Embryonic stem cells: the debate we shouldn't have

by Amin Abboud
first published in The Age (Melbourne), 27 March 2002

The editor of the journal Stem Cells, hidden from the gaze of a public confused about cloning and stem-cell research, made a revealing admission to fellow scientists in the September, 2001, issue that "we scientists have exaggerated the immediacy of the prospects of clinical therapies using stem cells, and that this has led to public misunderstanding.

"I continue to think that clinical application is a long way off . . . Prior to clinical use of embryonic and foetal stem cells, it will be necessary to thoroughly investigate the malignant potential of embryonic stem cells."

Nurtured on the accepted wisdom that science is reasonable, rational and objective, the debates surrounding embryonic stem cells have weakened my confidence in science. The white coats have covered a campaign of misinformation, personal interest and financial gain. There is an unwillingness by some in the scientific community to allow any barrier to research. The words of ethicist Paul Ramsey could help them: "The good things that men do can be complete only by the things they refuse to do."

Cloning and embryonic stem-cell research is something we should refuse to do. To manipulate and destroy embryos ultimately weakens the dignity of our own society.

The pawns of the biotech companies' public-relations exercise have been the vulnerable. The diabetics and those who suffer Alzheimer's or Parkinson's disease have been promised hopes of cure that are non-existent.

Stem-cell research should be pursued enthusiastically and energetically by any government (knowing well that it will not be the fountain of eternal life it is sometimes made out to be). The debate over stem cells is not over their usefulness but over their source. Those that argue for embryonic stem-cell research ask that we destroy the surplus embryos from IVF or propose the creation of embryos to destroy them (the misnomer of therapeutic cloning).

This goes against the dignity of the human embryo, the dignity of the point in life where we all began. Why destroy when we all have an abundant supply of adult cells?

Stem cells are those primary cells that have the capacity to develop in many different cell types (muscle, skin, brain etc). Because of this capacity they may prove useful for treatment of some conditions. Embryonic stem cells come from embryos by destroying them. Adult stem cells, despite their name, can come from children or adults without harming the person. Another rich source is the blood that remains in the umbilical cord after birth.

Adult stem-cell research is more advanced and more effective than research on embryonic stem cells. An article titled "Adult cells do it better" in the American Spectator of June, 2001, stated that private US funding of stem-cell research is nearly all directed into adult stem cells, where the results are promising. Of the 15 companies that do stem-cell research, 13 work on adult stem cells. Says Kevin FitzGerald, an assistant professor of medicine in the US: "If you look at some of the medical and scientific indications, adult stem cells are much closer to therapeutic applications; embryonic cells still have a variety of obstacles that need to be overcome."

The successes of adult stem-cell research have been extraordinary. In the US, a paraplegic woman with a severed spinal cord has been treated with her own immune cells and regained bladder control and movement of her toes. Scientists at the Harvard medical school have turned human pancreatic ductal cells into cells that produce insulin, promising hope for diabetics. An Australian researching at Columbia University will begin a trial on treating severe heart damage with adult stem cells. In animal studies, benefits for Parkinson's patients appear promising with adult stem cells, while experiments with embryonic stem cells led to 20 per cent of the animals developing tumours.

Embryonic stem cells, by contrast, have not helped a single patient. In a recent public forum on this topic, a courageous diabetic woman, who was very active in her local diabetic community group, was astounded to hear about adult stem cells. She told me that in all the literature she had read no mention had been made of it. Only destructive embryonic stem-cell research was talked about.

Ultimately, embryonic stem-cell research will open the door to cloning in all its forms. To be able to effectively help patients and avoid rejection, clones will need to be created to treat any person. Yet the community sentiment is against cloning.

We can have our cake and eat it: we should direct our efforts into the ethical alternative of adult stem-cell research, and turn our back on the unethical embryonic stem-cell research.