EDITORIAL: Calming Advance in Stem Cell Research

Aug. 30–Recent headlines suggested something close to an optimal outcome in the debate over use of embryonic stem cells for research. New scientific advances in stem cell generation might well resolve or make moot moral questions and thereby take this modestly contentious issue out of the political arena, a place where moral and scientific issues alike tend to get mangled.

Alas, the news from Harvard doesn’t quite accomplish this happy outcome — at least not yet. It is nonetheless encouraging.

Harvard researchers have reportedly created cells similar to embryonic stem cells from adult skin cells, without destroying human embryos. That could not only increase the number of stem cells available for research and eventually for therapeutic purposes, but do so without cloning and destroying human embryos. The potential upsides also include the possibility of making tailor-made, genetically matched stem cells for patients for a range of diseases including Type I diabetes and Parkinson’s through this cell fusion technique.

Stem cells, you may recall, are of interest because they have not yet been differentiated to be part of a particular organ and can be “programmed” for many functions. The current technique for acquiring them is by fertilizing an egg, which creates a human embryo that is later destroyed. Many Americans see that as morally offensive, killing a human being.

The new Harvard technique is “not ready for prime-time yet,” according to Kevin Eggan, lead researcher. The resulting embryonic-like stem cells have twice the genetic material that cells usually carry, which might make them dangerous as therapies. And it took 50 million skin cells to create 20 fused hybrid cells, so the technique at this point lacks something in efficiency.

But it’s early in this research and breakthroughs are possible.

Unfortunately, even if the science advances in the best possible way, it won’t eliminate all the political and moral issues revolving around stem cell research. Some of those dilemmas are created by the very act of funding research with tax dollars.

To use taxes extracted from people who believe deeply that the cloning and destroying involved in research is fundamentally immoral is always troubling and, some would argue, immoral in and of itself. It guarantees that the issue will be politicized in ways that shed more heat than light.

If a technique is found that doesn’t involve destroying embryos, that will make moot some moral questions. But the issue of using the money of people who have qualms about or are even indifferent to the research remains. And the research inevitably will be politicized.

For now, it’s important to note that the Harvard studies were funded entirely from the private sector. Funding future research privately not only will minimize moral problems but almost certainly improve the efficiency and reliability of research projects.

—–

To see more of The News Herald — including its homes, jobs, cars and other classified listings — or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.newsherald.com.

Copyright (c) 2005, The News Herald, Panama City, Fla.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.