Yun Tong
First Year Writing
Prof. Faircloth
November 28, 2017
Should Embryonic Stem Cell Research Be Performed?
As modern biotechnology steps into a whole new world called the human embryonic stem cell (ESC) research, things are deviating from what we know at an extraordinary fast pace. Stem cells serve as an internal repair system in many tissues and have the incredible potential to develop into many other different kinds of cells such as muscle cells, blood cells, or brain cells. When a stem cell divides, it can stay as a stem cell or turn into one of the types of cells mentioned above (“Stem Cell Basics I”). With this mind-blowing technology, doctors are going to be able to produce babies exactly according to what the parents want by altering genetic information in the embryo’s reproductive cells. While this might sound really amazing and magical, there have been many controversies involved in this kind of research. Although some may say that the ESC research violates the baby’s right to choose who he or she wants to be, or that the ESC research indirectly kills the baby without he or she even having the right to decide, the human ESC research does create a more positive impact on the society by helping scientists figuring out ways to cure previously incurable diseases and therefore should be supported and facilitated.
Since human embryonic stem cell research has been established, it has advanced many experiments on various diseases, dysfunctions, and drug testings. According to the Oxford Journals, human embryonic stem (hES) cells have participated in many different medical fields and played very important roles. Examples are “research on early human development are the causes of early pregnancy loss, aspects of embryonic ageing and the failure of pregnancy in older women … toxicology, … clinically in transplantation medicine, where they could be used to develop cell replacement therapies.” (“Human Reproduction.”). These and more examples clearly show that the hES cell research is really making a difference not only in the medical field, but also in the whole world. With this research being done, scientists will know more about the diseases and dysfunctions that happen to many people, and they will be able to find out the way to cure them as quickly as possible. Just like those people who donate their organs after their death for research purposes, the hES cell research saves thousands and maybe millions of people’s lives by using amorphous embryonic cells.
Some people may say that people donating their organs signed a contract which means they are willing to do it, while the hES cells research doesn't give the embryos any choice because they are “killed” before they even know. This argument could be considered valid, but only with the right definition of an embryo. Why? Because According to the Oxford Journals, people have different definitions of an embryo. Some people say that an embryo is “the result of fertilization of an oocyte by sperm”, “there is no absolute consensus that nuclear transfer gives rise to an embryo” (“Human Reproduction”). Some people “accept that the human embryo is a human being but argue that the human embryo does not have the moral status requisite for a right to life.” (“Ethics of Stem Cell Research”). Therefore, it is really up to everyone’s personal understanding of the definition of an embryo and whether and when it has the right to life. According to US National Library of Medicine, opposition to hESC research is often associated with opposition to abortion and with the “pro-life” movement. However, even such “opposition to stem cell research is not monolithic”. “A number of pro-life leaders support stem cell research using frozen embryos that remain after a woman or couple has completed infertility treatment and that they have decided not to give to another couple.” (“Ethical Issues in Stem Cell Research”) Different people just have different opinion on everything, but it does mean that they should refute whatever other people say. With that being said, people can say that the hES cell research is not ethical for “killing” embryos, but they can’t deny that hES cell research is really beneficial to the whole world.
For the most part people’s opinions are based on their own cultural and religious beliefs. For many cultures and religions such as Judaism and Buddhism, although it is not good to kill an embryo, it is more important to save sick people’s lives. In the teachings of Buddhism, although babies are really important, it is more important to care about people who have already been born. Sen. Hatch states that “the support of embryonic stem cell research is consistent with pro-life, pro-family valuest” (“Ethical Issues in Stem Cell Research”). Although some people believe that the hES cell research violates the babies and mothers’ right of life, it is more helpful because it cures infertile women and older women who are struggling to have another kid, and they are the people who we should care more about. While most people who are against the hES cell research do have some valid argument points, they are actually getting influence from their culture and religion, and so do people who are for the research. A majority of people who are against the hES cell research are Christians and Catholics, although the Bible encourages people to cure the sick, Christianity also firmly believes that “human life begins at conception” and that “an embryo is therefore a person”. “According to this view, an embryo has interests and rights that must be respected” (“Ethical Issues in Stem Cell Research”). People are all born in a culture or religion, so they are immersed in their own environment and they don't even realize it.
Moreover, we can even put the debate of whether killing an embryo is ethical aside. Since the hES can reproduce and grow infinitely in a petri dish and can, in theory, still grow into a human being, is the human embryo really destroyed (“The Stem Cell Debate”)? While the ethics of modern research on the human embryonic stem cell research continues to heat up, it can’t be denied that there are many ethically good aspects of it. Being able to save thousands and millions of lives and to create many lovely babies for this world, the hES cell research should earn more respect and approval than it has. With the benefits it has given to the world, the hES cell research is definitely ethical in a greater degree than previously thought.
Turning the attention to public awareness of the stem cell research, one would hope that the public opinion of this topic can gives the government and scientists some more directions in the decision-making process of the legislations and regulations. Unfortunately, the majority of the public, at least in the U.S., do not currently keep up with the debate over stem cell research. Matthew Nisbet, a professor of communication, policy & urban affairs at Northeastern University, states in his research “Public Opinion About Stem Cell Research and Human Cloning” that the attention peaked in the summer of 2001 when over 60 percent of the respondent of the survey reported that the issue was “very important” or “somewhat important” to them, accompanied with significant media attention. However, the number had kept falling, from the 27 percent to only 13 percent of respondents having seen, read, or heard “a lot” about the issue (Nisbet). Although it was sad to see the lack of public understanding on stem cell research in the past decade, it was also optimistic because these results meant that the disapproval voices that exist now did not represent anywhere close to the majority of the population; in fact, they did not even know even of the topic to take a side yet.
The future of the field is looking very optimistic, though. In a more recent article from the ABC News, it is proved that “Americans by a 2-1 margin support stem cell research and say it should be funded by the federal government, despite controversy over its use of human embryos” (Langer). As people are getting more and more aware to this particular topic, it is clear that the majority of the U.S. population choose to side in favor of stem cell research. Despite of the heated ethical debate on this topic, it is the public opinion which eventually leads the country onto the direction that is better for the country. If after being reasonably educated on this topic, the majority of the people decides that it is better for them or the future generations to perform the stem cell research, then there must be something truly beneficial which leads to a greater common good.
The stem cell field has also proven its reason of existence and significance also in terms of legislation. Since the employment of stem cells in scientific researches in the 1950s, there have been many laws and policies being set in place to regulate the performance of such research. The ongoing debate on this issue started after the Dickey-Wicker Amendment passed in 1996. This amendment allowed the congress to ban “federal funding for research on embryos” and “prohibit the use of federal funds for the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes, or research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero” (“Timeline of Major Events in Stem Cell Research Policy”). This law hindered many potential embryotic stem cell researches for many years, and the scientists, politicians, and activists fought for many years for better funding from the government. On January 7, 2013, the supreme court declined to hear Sherley v. Sebelius, thereby upholding the previous ruling of the D.C. Circuit Court’s ruling that was in favor of the proponents of hES cell reseach. This decision symbolizes “a major victory for scientifically and ethically responsible innovative research”, Bernard Siegel, spokesperson for the Stem Cell Action Coalition and executive director of the Genetics Policy Institute, said in a statement. Just last year, President Obama signed the 21st Century Cures Act into law, which includes “provisions intended to assure timely regulatory review of regenerative therapies, including cell therapies enabled by stem cell therapy research” (“Timeline of Major Events in Stem Cell Research Policy”). This is another big step for the stem cell research field because it does not only need legislative approval, but also reinforced regulations to ensure the safety and prosper of this field.
Besides the United States, many other countries around the world already have corresponding legislations and regulations in place to facilitate the progress of their hES reseach. Nevertheless, this issue has in fact divided the world into two different sides. While countries like Australia have banned all human cloning for reproduction or research (though it does allow the use of embryos remaining after assisted reproduction from before April 5, 2002), other countries like Brazil, Japan, China, Switzerland, and South Africa have allowed the performance of hES research with different extents of restrictions in place. Among them, China has one of the most unrestrictive stem cell policies, which is somewhat due to its cultural attitudes that a person’s life begins with birth (Dhar, Ho). The benefits, thus, that these countries have gotten are unmeasurable. For example, the hES research “has yielded promising results for the treatment for Parkinson’s disease and diabetes.” It “also has generated new knowledge about basic cell mechanisms that is critical to understanding the causes of disease, such as cancer” (“Stem Cell Research”). Therefore, the United States can definitely take a closer look at these countries and consider the pros and cons of the hES research, and what government can do to regulate this process to keep it safe while still progressing in the field.
Technologies have changed human beings in every aspect that can be possibly imagined, and the hES research will be one among the next few that will flip the world upside down, not surprisingly. While there are some worries or fears in terms of mainly safety and ethics of this kind of research, the benefits human beings are going to enjoy in the future definitely outweighs the harms.
Works Cited
“Stem Cell Basics I.” National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/1.htm.
De Wert, Guido, and Christine Mummery. “Human Reproduction.” Human Embryonic Stem Cell: Research, Ethics and Policy. Oxford Journals, 2003.
Lo, Bernard, and Lindsay Parham. “Ethical Issues in Stem Cell Research.” Endocrine Reviews. The Endocrine Society, 14 Apr. 2009.
Siegel, Andrew. “Ethics of Stem Cell Research.” Stanford University. Stanford University, 25 Apr. 2008.
“The Stem Cell Debate: Is It Over?”, University of Utah, Genetic Science Learning Center.
Nisbet, Matthew C. “Public Opinion About Stem Cell Research and Human Cloning.” OUP
Academic, Oxford University Press, 1 Mar. 2004.
Langer, Gary. “Public Backs Stem Cell Research.” ABC News, ABC News Network, 26 June
2017.
“Timeline of Major Events in Stem Cell Research Policy.” Research! America,
Research! America, 30 Dec. 2016.
Dhar, Deepali, and Ho, John Hsi-en. “Stem Cell Research Policies around the World.” The Yale
Journal of Biology and Medicine, YJBM, Sept. 2009.
“Stem Cell Research.” University of Michigan Stem Cell Research | Frequently Asked
Questions, University of Michigan.