Stem Cell Research - Not By Any Means

Brian Donohue
Semi-finalist in National Right to Life Oratorical Contest

“If scientists are correct, stem cell research could result in a veritable fountain of youth by replacing diseased or damaged cells.”  So contends Senator Arlen Specter, who was trying to persuade Congress two years ago to pass unrestricted funding for embryonic stem cell research.  The claim itself is certainly compelling.  Could this research really be the solution to a myriad of medical afflictions?

Recently, the Senate did approve a bill to fund embryonic stem cell research, with the hope that it will eventually save lives.  For nearly a decade, scientists, analysts and politicians have alleged that this research will one day cure numerous ailing Americans.  The infrequently voiced reality, however, is that embryonic stem cell research is highly unethical, and it has not benefited science; on the other hand, adult stem cell research, which does not destroy any live human embryos, has borne much fruit.

So what is embryonic stem cell research?  The process begins when a stem cell is removed from a human embryo and supplied with nutrients.  When that stem cell is removed, however, the embryo is destroyed.  The debate, then, is over the value of the embryo.  If it is merely an expendable, “potential human being,” then this really cannot be differentiated from any other type of stem cell research; but if it is a human being, then this research is genocide.

If an embryo is only a “blob of cells,” and not yet a human being, then at what point does it become one?  Truth be told, there is no event at any point during pregnancy which fundamentally alters the child or fetus or embryo in question except conception.  From that moment on, the formerly distinct sperm and egg become a completely new organism, a human being, which continues to grow and develop until its death; this is something a “potential human being” cannot accomplish on its own.  In the words of Dr. Arnold Halpern, former director of a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic, "There is no difference between a first trimester, second trimester, third trimester abortion or infanticide. It's all the same human being in different stages of development."  And yet, this doesn’t stop many scientists from justifying the destruction of human life on the basis that it could one day protect human life, but the ends, no matter how noble, do not justify criminal means.

Embryonic stem cell research is not just unethical; it is also entirely unsuccessful.  It has not cured a single disease or fought off any deadly cancer.  That fact does not hinder a popular myth that this research will one day soon cure Alzheimer’s, diabetes, Parkinson’s, and several other diseases.  Rick Weiss wrote in The Washington Post, concerning embryonic stem cell treatments, "Stem cell experts confess . . . Alzheimer's is among the least likely to benefit."  Similarly, despite well-funded attempts, diabetes and Parkinson’s results have been disappointing at best.  Why?  Embryonic stem cells are medically obsolete.  For example, a 1999 study found that adult stem cell treatments for Parkinson’s far surpassed their embryonic predecessors.  To be exact, they produced thirty-five times as much dopamine, the key chemical.

But there was an even greater discovery, related to something not commonly known about embryonic stem cell treatments: the danger they pose to patients.  "The potential that [embryonic stem cells] would explode into a cancerous mass after a . . . transplant might turn out to be the Pandora's box of stem cell research,“ said Ethicist Glenn McGee of the University of Pennsylvania.  Likewise, Tulane University's research professor, Brian Butcher, said, "With embryonic stem cells, a significant number become cancer cells, so the cure could be worse than the disease."  The great discovery was that adult stem cells do not carry this risk, and they do not lower the patient‘s immune system in the process.

In addition to benefiting Parkinson’s patients, stem cells obtained from adults or even young children have successfully treated 72 other serious diseases, including 26 cancers, 15 auto-immune diseases, 10 blood conditions, and 5 metabolic disorders.  So what do scientists see in embryonic stem cell research?  A common claim, and myth, is that embryonic stem cells are more versatile than adult stem cells.  But just last year German scientists discovered that stem cells in mouse testis had very similar properties to embryonic stem cells, and American scientists later found that they could isolate these cells from humans.  Likewise, researchers from the University of Pittsburgh showed that stem cells obtained from a placenta can, "potentially form any tissue, with no signs of tumor formation."  There’s more.

Stem cells obtained from umbilical cords have helped treat more than eighty serious medical conditions; they saved the lives of an Israeli woman with acute leukemia and several infants afflicted with Krabbe’s disease, a fatal nerve disorder.  Swiss researchers found they could use amniotic fluid to create new heart valves for babies who had congenital heart defects.  Australian scientists developed nasal stem cells into heart, liver, kidney, muscle, brain and nerve tissue.  The list goes on, but I’ll stop right here.

Simply put, there is no reason in the world to continue destroying embryos in the name of science, and there is every reason to want this research stopped immediately.  Not only is it fatal to thousands of helpless human beings, absolutely no medical progress has come of it.  What I have just been telling you, however, is certainly not common knowledge.  These fascinating discoveries in the field of adult stem cell research get little or no coverage in the media while the spotlight continues to shine solely on the embryonic stem cell debate.  Consequently, it has become our responsibility to be a voice for the voiceless.

Why is this issue so important?  Laws protecting human life are the bases for all other laws.  If all people, from the moment of conception, are not guaranteed the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, freedom will not survive.  Instead, it will be crushed under the weight of this legally shrouded oppression.  We all have a duty to fight for the lives of others, for, in the cautionary words of Mother Teresa, “If a mother can kill her own child, what is left [but] for me to kill you and you to kill me?  There is nothing between.”

Information about the contest and Brian

Updated on RARTL July, 2007