Human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research has been a major controversy in the United States since the late 1990's. Why would hESC research be so controversial? To many, it's the death of a living human being, which removes its potentiality from mankind. Is this a valid argument? Are we crossing ethical and moral boundaries by conducting research using human embryos?
To begin explaining this, I need to explain how hESC research is conducted. An embryo, either a leftover from in-vitro fertilization (IVF) or one that is created in a laboratory in a petri dish, contains a couple hundred cells. Among these cells are stem cells, which are undifferentiated. What does this mean? Undifferentiated means that they have not yet become a specific cell type, for example, they have not yet been determined to be liver cells, blood cells, etc. Once these cells are obtained, a line of stem cells can be developed and grown indefinitely in culture. This means that once the cells are obtained, they aren't going to kill a 100 other embryos to get more cells for that line. The line has been established from that embryo.
Varying religions do not agree on the point in which the fetus in question becomes a human being. One point is certain. It never becomes a fetus in a laboratory. It never becomes anything more than a couple hundred cells in a dish. How can we sit back and state that it is a living human being? The only way it can become a living human being is if it were to be placed in a woman's uterus. Most leftover embryos from IVF never get that far. They end up in a dumpster in daily garbage. Is this justice? Is this more ethical and moral than allowing for their use in research? Thus, the argument of religion or what the Bible states is null and void. Conception, as the Bible identifies it, happens after sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. No sexual intercourse occurs to develop these embryos for research, it's a lab made embryo! Religions such as Islam and Judaism do not believe an embryo is a living human being. In fact, the Koran identifies a fetus as a human being after 120 days when the soul is instilled into it. Judaism believes much of the same belief, which means that the fetus is 4 months old before it is a living human being under their religious beliefs.
Aside from religion, we turn to the views of John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham. Embracing utilitarianism, we must consider what is good for the greatest number of people. Surely it's for the greater good that we utilize embryonic stem cells for research that could cure spinal cord injuries, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, Multiple Sclerosis, and other debilitating illnesses that afflict so many individuals worldwide. What if we could custom design an organ for someone who needed it that would not run the risk of rejection because it would contain their genetic information and therefore the body wouldn't recognize it as something foreign? Not only would it prevent rejection, but would reduce long-term costs for the patient as they would not require long term immunosuppressant medication. Preventing federal funding in the United States to scientists trying to find these treatments and cures is not benefiting the common good of most people.
Even pointing all of these benefits out does not convince those who continue to believe that an embryo is a human being and that hESC research is immoral and unethical. Some argue that they know more about adult stem cells so why are we not using these instead of ESC? Adult stem cells are harder to grow in culture, harder to locate in the human body, and tend not to grow over a long period of time, making a long term stem cell line nearly impossible to maintain. They simply are not as useful as hESC.
Yesterday, the U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth ruled that federal funding for stem cell research stating that "The Dickey-Wicker Amendment unambiguously prohibits the use of federal funds for all research in which a human embryo is destroyed." This bill was signed in 1995 by then President Bill Clinton. Section 509 of the bill states: None of the funds made available in this Act may be used for-- (1) the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes; or (2) research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero under 45 CFR 46.208(a)(2) and Section 498(b) of the Public Health Service Act [1](42 U.S.C. 289g(b)) (Title 42, Section 289g(b), United States Code). Unfortunately this is not something President Obama reversed. He reversed President George W. Bush's 2001 bill that allowed for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research from existing stem cell lines (meaning you could not obtain federal funding to develop a new stem cell line). Progress has once again been halted by those who confuse human life with a lab developed embryo.
Although President Obama will surely appeal, he will have his work cut out for him to obtain funding for hESC research as a result of a bill passed 15 years ago, before the human genome was completed and people thought that hESC research would result in mutant clones. Until people understand the difference between a living human being and a lab developed embryo, we will continue to fall behind in the race for the cures of so many diseases. While people continue to equate hESC research to murder and abortion, our loved ones will continue to die of Alzheimer's disease, Multiple Sclerosis, and other debilitating illnesses. Until people understand why hESC research is so important, the scientific gains that could have been obtained by President Obama's passing of the Stem Cell Bill Reversal will, like so many other attempts at scientific advancement in this country, get shoved into a deep freezer for another 20 years before it is finally able to be investigated.
