Pluripotent Stem Cells? Oh, Yeah

Saturday, October 31, 2009
For my Breakthroughs in Science class, one of the work products is a position paper on a controversial area of scientific research. The professor assigned the topics, and also whether we had to argue "pro" or "con."

I was assigned the "pro" position on fetal stem cell harvesting and research, so I've been reading about the issue.

I have long been a proponent of stem cell research. I have no issue with using donated or abandoned zygotes or embryos for this purpose, and my research is reinforcing that position rather than weakening it. Now I just have more facts at my disposal to defend my view. Learning to actually understand the differences between totipotent, pluripotent and multipotent stem cells has given me a much clearer view of the scientific issues inherent in the debate.

Given my own views regarding abortion and when life begins, it was extremely unlikely that I would suddenly decide that harvesting embryonic stem cells from donated or abandoned embryos was somehow immoral or unethical. While I think you might be able to make a case that creating an embryo for the sole purpose of harvesting its pluripotent stem cells is a little shady, I just can't see the issue with using the ones that are already there.

Of course, since many of the arguments used to oppose this practice are religious ones, it's extremely unlikely that any of them will carry any weight with me whatsoever. Another student has been assigned the "con" position, and our final assignment, to take place in three weeks, is an on-line debate using the arguments, evidence and ethical justifications we researched for this assignment. I'm rather looking forward to it, and I hope my "partner" ends up being a worthy adversary. If she ends up discussing "SIN" I am going to be sorely disappointed.

7 comments:

neurondoc said...

That will deserve the Shovel of Doom (if she starts on down the sin pathway)...

Random Michelle K said...

If she does, I'll argue the morality of using fetal stem cells with you.

;)

Janiece said...

Michelle, fair enough. It's not that I don't see the other side of the argument - it is a genuine moral dilemma. I simply come down on the opposite side from you.

I just can't abide someone using a faith-based argument in a secular discussion.

Random Michelle K said...

Actually, I don't have an issue with stem cell research--assuming you are using fertilized eggs that would otherwise be destroyed (ie from fertility clinics).

But much of the argument dovetails with other issues. :)

Janiece said...

Michelle, it's interesting, but when I wrote my position paper, I limited my arguments to harvesting those zygotes that were dontated by the parents or abandoned. So we may be on the same side of this issue, after all.

Random Michelle K said...

I can still argue with you if you want tho.

;)

Steve Buchheit said...

Well, the embryos are already created, so it's not like they're being created to destroy (although it is possible in the future that research might lead us to create individual stem cells for each patient, but then I believe the research into creating them from adult cells would fill those needs). They're going to be destroyed in any event (there's not enough snowflake adoptees available for the embryos already created, let alone what will be created in the next year).

The alternative is to stop fertility treatments that create the embryos outside the womb. Which is the greater ethical need?