Stem cell debate: the issues

Sydney
25 August 2002

Stem cells: Cancer risk warning

Stem cell debate: the issues

Will John Paul II see Poland again?

Protesters meet on brothel plan

Song offers to ‘carry the flame within’ for John Paul

Here is the news Live on Radio 2

Sisters renew vows after 390 years ...

Canada Bay raises $50,000 for Burmese aid project

Catholic Press – ‘duty to report truth’

Religious reporting ‘important to ABC’

Editorial: The good priest

Letters: Change the words

Conversation: No bullies allowed in his oasis of harmony - Br Nicholas Harsas, primary school principal

Reflections: Priests can be youthful at any age

Would a war against Iraq be just?

‘Lost for words’ in moment with Pope

Toronto and the witness of youth

Battle to help ‘dual diagnosis’ victims

Inspirations: ‘Courage and strength’

Stem cell debate: the issues

By Dr Amin Abboud

Regenerative medicine is an exciting new field of medicine in which different techniques, including stem cells, are used to repair damaged organs and tissues. The ethical issue is where we get the stem cells from. The destruction of embryos for stem cells research is ethically unacceptable.

What are stem cells?

Stem cells can change into many types of cells – heart cells, nerve cells, muscle cells, skin etc. Because of this capacity they may prove useful for treatment of some medical conditions .

Where do stem cells come from?

Adult stem cells can be taken from living humans (children or adults) without harming them. Embryonic stem cells come from embryos. The embryo is destroyed and its stem cells are extracted.

What are the benefits of stem cell treatment?

Stem cell research may benefit many conditions, including Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, spinal cord injuries, heart disease and cancer. The new cells may be able to replace damaged tissue. The only stem cells that have helped patients so far are adult stem cells. Embryonic stem cell research has not helped a single patient.

Which cells should doctors use?

The deception that there is no alternative to embryonic stem cell research is propagated by those with a personal interest in destructive embryonic stem cell research. Successful and ethical adult stem cell research involves no destruction of embryos.

Is this a clash between religion and science?

No. It is about good science versus bad science. Good science is ethical science.

Why are some scientists pushing embryonic stem cell research if the use of adult stem cell is useful and ethical?

The key argument for using stem cells from embryos is they are easier to change into other types of cells. While this has some basis, the technology is improving so rapidly that it is hard to substantiate. The advantage of embryo stem cells may already have been superseded.

Why shouldn’t we use embryonic stem cells for cures and research?

1. It is unethical.

The process of obtaining them destroys a human embryo.

2. Embryonic stem cells can cause cancer.

Embryonic stem cells are versatile but they can also become malignant. Their potential for causing cancer is a real concern for researchers.

3. It is unnecessary.

Adult stem cells are proving to be a viable alternative.

4. The benefits of embryonic stem cells are a long way off.

Most scientists admit that the potential benefits of embryonic stem cells are still distant. However, many adult stem cell breakthroughs have already taken place.

5. The use of adult stem cells seems to overcome the problem of immune rejection, which will be a big problem with embryonic stem cells.

Our bodies quickly recognise and try to kill off foreign tissues implanted in them. By using cells from oneself, the compatibility problem is avoided.

6. Embryonic stem-cell research is not driven by hope for cure, but lust for profit.

Many of the cell lines are in the hands of private companies. The amount of vested financial interests is staggering.

What about ‘reproductive cloning’?

Almost everyone agrees that ‘reproductive cloning’ should be banned. But if we allow cloning for research, unscrupulous people will inevitably push for cloning an embryo to produce a child.

Does an embryo deserve the same respect as a person?

The human embryo is a distinct, living human being and is entitled to the same rights as any other human being. Human life begins at conception (or fertilisation).

Won’t embryos be destroyed anyway? Why not do something useful with them?

Those who argue that frozen embryos would be destroyed anyway miss the point. Couples had the embryos created for implantation and bringing about new life. The existence of surplus embryos is a scientific embarrassment and legal mess created by the IVF industry.

This is edited from a report by Dr Amin Abboud, director of the Australasian Bioethics Information centre.