to be certain. We have duties toward the uncertain microscopic world, duties toward the blastocysts we create. But we have duties as well toward the millions of patients who might be cured by regenerative medicine, just as we did toward infertile women. It is the strong belief in many religious and philosophic traditions that the ethical appeal for healing the suffering neighbor is far more important than the appeal for the blastocyst.’[8]
Would we not be going against our ethical responsibilities to the survival of our society, humanity and civilization if we abstained from researching in a possible key to curing some of the greatest physical sufferings and diseases faced by our society? The answer of this controversial debate, to me, seems quite clear: to move forward ethically, we must do just that, move forward, allow for research and hope that with time, and support for the scientific discovery stem cell research will offer a cure and potential we hope for, to do this however we must take the first stem of support.
[1] 1
[2] 1
[3] 1
[4] 5
[5] 3
[6] 3
[7] 4
[8] 3
Bibliography:
Bibliography:
MLA:
1.
Dr. Janet Rossant, Dr. Janet Rossant. "Canadian Institutes of Health Research / Instituts De Recherche En Santé Du Canada - Stem_cell_e.pdf." Canadian Institutes of Health Research | Instituts De Recherche En Santé Du Canada. Web. 22 Nov. 2010. <http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/pdf_14370.htm>.
2. George, Robert P. "A Distinct Human Organism : NPR." NPR : National Public Radio : News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR. National Public Radio. Web. 22 Nov. 2010. <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4857703>.
3. Zoloth, Laurie. "What Does It Mean to Be Human? : NPR." NPR : National Public Radio : News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR. Web. 22 Nov. 2010. <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4867060>.
4. "BBC NEWS | Health | 'Ethical' Stem Cell Creation Hope." BBC News - Home. Web. 22 Nov. 2010. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7914976.stm>.
5. Andre Comte-Sponville, Andre. The Little Book of Philosophy. Vintage. Print.
YouTube Videos:
Against:
This group supports Adult Stem Cell Research, but is against embryonic Stem Cell Research as it is “destruction of life.”
Pro:
This group argues that ‘Embryonic Stem-Cell research is one of the most promising areas or research to generate medical therapies for conditions suffered by millions of people’ but because or religion we are not investing in it- highlighting its point by comparing an Embryo to a fly.
The Bush administration did not support embryonic cell research. This video highlights why this seems absurd.
President Obama sings legislation that will financially support Stem Cell Research and he explains why the American government is supporting this research.
No comments:
Post a Comment