Op-Ed; AS YOU WERE SAYING . . . Intrinsic Value of Human Life Must Trump Stem-Cell Research

Embryonic stem-cell research (ESCR) continues to be promoted to the public, by the mainstream media and the biotech industry alike, as the “great hope” for the treatment of numerous diseases. However, despite not one successfully documented clinical trial on human beings, the public continues to be fed these misleading claims of promise as venture capitalists pour billions into biotech hoping to realize “the great medical discovery of the new century.”

But let’s examine the facts.

At fertilization, a complete, unique human being is created and needs nothing except time to develop. ESCR requires the creation of a human life for the sole purpose of “harvesting” its cells.

Embryonic stem cells are obtained by removing the isolated inner cells inside of the embryo, which results in its destruction.

Embryonic stem cells are hypothesized to have potential because of their flexibility or “pluripotency.” However, the clamor for embryonic stem cell research is based not on a record of success, but rather its “promise.” By contrast, adult stem cells have already proven safe and effective therapy on a multitude of fronts including Parkinson’s disease, heart attacks, spinal injuries and more.

Meanwhile, other sources of stem cells are proving successful. Robert Langer, professor of chemical and biomedical engineering at MIT, stated, “Many hospitals in Massachusetts and other states have been neglecting an easily accessible source of stem cells with minimal ethical issues – umbilical cords of newborn babies – which have already proven their therapeutic value.”

Additionally, embryonic stem cells carry a multitude of risks. Once transplanted, such cells have a tendency to develop into tumors or to grow uncontrollably.

In a 2002 study, 20 percent of Parkinson’s rats injected with mouse embryonic stem cells died of brain tumors. In the June 2004 issue of The Scientific American, Robert Lanza, medical director of Advanced Cell Technology (and a proponent of ESCR) said, “In animal experiments, teratomas [tumors] containing fully formed teeth have been reported.”

Furthermore, stem cells from human embryos are subject to a high rate of rejection. Lanza said overcoming this problem “could require millions of discarded embryos from IVF clinics.”

For those who claim scientists are capable of policing themselves on matters of ethics, think again.

Harvard embryologist Douglas A Melton has his own view on the “brave new world” of science. Melton told The Boston Globe that researchers have already crossed a sheep with a goat. He predicted it would only be a matter of time before human-animal hybrids are created. He envisioned a day when, after transplanting human stem cells into a monkey’s brain, “you walk into a lab in 2090 and the monkey says, `good morning.’ “

For most, this vision of the future resembles the horrors of “The Island of Dr. Moreau” more than it does the “invaluable scientific research” it is touted to be.

In the end, personhood can never be a vague, subjective term applied by the shifting perception of a technologically driven society. If human life can be reduced to a commodity, then the weak, the sickly, the elderly, the silent unborn, become expendable in the eyes of an increasingly materialistic world.

Science offers great hope for the future toward curing an array of diseases. However, we must never compromise the fundamental dignity of human life. The mutual survival of all humanity, indeed our very civilization, hinges on this fundamental principle.

Darby Duffin is director of communications for Massachusetts Citizens For Life. As You Were Saying is a Herald feature. We invite readers to contribute pieces of no more than 600 words. Mail to Boston Herald, P.O. Box 2096, Boston, MA 02106-2096, fax to 617-542- 1315 or e-mail to oped@bostonherald.com. Submissions are subject to editing and become Herald property.