Robert Edwards of Britain received the Nobel Prize in medicine earlier this month for research that led to the birth of the first "test-tube baby" in 1978. Hugely controversial 32 years ago, Edwards' work is now lauded as a medical breakthrough that has brought immeasurable joy to the families of the 4 million babies born through in vitro fertilization.
In another 32 years, history may take a similar view of today's controversy over stem cells.
Stem cell research has the potential to revolutionize the field of medicine. Blindness could be reversed. Severe burns could be healed. Children with muscular dystrophy, Type 1 diabetes and even spinal injuries could be cured. Doctors already use blood stem cells, from bone marrow, to treat people with blood diseases such as leukemia, and other types of stem cells hold even greater promise.
Stem cells are the foundation cells for every tissue, organ and cell in the body. Since they can be "programmed" to develop into specialized tissues and organs, stem cells could one day be used in new treatments and maybe even cures for degenerative and autoimmune diseases like Parkinson's, lupus and rheumatoid arthritis.
The future of medicine may hinge on this work -- yet it has been stymied by presidential and court orders prohibiting federal funding for research using stem cells from human embryos.
First, some background: Adult stem cells, which exist in fetal and adult tissues, can only form a limited number of cell types, but embryonic stem cells can form all cell types. Researchers have been studying mouse embryonic stem cells for years, and human embryonic stem cells were first isolated in 1998. In 2001, President Bush issued an order that only existing embryonic stem cell lines could be used in research funded by federal grant money. No new embryonic stem cells could be studied -- not even those from leftover embryos donated to science by couples using in vitro fertilization.
President Obama removed the limitations last year, but research was shut down in August after a U.S. District Court issued an injunction banning federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research. A Court of Appeals stay issued last month allows research to continue while the original case is debated … and the legal battle continues.
Critics oppose human embryonic stem cell research on the grounds that it violates the sanctity of life because embryos are destroyed when the cells are harvested.
I understand that they are standing on principle. However, don't we also have a moral imperative to do everything we can to save lives and alleviate suffering?
The argument that no tax dollars should be used to fund research on donated embryos is ridiculous. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the federal government spends 20 percent of the budget ($715 billion this year) on defense and security, far more than it spends on medical research of any kind. So it's OK that our money is being used to kill civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan because the end justifies the means -- but it's not OK to destroy an embryo in order to develop a treatment that could heal a child with a spinal injury?
This makes no sense.
People have a right to their beliefs. Those who believe an embryo is more valuable than a real, live, breathing child suffering from muscular dystrophy are entitled to their opinion. But fear of upsetting the pro-life voting bloc should not dictate National Institutes of Health policy.
People who don't want to be a party to research they deem unethical can do what thousands of anti-war activists have done: refuse to pay their taxes.
In the 32 years since test-tube baby Louise Brown entered the world, we've been forced to grapple with many challenging ethical questions related to human reproduction. For example: Should egg donors be paid? Should there be an age limit for women using in vitro fertilization? Who is a child's legal mother: the egg donor, the surrogate or the mother who actually raised the child? Should a child be brought into the world for the primary purpose of saving a sibling from a life-threatening disease?
Stem cell science certainly adds more ethical issues to the mix. But stifling research that could save lives because we're scared of the sticky questions serves no purpose.
Lisa Miller is a freelance writer who lives in Oneonta. She can be reached at lisamiller44@hotmail.com.
Columns
Related Photos
-
Lisa Miller
Discussion
COMMENTING ON STORIES:
Welcome to our story comments feature. We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including the unpopular ones. We only ask that you keep your conversations clean, civil and on the topic of the story you are commenting on.
Coinciding with our websites redesign, we launched our new story comments feature through Disqus.
Disqus gives users the ability to log into our story comments feature so that they may be able to track their conversations, receive emails when their comments get a reply or to even have your comments update onto your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
For the time being, our story comments feature will continue to have the ability to post comments anonymously. We reserve the right to require registration in the future using your name and verified email address.
Not all comments are deemed printable. Some are disqualified at the newspaper’s discretion for a number of different reasons. Please follow our Online Rules of Conduct at all times.
RULES OF CONDUCT:
We reserve the right to remove comments that are unacceptable, to wit:
1. False and inacurate statements.
2. Personal attacks. Explicit name-calling.
3. Harassing, harmful, vulgar, obscene and defamatory language.
4. Threatening statements or statements that suggest violence.
5. Hate speech of any kind.
6. Intolerant comments on religion, race, age, gender, sexual preference or disabilities.
7. Accusations of criminal activity.
8. Content that is harmful to children and minors in any way.
9. References to any type of sexual activity and other private matters.
10. Random and inflammatory statements that are off topic.
11. Advertising of any kind.
12. Typing in all caps.
WE ENCOURAGE REASONABLE AND COURTEOUS COMMENTS THAT:
1. Create conversation on issues of interest and concern to fellow readers and local community members.
2. Express opinions and contrarian views.
3. Stimulate debate with respectful language.
4. Stay within the boundaries of these rules.
WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SUSPEND OR TERMINATE ACCESS FOR:
1. Violating any of these Online Rules of Conduct.
2. Deliberately disrupting discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or spam.
3. Misrepresentation of identity or impersonating another user.
WE WELCOME:
1. Flagging violations of these rules that you observe to our attention.
MONITORING:
We monitor comments regularly Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Approval of comments outside of this time (including weekends) will be sporadic.
Welcome to our story comments feature. We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including the unpopular ones. We only ask that you keep your conversations clean, civil and on the topic of the story you are commenting on.
Coinciding with our websites redesign, we launched our new story comments feature through Disqus.
Disqus gives users the ability to log into our story comments feature so that they may be able to track their conversations, receive emails when their comments get a reply or to even have your comments update onto your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
For the time being, our story comments feature will continue to have the ability to post comments anonymously. We reserve the right to require registration in the future using your name and verified email address.
Not all comments are deemed printable. Some are disqualified at the newspaper’s discretion for a number of different reasons. Please follow our Online Rules of Conduct at all times.
RULES OF CONDUCT:
We reserve the right to remove comments that are unacceptable, to wit:
1. False and inacurate statements.
2. Personal attacks. Explicit name-calling.
3. Harassing, harmful, vulgar, obscene and defamatory language.
4. Threatening statements or statements that suggest violence.
5. Hate speech of any kind.
6. Intolerant comments on religion, race, age, gender, sexual preference or disabilities.
7. Accusations of criminal activity.
8. Content that is harmful to children and minors in any way.
9. References to any type of sexual activity and other private matters.
10. Random and inflammatory statements that are off topic.
11. Advertising of any kind.
12. Typing in all caps.
WE ENCOURAGE REASONABLE AND COURTEOUS COMMENTS THAT:
1. Create conversation on issues of interest and concern to fellow readers and local community members.
2. Express opinions and contrarian views.
3. Stimulate debate with respectful language.
4. Stay within the boundaries of these rules.
WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SUSPEND OR TERMINATE ACCESS FOR:
1. Violating any of these Online Rules of Conduct.
2. Deliberately disrupting discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or spam.
3. Misrepresentation of identity or impersonating another user.
WE WELCOME:
1. Flagging violations of these rules that you observe to our attention.
MONITORING:
We monitor comments regularly Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Approval of comments outside of this time (including weekends) will be sporadic.
October 23, 2010
Stem cell research must move forward
- Big Chuck D'Imperio
-
-
Upstate theme parks offered affordable thrills
I saw in the news last week that Disney theme parks are raising admission prices to almost $100 a person. Children (who Uncle Walt considers 10 and under) are now $86 a day.
Continued ... - Getting creative with gifts for grads
- Safety Patrol D.C. visits never get old
- My pal Brucie, savior of Sidney's hospital
- Catching a whiff of 'Vermont Vapor'
-
Upstate theme parks offered affordable thrills
- Cary Brunswick
-
-
Book-banning has a tendency to backfire
So what does the 1960s game show ``What's My Line'' got to do with the Bloomsday festivities occurring in Dublin, Ireland, this week? Surprisingly, there is a link.
Continued ... - Envisioning a world without terror
- We've become our own worst enemies
- Plenty of blame to go around for Bangladesh horror
- Obama is going against his word on Social Security
-
Book-banning has a tendency to backfire
- Chuck Pinkey
- Guest Column
- Lisa Miller
-
-
A view from above
Fire towers in the Catskill Mountains have always been destination points, built to capture some of the region’s best views. These sentinel stations served an important role for the earliest possible sightings of forest fires in the remote mountain ranges. But the fire towers and those who manned them fulfilled a multitude of other roles as well.
Continued ... - Being a parent is a constant learning process
- Healthy doesn't have to mean expensive
- A family era ends with close of Potter series
- Independent stores make up for loss of Borders
-
- Mark Simonson
- Rick Brockway
-
-
Don't play around with snappers
The other day, I was driving along Route 205 between Mount Vision and Hartwick. Suddenly, I had to swerve out of my lane to miss a huge snapping turtle. It was crossing from a large swamp on the left to some higher ground on the other side of the road.
- Emmons Pond Bog is pretty easy to enjoy
- Fishing has gotten a lot more complex
- Waterfalls are even better when you keep them to yourself
- Kids have sparkle in their eyes
-
Don't play around with snappers
- Sam Pollak
-
-
Justice Dept., IRS abuses worth screaming about
"If this had happened while a Republican was president, the liberal media would be screaming."
Continued ... - THIS WEEK'S POLL
- Using time off in the worst way possible
- Terror lives on, and there's no end in sight
- Remembering the glory of their times
-
Justice Dept., IRS abuses worth screaming about
- William Masters
-
-
Schreibman tops Chris Gibson on women's issues
As the time to vote draws near, we need to remember how money can run politics more than we can. Raising funds is a prominent (if not the dominant) task of getting elected. Raising issues is also crucial, but those efforts are subject to distortion and fear-mongering.
- Republicans feelentitled to allthey can garner An entitlement is a legal benefit available from the government to individuals who are within a defined category of recipients, such as needing insurance for unemployment or health services.
-
Romney focuses on self; Obama emphasizes unity
Mitt Romney criticizes President Obama for saying a person's success is rooted in his community, and is not all his alone. Romney belittles this with his belief in individual initiative. He is better at the put-down than the push-up.
-
Romney shows little regard for common man
The Republicans in Congress have voted over and over, 33 times, redundantly and uselessly, to rescind what they call Obamacare.
-
Scouts' gay ban creates problem where none exists
The Boy Scouts of America's "emphatic reaffirmation" of its vow to exclude any and all homosexuals from its hallowed ranks is ill-considered and pathetic, especially in view of its having reviewed the matter for two years.
-
Schreibman tops Chris Gibson on women's issues
