Stem cell research and therapy are not new and continue to be a controversial topic. The benefits of stem cells, and what most scientists agree are the potential benefits of stem cells, in curing disease and regenerating tissue are seemingly limitless. In the past bone marrow transplants were the primary method used to obtain stem cells for research into cures for contemporary diseases such as cancer, heart disease, Parkinson’s, Alzheimers, multiple sclerosis, and diabetes as well as spinal cord injuries. However, Embryonic Stem Cell Research (ESCR) is much more controversial.
There has been a recent shift to use embryonic stem cells because they have the ability to develop into any type of body tissue. Although the embryonic stem cells can be derived from the in-vitro process, many people oppose using these cells due to strongly held religious beliefs about the definition and sanctity of human life.
Stem cell research is a topic of much debate and forces us to evaluate our ethical and moral priorities. Choosing an ethical and moral approach that allows stem cell research to receive continued federal funding for continued scientific progress and the potential eradication of incurable contemporary diseases should be encouraged.
Stem Cell Types
There are two basic types of stem cells that historically have been used for research: embryonic stem cells and somatic (or adult) stem cells (“Stem Cell Basics,” 2015). Recently, research scientists have begun using a third type, induced pluripotent stem cells (IPSCs). These are adult cells that scientists reprogram so that the cells become embryonic (“Stem Cell Basics,” 2015).
Most of the controversy derives from the use of embryonic stem cells, ultimately to the as-yet-unanswered question, “When does life begin?” Scientists are not in agreement as to when this occurs. The use of somatic stem cells has much less controversy associated with its use. However, the science related to using somatic stem cells has yet to prove as efficient and effective as the use of embryonic stem cells.
History of Stem Cell Use
In the past, bone marrow transplants were the primary method used to obtain stem cells for research. The use of stem cells has proven to alleviate or even cure many diseases and conditions suffered by patients. The contemplation of these possibilities emanates from over a decade of research on stem cell-derived therapies (Weismann, 2015). This list includes such conditions as certain types of cancer, heart disease, Parkinson’s, Alzheimers, multiple sclerosis, and diabetes as well as spinal cord injuries (“Adult Stem Cells” 2013). Stem cells, by virtue of their embryonic state, have the potential to develop into any organ or tissue. Scientists have made great strides in determining how to coax a stem cell to develop, for example, into a heart or liver, and perhaps the next time into skin or bone.
Although the embryonic stem cells can be derived from the in-vitro process, many people oppose using them. Some believe that life begins at conception, hence it is the equivalent of murder to use or create embryonic stem cells.
The Promise of Stem Cell Use
Most scientists believe that the potential for stem cell use in medicine makes it imperative that research not only continue but accelerate. There is one key reason for this optimism, “Because of the self-renewal property of stem cells, a single transplantation treatment may have the potential to return an impaired organ to proper function for the life of the patient” (“The Promise of Stem Cells” n.d.). If this holds true, stem cells could theoretically cure, repair or fix just about anything. The side effects, for example, of transplants would disappear (“The Promise of Stem Cells,” n.d.).
Virtually all researchers agree that the potential is so vast that limiting or even prohibiting stem cell research altogether would be foolish and even violate one of the medical profession’s ethical tenets.
Positions of the Major Religions
Jewish and Islamic Views
Jews and Muslims have fewer objections to ESCR than most Christian groups have. This is because under Jewish and Shari’ a laws, the fetus is considered part of the mother and is not a person. Jewish law states that a fetus remains part of the mother for 40 days after conception. Shari’ a law states that a fetus does not have a soul until 120 days after conception (Bourzac, 2001).
In addition, embryos created outside a mother’s womb are not considered human and using them for stem cell research poses not moral dilemma from a religious perspective.
Christian Views
Christians beliefs are not as universal as those in Jewish and Muslim tradition regarding conception and fetuses. Roman Catholics generally insist that life begins at the moment of fertilization and hence the use of fetal tissue is a sin. Evangelical Christians tend to believe the same way. Others, such as protestants and Orthodox, are not as rigid in their interpretations.
The Medical Researcher’s Ethical Dilemma
According to the European Union’s official website regarding stem cell research, there are two ethical dilemmas that researchers must choose from when using stem cells: the duty to prevent or alleviate suffering and the duty to respect the value of human life (“Embryonic Stem Cell Research,” 2015). Most scientists do not dispute the promise that stem cell therapy holds for treating and preventing diseases and alleviating suffering. Over the past few decades the use of stem cells has already proven its effectiveness. However, many hold strongly to the belief that life begins at conception. If so, then by using embryonic stem cells a doctor or scientist violated the second ethical principle concerning valuing human life above all else. Using this definition or belief, then ESCR violates this.
Other problems, such as religious objections and more, make the entire ethical and moral view of stem cell use even murkier.
Legislative History
Governments, scientists, doctors, and the public have been wrestling with these ethical dilemmas for decades. As a result, laws and guidelines have been published and promulgated by various countries.
One viewpoint that most governments adhere to is that it is morally reprehensible and unacceptable to create embryos for the purpose of stem cell research (Weismann, 2015). Most institutions and individual scientists conducting stem cell research use “leftover” embryos from fertility clinics. Moreover, the practice only takes place with the consent of donors (Magnus & Cho, 2005).
Even so, many religious groups, especially conservative evangelicals, oppose using leftover embryos. The use of these embryos has generated considerable controversy over the years. Political parties in the United States have stem cell and embryo usage as part of their platforms and political parties attempt to generate support for their position pro or con (Levin, 2008).
Why Funding Stem Cell Research is Important
Funding stem cell research can not only help with the science of using stem cells to cure and alleviate diseases and degenerative or debilitating conditions, but it can also help to ensure that researchers carefully and thoughtfully address all sides of the moral and ethical issues involved. This strongly argues for increased government spending so that governments, that already have legislation in place, will continue to help provide oversight and direction.
There are many other reasons that continuing to fund stem cell research is essential. Science has already proven the benefits of stem cells and their use in research. Continued funding (“Eight reasons to Applaud,” 2009) will ensure that:
Faster and more efficient research can continue.
The search for life-saving cures will not be halted due to insufficient funds.
Safer and more efficient drug testing will be developed because researchers can use stem cells to quickly differentiate cells into a specific organ and test them in-vitro rather than using living people or animals.
Genetic research will improve as “scientists need to conduct research on embryonic stem cells so that they can discover how these all-purpose cells can change into any one of the more than 200 different cell types in the human body” (“Eight Reasons to Applaud,” 2009)
More standardization of research
Government Funding
Government funding must continue if stem cell research can continue. Without government funds, the pace and breadth of studies will stagnate. Government funding also provides the opportunity for legislatures to address their constituent’s moral and religious concerns and ensure that the voices of the people are heard. This will force governments to remain cautious and considerate of the religious and ethical views. Compromise and the crafting of the inevitable rules and regulations surrounding stem cell research will be more likely to include and address the concerns of all parties. Without some modicum of government control, through government control of part of the research funds, the moral and ethical issues may be forgotten in the quest for the next great cure.
Private Funding
While government funding has advantages, continuing private funding of stem cell research can mitigate the disadvantages of relying solely on government funding. The raw emotion surrounding stem cell usage can result in unexpected consequences. For example, the Congress of the United States cut off funding for stem cell research based on the “life begins at birth” viewpoint of the majority Republicans, and some democrats, in congress. When that happens, without private funding all research would have halted.
For example, President Clinton signed a law that prohibited using federal funds for scientific research that in destroyed human embryos. After the law had been signed, research at the University of Wisconsin cultivated the first embryonic stem cells, despite using human embryos that were destroyed in the process. This opened up an entirely new line of research, ultimately resulting in many medical breakthroughs. He was able to do this because, his funding came from private sources (Jacoby, 2010).
The promise of for-profit drugs, cures, and curative therapies resulting from stem cell research encourages private companies and groups to fund stem cell research. The more streams of funding available, the less likely that research will be halted and potential cures and therapies lost.
Conclusion
Stem cell research promises the future treatment of a broad range of degenerative, chronic and fatal modern diseases with no cures or effective treatments afflicting global populations. There are a number of scientific considerations involved with stem cell replacement therapy. No one person has the expertise to take the process of stem therapy research from start to finish. There are several stages which make collaboration essential to success. The collaboration of everyone from investors to researchers, clinicians and regulators are required to make the process happen.
Government funding will help ensure that proper attention is given to the moral and ethical questions raised by embryonic stem cell research. Public debate will be encouraged, politicians will stay engaged and overall the world and humankind will benefit. However, due to the ebb and flow of legislative and judicial challenges to stem cell research, private funding must also continue.
References
Adult Stem Cells - Therapies & Treatments List -. (2013). Retrieved July 15, 2016, from http://www.stemcellresearchfacts.org/treatment-list/
Bourzac, K. (2001, December). Stem Cells and Public Funding: Moral Controversies and Scientific Issues | JYI – The Undergraduate Research Journal. Retrieved July 16, 2016, from http://www.jyi.org/issue/stem-cells-and-public-funding-moral-controversies-and-scientific-issues/
Eight Reasons to Applaud Action on Stem Cells. (2009, March 9). Retrieved July 16, 2016, from https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/general/news/2009/03/09/5745/eight-reasons-to-applaud-action-on-stem-cells/
Embryonic stem cell research: An ethical dilemma. (2015, November 5). Retrieved July 16, 2016, from http://www.eurostemcell.org/factsheet/embyronic-stem-cell-research-ethical-dilemma
Jacoby, J. (2010, August 29). Let the private sector fund stem-cell research. Retrieved July 16, 2016, from http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/08/29/let_the_private_sector_fund_stem_cell_research
Levin, Y. (2008). The Electoral Politics of Stem Cells. Retrieved July 16, 2016, from http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-electoral-politics-of-stem-cells
Magnus, D., 7 Cho, M.K. (2005) Issues in Oocyte Donation for Stem Cell Research: Science, 308 (5729), 1747-1748
Stem Cell Basics. (2015, April 8). Retrieved July 16, 2016, from http://stemcells.nih.gov/staticresources/info/basics/
Stem Cell Research News. (n.d.). Retrieved July 16, 2016, from http://www.stemcellresearchnews.net/Diseases_Treated.aspx
The Embryonic Stem Cell. (n.d.). Retrieved July 16, 2016, from http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/scireport/pages/chapter2.aspx
The Promise of Stem Cells. (n.d.). Retrieved July 16, 2016, from http://www.stemcellsinc.com/science/the-promise-of-stem-cells
Weismann, I.L. (2015) Stem Cells are units of Natural Selection for Tissue Formation, for Germ0line Development, and in Cancer Development: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(29), 8922-8928
