The polarizing ideology surrounding stem cell usage leaves very little room for thoughtful discussion. All too often the mainstream media frames this matter in such a way that either you support stem cell research to cure cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s – or you’re a Neanderthal, opposed to medical progress and dismissive of human suffering. That’s pure nonsense. It’s far more complicated.
Most agree that stem cells are wonderfully versatile, with great potential to transform themselves within the human body and advance treatments and cures for many diseases. Beyond that, there are actually three important stem cell debates going on. We need to come as close as we can to getting each one right.
The morality debate. Not all stem cells are created equal. There are embryonic stem cells taken from “discarded” human embryos, stem cells extracted from a delivered baby’s umbilical cord with no risk to the donor, and adult stem cells derived from skin, organs and other parts of the body with little risk to the donor.
The Rev. Tadeusz Pacholczyk, Director of Education at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, puts the moral argument against using embryonic stem cells this way: “(Clearly) this research exploits younger humans, with lethal consequences, to address the needs of older and wealthier humans. The human embryo is being slowly transformed before our eyes into a commodity to be exploited, a kind of raw material to be utilized on the way to making a brilliant career as a scientist, or making profits as an entrepreneur, or making treatments for myself when I’m sick.”
Ruth Faden, Director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics, has a different perspective: “Those who believe that human embryos have the same moral status as the rest of us will and should continue to press their case. For most Americans, however, the president’s policy strikes the right moral balance (on) reducing human suffering and improving human health.
The medical debate. With due respect to Ms. Fadden, no one has yet significantly reduced human suffering or improved human health with any stem cell, embryonic or otherwise. That jury will be out for a long time.
In fact, the most exciting developments to date have come from adult stem cells drawn from patients themselves. Scientists have already discovered how to morph them into heart and brain cells in the laboratory, and recent reports cite patients with spinal cord injuries and multiple sclerosis benefiting from adult stem cell therapy.
Meanwhile, scientists recently reported that a new kind of stem cell called iPS (induced Pluripotent Stem cell), discovered in 2007, has been transformed into mature nerve cells. iPS stem cells are created using DNA from adult skin, with no need for embryos or eggs.
If non-embryonic stems cells become the surprise winner in the medical debate, the moral debate probably disappears.
The money debate. Questions of morality, medicine and money – specifically federal dollars –are about to collide. President Obama has given the National Institutes of Health (NIH) the authority to determine both ethical standards and funding eligibility for two kinds of embryonic stem cell research: research using stem cell lines taken from embryos remaining after in vitro fertilization (controversial because organizations such as Snowflake have been helping couples have children through embryo adoption for years), and research using stem cells from embryos created for research (much more controversial).
Most controversial of all would be altering legal prohibitions against spending federal dollars to create or destroy human embryos engineered to donate stem cells. President Clinton banned the practice by Executive Order. President Bush reaffirmed the ban, and it will stand unless present leadership overturns it (Note: though Obama overturned the ban, the Dickey Amendment prohibits federal funds to be used to create or destroy human embryos for research purposes).
As a Medical Doctor, here’s my personal bottom line. I am committed to human life, health and healing. And I took the Hippocratic oath to “first do no harm” [Hippocratic corpus]. Neither changes – whatever the future holds for stem cells.
Sincerely,
Marion D. Thorpe, Jr. MD MPH
US Senate candidate
Florida
Chief Medical Officer (former)
Agency for Health Care Administration
State of Florida
www.marionthorpe.com
doc@marionthorpe.com
No comments:
Post a Comment