Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Stem Cell Research is a controversial issue that affects our culture and is a source of great debate. There are ethical, medical, financial, legislative, and religious issues to consider in stem cell research. The major controversy of stem cell research, however, is from a religious and ethical perspective. The delineation of the types of stem cells, their uses, the benefits, and the examination of the controversies from an ethical perspective further segment the differing viewpoints. The examination of the issues in stem cell research and the roles that the ethical and religious implications play in that debate are the focal point of this writing.

Stem Cells are unspecialized (undifferentiated) types of cells that are in certain living tissues, such as in fetal, embryonic, and in specific adult tissue. These cells are ‘undifferentiated’ because they have not developed into a specialized cell type. Conversely, a ‘differentiated’ cell develops characteristics and functions to perform a specific task; this can be observed in a differentiated cells’ normal ability for tissue repair, the regeneration of stomach lining and bone marrow, and during normal cell turnover, such as is found in normal skin growth, for example.

These stem cells are unique from other cells because they can replicate themselves via cell division, even if they have been in a dormant state for long periods. Another, unique characteristic of stem cells is that they can be manipulated to perform specific functions, due to their undifferentiated state. The primary focus of stem cell research is the manipulation and modification of these cells to replicate the healthy differentiated cell types needed to cure disease, regenerate organs, or, to produce abnormal cell types for drug and treatment evaluation in a controlled clinical setting.

Stem cell types can be divided into three classifications: Embryonic stem cells, Adult stem cells and Induced Pluripotent stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are cells taken from an embryo and cultured in a laboratory to replicate in even more stem cells. The cells in an embryo, have not yet begun the cell division into differentiate cells, thus, these cells exponentially produce further stem cells. This process of replication in embryonic stem cells is favorable in research because of the larger number of usable stem cells available.

Adult stem cells are cells taken from an adult host, from various organs and tissues within the body. The majority of adult cells in the body are already differentiated cells that have developed into a cell with a specific purpose, however, other undifferentiated cells (stem cells), can still be found in the body in various organs, tissues, and systems, but only in much smaller quantity. Scientists have located Adult stem cells in the blood cells in the body, as well as in bone marrow, the brain, skin, teeth, heart, liver, and the reproductive organs, among others. Since Adult stem cells are found in fewer numbers within the organs and tissues, this adds to the controversy for the preference of embryonic stem cells in research, due to their availability.

Induced Pluripotent stem cells are adult cells that have been genetically manipulated into an embryonic stem cell-like state. This involves reprogramming the cell at the genetic level with characteristics of an embryonic stem cell. Induced Pluripotent stem cells are a relatively new process that has been discovered in recent years and may be effective in mitigating the need for embryonic stem cell usage. It is theorized that if these cell types display the same properties as an embryonic stem cell, then this may mitigate or eliminate the need eventually for embryonic stem cell usage.

Stem cell research offers a number of potential uses from a medical perspective. The study and manipulation of these cells at the ‘gene’ level in a controlled environment may yield information that will allow certain serious medical conditions that involve cell divisions, such as cancer and birth defects, among others, to be curable or preventable.

Another medical perspective of stem cell research is to differentiate stem cells into specific cell types, specifically abnormal cell types, which can be used to test new drugs and treatments, in a controlled environment of optimal conditions. The advantage of this research is to be able to test on actual human cells, rather than animal cells, in controlled tests to determine the effectiveness of the treatments.

The third and most prevalent aspect of the research involves ’cell-based therapies’. Cell-based therapies involve the use of the manipulation of stem cells into differentiated cells, in the anticipation that the cells will offer a “renewable source of healthy cells to treat diseases including Alzheimer’s diseases, spinal cord injury, stroke, burns, heart disease, osteoarthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis.” (Stem Cell Basics: Introduction, 2009)

Evidence seems to suggest, although not verifiable without extensive analysis, that adult harvested stem cell research has produced conclusive advancements in treatment. (Adult Stem Cells That produce Therapeutic Benefit, 2007) Furthermore, adult stem cells harvested from the donor that are then cultured, modified and inserted into the designated treatment area will not experience rejection, therefore, nullifying the use of antirejection drugs.

Embryonic stem cell research advancements, conversely, have much fewer published results. This could be due to the relative infancy of the embryonic stem cell research, as adult stem cell research has been ongoing for a substantial number of years longer than embryonic research.

The ethical perspective of stem cell research is the biggest point of controversy. The use of embryonic stem cells involves the use of those cells obtained from embryos that develop from eggs through the process of in-vitro fertilization, which is a process that involves uniting the sperm and egg in a laboratory for eventual placement in the female uterus to assist in propagation. Many eggs and sperm undergo this process to improve the likelihood of success. This is usually performed at a fertility clinic. The embryos are frozen and stored for long periods to assist in propagation efforts. Once propagation is successful, the “excess” embryos are no longer needed and facilities dispose of the embryos using prescribed manners or they are donated with consent from the donors for stem cell research.

The controversy, from an ethical and religious standpoint, involves the definition of when life begins and the sanctity of human life.  The non-secular or religious community advocates that life begins at conception, which means that once the sperm and egg are joined to produce the embryonic stage of development that it is a human life. The secular community advocates that the embryos, by definition are not life forms due to their lack of uterine environment and stage of cell division.         

The controversy is further clouded by the ambiguity of the legal definition of when life begins. The legalization of abortion stemming from the “Roe vs. .Wade” court decision further compounds the controversy between the two communities of thought. The complexity of the ethical perspective has had a direct impact on the legislation of stem cell research. The Clinton administration in 2000, published guidelines shortly thereafter the successful isolation and culturing of human embryonic stem cells, referred to as pluripotent stem cells back in 1998. The Bush Administration further enacted and published guidelines governed the use of embryos; the guidelines addressed obtaining the informed consent of the donors, the assurance of no financial inducement for the embryos and that the embryos used in research could only be from reproductive excess and not expressly created for research purposes. The Congresses, in future years, have enacted several acts and introduced bills regarding the use of federal funds in research, implemented tax laws related to stem cell research and passed legislation prohibiting human cloning using stem cells.

Funding of stem cell research is a hotly debated subject, since there exist the ethical and religious issues. Opponents of embryonic stem cell research hold the position that no funding of this research should come from the public sector. Although definitive funding numbers could not be obtained from private funding sources, it is important to note that those funds provided from the federal level for embryonic versus adult stem cell research is at least third times greater  in appropriations for adult stem cell research. (NIH Stem Cell Research Funding, FY 2002–2011, 2012)

While the varying perspectives involved in embryonic stem cell provide fuel and further controversy from an ethical standpoint, one point continues to remain unchallenged, that the use of adult stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells at not part of the ethical debate.

The theist viewpoint is solely concentrated on the sanctity of human life and that the definition of life begins at the point of conception, or the fertilization of the egg with sperm to produce an embryo. This theist definition does not take into account any legislative mandates or judicial rulings, as is only appropriate due to the subjective and fallible nature of these governing bodies. Several scriptures contain specific inferences as to the start of life, Jeremiah 1: 5 states, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born, I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.” This is the word of the Lord God, which came to Jeremiah. While some opponents argue that life, from a scriptural basis, occurs when the “breath of life” has entered, presumably at birth. Additionally, other mindsets exist where viability of life unsupported from the womb at approximately 22 weeks or greater (although still mechanically assisted) is the definition of the start of life.

The definition of conception becomes further muddled when the scientific aspect of the embryonic cell division enters into the argument. Approximately 5 days after the fertilization process, the cells have divided into the blastocyst stage of the embryo. The blastocyst is the stage of embryonic development prior to implantation in the uterine wall. It has been determined that at this stage and until 14 days of development, that the embryo can split and develop into twins or triplets. Conversely, multiple embryos can also converge into a single life at this stage. This phenomenon creates further ambiguities regarding when life begins since embryonic duplicity and/or absorption may occur at this stage.

Clear scriptural references exist that God,” knew us” before we were ever formed in the womb. It must be clarified, that from a theist view, that since God is omniscient, He has been aware of each life since before creation of even the universe. Thus removing any ambiguity as to when life begins. Therefore, from a personal and from the theist viewpoint, the conclusion is very clear, the destroying of embryos for the stem cells is wrong, as life is destroyed in the process.

Furthermore, God’s transcendence and sovereignty on this issue factors into the equation. Since God is transcendent of the those things in this physical realm that are beyond our human understand, what the scientific community views physically as a mere single cell division probably contains those ethereal qualities and characteristics that are not visible on the physical or human plain of existence.

I understand and appreciate the position that stem cell research is looking to provide cures and treatments for disease and birth defects. I also understand that as this technology develops further, that some theists may be placed in the position to make a choice to utilize the treatments from this research on a personal level when confronted with certain illnesses or diseases. 

It is worth noting that most treatments, at least at this point and for the short duration, will stem from adult stem cell research, rather than embryonic research. Embryonic research is still in its primary stages of research, although fourteen years have passed since its discovery, and it has not provided sufficient results in contrast to adult stem cell research. Furthermore, the subsequent recent discovery and manipulation of induced pluripotent stem cells should further eliminate the need for embryonic stem cell research.

I personally feel that there is a greater issue than the controversy of embryonic stem cell research. An issue that seems to be largely overlooked in the stem cell discussion, which is the issue of the embryos themselves, regardless of donation to stem cell research.

Most Theists agrees that life begins at conception. The In-vitro fertilization of the eggs with sperm in a clinical setting automatically dictates conception, although clinically induced. Since these embryos are life, according to God’s definition, then medical practices are essentially freezing and suspending human lives until such time as the couple undergoes fertility treatments and the implantation of multiple embryos, of which are many anticipated to die in the process. The larger tragedy is when the couple has successfully conceived and there is no longer the need or desire to store any remaining embryos. There are only four options available at this stage. On option is to provide the storage for the embryos indefinitely, which most patients are not inclined to do since they are no longer needed. The second option involves the destruction and disposal of the remaining embryos according to mandated disposal procedures. The third option is the informed consent and donation of the embryos to research. The fourth option is to donate the embryos to couples hoping to conceive.

The cost of storage for these embryos is prohibitive and many will opt for donation to research or destruction, with an even smaller percentage of donations to other couples. The argument could be made that since these embryos are going to be destroyed anyway if not used, then the greater good is served by their closely monitored use in research. There is the obvious oxymoron concerning whether the ethical dilemma involved in the In-vitro fertilization process and subsequent destruction of the excess embryos, is negated by the subsequent use and testing of the embryos for a more noble and helpful purpose. Essentially, do two concurrent ‘wrongs’ make a ‘right’? This question tends to further cloud the issue by making the choice subjective to the greater good, similar in theory to the secular humanist perspective.

I am personally against the destruction of embryos, regardless of the ultimate purpose, whether for research or for excess disposal. I do feel divided, however, that since these embryos are going to be discarded anyway, is the disposal of them any better than using them for research, since all avenues for their disposal are ethically and morally, wrong, with the exception of donation to other couples? Even in that instance, the probability that the donated embryo’s will not all be used is great, still producing the same ethical dilemma. These uncertainties regarding the storage and eventual destruction of the vast majority of unused embryos make it difficult to conclude what should be the ultimate resolution to this ethical conundrum, as most avenues for these embryos will result in destruction. Perhaps, the issue of In-vitro fertilization needs to be more closely examined, as the resultant supply of excess embryos from that practice is the reason for the embryonic stem cell debate in the first place.

References

 

Adult Stem Cells That produce Therapeutic Benefit. (2007, 4 11). Retrieved from http://stemcellresearch.org/facts/asc-refs.pdf

Stem Cell Basics: Introduction. (2009). Retrieved February 24, 2012, from National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics1

NIH Stem Cell Research Funding, FY 2002–2011. (2012). Retrieved February 25, 2012, from National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: http://stemcells.nih.gov/research/funding/funding

Bohlin, D. R. (n/a). The Controversy Over Stem Cell Research. Retrieved February 23, 2012, from Probe Ministries: http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4218211/k.1B8F/The_Controversy_Over_Stem_Cell_Research.htm