 |
 |
This is a great article. Presenting the whole story and separating the emotional fight between science and religion gave me a better perspective. Thank you. Norma Murray Charters wrote: > Embryonic stem cell debate is more than science vs. religion > Rhetorical battle is also about politics of money > Tom Abate Monday, May 28, 2001 > > One of the thorniest issues in biotechnology involves research into > the therapeutic uses of stem cells taken from human embryos. > > In nature, embryonic stem cells divide and multiply to form every > nerve, muscle and organ in the body. In the laboratory, these same > embryonic stem cells could be used to fashion spare parts to repair > weak hearts or damaged nerves. > > Prominent academic scientists want the federal government to fund > research into embryonic stem cells, provided they are obtained from > consenting couples with embryos left over after in-vitro fertilization. > > Anti-abortion groups have so far successfully used Congress and > the courts to prevent the National Institutes of Health from funding > embryonic stem cell research. > > The latest turn of events came in March, when anti-abortion groups > led by Nightlight Christian Adoptions in Fullerton (Orange County) > filed a federal lawsuit that has had the effect of stopping NIH from > considering grant applications to do experiments with embryonic > stem cells. > > Academic scientists countersued earlier this month, seeking to force > the Bush administration to follow through with an NIH policy > hammered out under Clinton that would have allowed federally > funded embryonic stem cell research to proceed. Roger Pedersen, > a professor of reproductive sciences at the University of California > at San Francisco, said he felt morally obliged to join the countersuit. > > "I understand the distinction between a very early embryo and > a baby at birth . . . and because I see that distinction I choose to do > research," Pedersen said. The stem cells he wishes to use would be > derived from embryos that would literally be discarded if not used > for research. > > "I find it rather immoral to deprive people -- existing people -- the > benefits of (stem cell) knowledge by simply throwing away the > (embryonic) material," he said. > > Ronald Stoddart is executive director of Nightlight Christian > Adoptions, which, among other things, places surplus embryos > with adoptive parents. He said he's placed eight embryos so far, > including one baby born the morning we spoke. > > "I understand that there's an enormous difference between an embryo > that's two or three cells and a baby that can cry and I can hold," > Stoddart said. "But we got into this because we view the embryos > as life . . . that everything you need for a human is there and it's just > a matter of time and growth." > > The stem cell controversy is generally portrayed as a stark conflict > between anti-abortion groups who believe the embryo is every bit > as deserving of protection from vivisection as you or me, and > scientists who hold out the prospect of creating miraculous > treatments if only they are allowed to use a few cells, plucked > from embryos that would be discarded anyway. > > I sought out another point of view, from a scientist whose qualms > about stem cell research arise from secular concerns. > > "I don't like (embryonic stem cell research) and not from any > religious conviction," said Stuart Newman, a professor of cell > biology at New York Medical College in Valhalla and a biotech > critic who supports women's right to choose abortion. > > "It's putting a use value on a human embryo that is different > than what it was produced for, and when you attribute a use > value to something, it becomes a commodity," Newman said. > > In years of debates over stem cell research, the National Bioethics > Advisory Commission said harvesting of stem cells from surplus > embryos is like taking organs from consenting accident victims > and using them for transplants. I asked Newman about this. > > "You don't use organs from executed people to save the lives > of other people even if those organs are going to waste," he said. > > Seeking permission from the parents who produced surplus > embryos -- as pro-stem cell scientists are doing -- doesn't satisfy > Newman. He doesn't want an embryo, created to help a couple > give birth, to become part of a biotech value chain. Better to throw > it away than to create a potential market for embryonic tissue the > way people today buy and sell female eggs. > > Opponents of embryonic stem cell research say there are alternatives. > Adults also produce stem cells in the blood, brain and muscle. These > adult stem cells are also being studied for their therapeutic potential. > > The great weight of scientific opinion, however, says adult stem cell > studies are not a substitute for properly conducted research into the > uses of embryonic tissue. Eighty Nobel laureates recently told that > to President Bush in a letter quoted in Pedersen's countersuit: > ". . . Impeding (embryonic) stem cell research risks unnecessary > delay for millions of patients who may die or endure needless > suffering while the effectiveness of adult stem cells is evaluated." > > It's tough to argue with 80 top scientists and even tougher to > confront the patients who might one day benefit by research. > > Former actor Christopher Reeve, now paralyzed by an accident, > has been the most visible advocate of federal funding for embryonic > stem cell research. > > But these scientific and emotional appeals, though powerful, > should inform our thinking, not substitute for it. > > Bear in mind this is not a debate about the legality of embryonic > stem cell research. Such work is being carried on today, on a modest > scale, supported by biotech firms like Geron Corp., the Menlo Park > company that controls many patents on embryonic stem cells. > > What is at issue in the current lawsuit is whether NIH should use > federal funds to accelerate this research. > > "We think we can control embryonic stem cells to provide > a wide variety of tissues that could be useful for diseases," said > UCSF's Pedersen. "The ability to achieve and deliver on that is a > function of the number of people who put their minds to it. You > can't expect one California biotech company to accomplish this -- > it takes the entire medical enterprise." > > It is this last point that makes the issue most important to me. > > Biotechnology is an industry whose products often depend on > federally funded university science. This gives research debates > political overtones. When academics look for money to bioengineer > crops, they say they want to feed the world. When these scientists > say they want money for embryonic stem cell research, they ask on > behalf of the diseased. > > The scientists may be completely in earnest, but the research > takes on a life of its own. Modern bioscience is geared toward > commercialization. The last step in discovery used to be publication > in a scientific journal. Now scientists take discoveries through > to patents, products and profits. > > Andy Kimbrell, director of the International Center for Technology > Assessment in Washington, D.C., said the financial pressures on > science, combined with "public amnesia" about past technological > claims, encourage hype. > > "Ten years ago it was gene therapy and fetal tissue research that > were going to be silver bullets for disease," he said. "Neither of these > have lived up to their promise. Now we're hearing the same promises > for embryonic stem cell research." > > Are we moving too fast, too slow or just right on embryonic stem > cell research? > > As you filter these questions through your own values, please > don't think it's as simple as lining up behind science or religion. > > ©2001 San Francisco Chronicle Page D - 1 > > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=chronicle/archive/2001/05/28/BU21307.DTL&type=business > > **************** > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn