Stem Cell Research
Stem cell research has been a controversial issue for many years on both a national and international stage and still continues to be so today. Scientists and other groups of people including religious and anti-abortion groups continue to debate whether research on stem cells is ethically and morally right and will be beneficial financially.
Stem cells are defined as “a class of undifferentiated cells that are able to differentiate into specialized cell types”. The cells are different to mature cells, as they are unspecialised cells which can specialise to become any of the 200+ different types of cells in the body, compared to mature cells which remain as they are. Stem cells continue to divide and differentiate to renew themselves as well are generating new cells of the tissue that they belong to. For example stem cells from bone marrow can specialise to become red blood cells, muscle cells and neural cells (as seen in the diagram below). When a stem cell divides it creates two cells, one of which has the same capability as the original cell. These stem cells can be classed into two main groups that are used for research, these are embryonic stem cells and adult/somatic stem cells.
Adult stem cells
Adult Stem cells, also known as somatic stem cells or non-embryonic stem cells, are cells which have developed past embryonic stage. The cells can be found inside many different types of tissues around the body such as bone marrow, which is commonly used for stem cell extraction, and blood vessels. These cells can continue to divide but only after they have been “activated by disease or tissue injuries”. By dividing and self-renewing they are able to produce different types of cells from where they originated from, as well as the ability to restore whole organs. As adult stem cells are only able to differentiate to produce the different cells types from where they originated, they are labelled as multipotent. Adult stem cells, when used for treatment, are derived from the patient themselves, meaning they are less likely to be rejected by the body. They are however harder to obtain than embryonic stem cells as they are located in areas of the body that are hard to locate, such as bone marrow.
Diagram above. showing how adult stem cells are derived.
Embryonic Stem cells
Embryonic stem cells are harvested from embryos which are between 3-5 days old, otherwise known as Blastocysts, which have not been implanted in the uterus, and also aborted fetuses. The stem cells are unspecialised cells and have the ability when they divide and differentiate to become any type of the 200+ cells in the body, such as skin cells, red blood cells ect. Because of this ability to differentiate into any type of cell they are called pluripotent. The embryos that the cells are derived from are often from the leftover embryos from vitro fertilization facilities, or else from embryos that have been grown in a lab. The process to harvest the stem cells from an embryo begins by allowing the embryo to mature for 3-5 days after it was formed, the inner mass of cells are then removed, plated and then chemicals are used to specialise the cells, as seen in the diagram below.
Diagram above showing how embryonic stem cells are obtained.
Stem Cell Research
Stem cell research is the use of stem cells to carry out scientific research. This research could be testing new drugs and treatments for a range of different conditions. Or observing the cells to see how the develop and function. For this research to be carried out in a lab the cells must be derived from a source, such as adult bone marrow stem cells, umbilical cord blood cells and embryonic stem cells. The end results of this research is to learn more or about the body and how it developes from single cells and to develop new treatments for diseases and conditions.
Biological Implications
Stem cells can have significant medical benefits. The research on stem cells could bring out cures for debilitating and potentially life threatening diseases and conditions such as Alzheimer’s, Type 1 Diabetes, Spinal cord injuries and heart diseases, to name a few. For example it is believed Parkinson’s disease could soon be cured by implanting stem cells into the brain of the patient. Not only does research on stem cells have the possibility to cure and treat these conditions but they can be used to test and develop new drugs, advancing regenerative medicine, which in turn will improve the quality and longevity of life for all kinds of people all over the world. By testing the drugs on tissues developed from stem cells in a lab, the researchers can avoid using people to test the drugs on. Not only can stem cell research be used to advance medicines and cure diseased but using them for research is giving scientists a better understanding of a number of factors. One being the development of humans from a single cell, and how damaged cells can be replaced by healthy cells. Mutations such as birth defects and cancer can be studied by looking into abnormal cell divisions and differentiations and by studying this, cures for cancers can be developed and birth defects may be able to be detected and fixed before babies are born. The ability of stem cells to divide and replace old and damaged cells, and even renew whole organs, is leading scientists to believe that humans life expectancy will be able to be increased with stem cell therapies, and maybe, in time humans will be able to live “two or even more centuries”. There are concerns that stem cell therapies will have negative impacts on people, however, as the treatments have no impact on the individual’s genes, if something were to wrong only the individual would be affected rather than future generations. Overall it is clear that stem cell research has a wide range of immense positive biological benefits for all people of any age, that will help develop regenerative medicine and improve the livelihood of many.
It does not however go without implications that are concerns. After implanting embryonic stem cells in animals, malignant tumors have developed, and other issues like the implanted cells being rejected by the body, or differentiating into the wrong type of cell than intended. This means that these could issues could occur when the stem cell treatments are used on humans, however this has not yet happened. There is a particularly high chance of the stem cells being rejected by the patient’s body if the cells are from an embryo as they are completely foreign to the body, whereas if the cells are obtained from the patient’s bone marrow or similar, these are familiar to the body so are less likely to be rejected.
Social Implications
The main social issues in stem cell research are the ethical questions that are being raised. The embryos and fetuses that are used in stem cell research in most countries are the leftover embryos that have been produced in vitro fertilization for the purpose of helping couples conceive which have had trouble doing so. The fetuses that are used to harvest cells in some cases, are fetuses that have been aborted, for whatever reason the mother had. In both cases the organisms that are being used are destroyed after the cells have been obtained. This has left people questioning whether we should be giving embryos the same rights as living humans. On the other side of the debate is that by carrying out the research on the embryos will lead to cures and treatments for common and debilitating diseases and conditions. Thus, in order for stem cell research to be carried out, both sides of the debate cannot be satisfied, which has created this large ethical issue. I will therefore discuss the different sides of the ethical debate, and how groups see it as ethical or not in different ways.
The debate can be looked at from a spiritual point of view, on what is considered ethical or not. From a Christian-Catholic perspective, it is our duty to “alleviate suffering, and preserve and enhance life” and partake in God’s work to do so, however it is noted that some suffering is inevitable. Thus it is more important to “live and die well – ethically, this is – than to seek life and well being over all else”. Scriptures also warn us against doing “evil that good my result” (Rom 3:8). This tells us that a strong part of being Christian is to live ethically. It is Christian and Catholic belief that life begins at the moment of conception, ie when the sperm fertilizes the egg. Therefore the embryo should be treated with the same dignity and given the same rights as a living human, and any intervention that is not in favour of the the embryo is a violation to its right to life. Therefore from a Christian Catholic point of view, the use of embryos in stem cell research is not morally or ethically right and cannot be supported. Thus stem cell research on embryos has negative ethical implications.
Another side to the ethical debate is that idea that ‘majority rules’. Those who do not hold Christian/Catholic beliefs often think that it is morally and ethically wrong to protect the lives of a few unborn individuals at the detriment of hundreds or thousands of living individuals. Stem cell research is likely to bring about treatments/cures for a range of debilitating and sometimes life threatening diseases and conditions, which many people suffer with, ranging from type one diabetes, to spinal cord injuries and heart disease. As †he research on stem cells has to potential to relieve pain and save lives of so many, some think that it is unethical to deny living people of this treatment, in order to save the lives of embryos which have not yet been born. The embryos used are between 3-5 days old, and have not been implanted in the womb, meaning they cannot develop into fetuses. They are also left over from IVF treatments, so they are going to be destroyed even if they aren’t used in research. Thus it can be seen as unethical to protect a small number of these embryos that are being destroyed anyway at the detriment of many more living people. Therefore not using the embryos’ stem cells to perform research, is causing moral implications.
The ethical debate surrounding stem cell research can also be looked at from a cultural perspective. Living in New Zealand, the stem cell debate can be looked at from a Maori perspective as to whether it is ethical or not. The Maori culture is centered around supporting the whanau, and as stem cell research can help people’s personal health, the Maori culture recognises the benefits. However as stem cell research is essentially interfering with whakapapa (identity and genealogy), and could potentially have risks to future generations, there is uneasiness surrounding this. As there are two different sides for Maori as to whether stem cell research is ethical or not, they support freedom of choice.
Stem cell research has also stirred questions about the economical implications of the process. Some people argue that stem cell research and therapies will be too expensive, and thus there is little point putting money into it, while others argue that it will bring about great economic gain. Dan Gincel, director of the Maryland Stem Cell Research Fund, believes that stem cell research has and will bring about great economic gain, stating that after just two years of investments in his fund, it has generated over 500 jobs and had an ‘“indirect impact to recipients of $71 million”, which generated a $2.7million increase in tax revenue. Allen Goodmen, another supporter of stem cell research and an economist at Wayne State University, Michigan predicted that of the 500,000 biotech jobs in Michigan, if the proposal to allow embryonic stem cell research was passed, a 1% impact would generate 797 new jobs and US$51 million in payroll. In terms of New Zealand’s 2,200 jobs in Biotechnology, which is worth about NZ$2.1billion, the same 1% increase would generate just 22 jobs and roughly NZ$21million. While this is only a small increase, with regenerative medicine becoming more and more developed and widely available, stem cell research could have a very positive impact on biotechnology New Zealand, as well as the economy. it has however been estimated that treatments that are developed from stem cell research, for conditions such as diabetes, the costs would be astronomical, costing between $100,000-$200,000 to harvest 50-100 eggs for one patient alone. These cost concerns are a negative economic implication of stem cell research.
Perspectives
There are very varying opinions on whether stem cell research is a practise that should be continued in both New Zealand and all over the world.
The Family Life International New Zealand is a particular organisation in New Zealand that does not support embryonic stem cell research. Family Life New Zealand is an organisation with a mission “To build a culture of life and love by promoting and defending the dignity of human life from conception to natural death…”, the organisation is run by three catholic women, Michelle Kaufman, Colleen Bayer and Clare McClean, all with the belief that moral and ethical concerns should take precedence over science and research. They believe that life begins upon conception (when the sperm fertilizes the egg), as something which did not exist before has been created, with new capabilities and potential that the individual gametes did not have before. They believe that a human embryo is the same as a living human adult, and compared harvesting stem cells from embryos for research, to being the same as harvesting cells from four year old to treat cancer, if that was possible. They see destroying embryos as bad for humanity. Because of this the organisation Family Life International New Zealand, with catholic views, does not support embryonic stem cell research as human life must come before potential treatments and new technologies. They do not however see stem cell research using adult stem cells or cord stem cells as immoral as neither require the destruction of human life. This perspective on stem cell research is from a spiritual point of view.
The Humanist Society of New Zealand is an organisation that does support stem cell research, including embryonic stem cell research. The humanist Society “represents the interests of non-theistic people in New Zealand. In Kent Stevens submission to the New Zealand Ministry of Health, he stated that he supports the use of embryos from vitro fertilisation to be used in medical research, as it can be “of great benefit to humanity”. And also somatic cell transfer cloning. The society recognizes that immense benefits that could come out of the research such as treatments for Alzheimer’s and stroke victims and this promotes “public good”. They stated in their submission that the government should allow scientists to create embryos for medical purpose (on the condition that they are used in early days of development) as it is allowing people freedom of religion/belief, due to some people have strong religious beliefs for stem cell research. The society supports the use of embryos in stem cell research as they say that an embryo does not resemble anything of a human yet, and because it not like harming a living person they believe scientists and researchers should be able to use embryos in stem cell research. Overall, The Humanist Society of New Zealand, and particular member Kent Stevens, are strongly supportive of stem cell research of all kinds, including embryonic stem cell research.
John Kleinsmith, from the Nathaniel Centre (New Zealand Catholic Bioethics Centre) an anti embryonic stem cell research. Kleinsmith is the director and head of research at the nathaniel Centre and holds catholic beliefs. He holds the belief that life begins at the moment of conception, so embryos should be treated the same as any living human. Therefore he does not condone research on embryonic stem cells as it is giving them a “second class status”, even if they are left over from IVF treatments. The only terms that he sees fit for the embryos stem cells to be used is if it is directly helping the same embryo, and does not cause any harm to it. If the embryo is used to help someone else it is wrong, as it is essentially sacrificing the life of an individual to help another, which is not treating the embryo with dignity. Kleinsmith stated “From a Catholic-Christian perspective, the absolute dignity of human life means that no outcome, no matter how noble, can justify the destruction or harming of embryos”. Kleinsmith recognises the potential medical benefits of stem cell research, so sees it worthwhile to pursue more ethical methods, such as cord stem cells. This shows us the view on stem cell research from both a spiritual and scientific point of view
Another person that supports stem cell research is neuroscientist Bronwen Connor, from Auckland University, New Zealand. Connor has been carrying out stem cell research surrounding the brain for a number of years. Connor sees the potential that stem cells have in treating a range of conditions and acknowledges the benefits they have had in developing drugs such as Prozac, which has been studied using stem cells. Connor and her team of graduate students at Auckland University support stem cell research as there “is a chance their research is going to helping people”, and that she needs to be sure about her treatments before they are used on humans, so therefore research will help to iron out flaws and make sure the scientists are absolutely sure about the “safety and effectiveness” of the treatments, as “regenerative therapy and transplant is permanent. Stem cell research “excites her” and therefore is a strong supporter of stem cell research. Thus from a scientific point of view, stem cell research can be supported because of its biological benefits.
Not only can the debate be looked at from a scientific and spiritual point of view, but it can also be looked at from an economic perspective. A supporter of stem cell research and regenerative research is Dan Gincel, director of the Maryland Stem Cell Research Fund. He believes that stem cell research has immense economic benefits. The Maryland Stem Cell Research Fund has generated $64.8million in research grants in four years. Glincel stated that “you look at number, and it makes sense that this is the way you want to grow your economy”. He predicted that his fund has generated 500 jobs and increased tax revenue by $2.7million. Because of these immense economic benefits, he believes that stem cell research should be supported by politicians and similar and more money should be put into the cause. Overall, from an economic perspective, stem cell research can have very positive impacts on the economy of countries that allow stem cell research to go ahead.
Comparing biological and social implications
It is important to compare the biological implications and the social implications to decide whether stem cell research is in fact beneficial. As discussed, stem cell research has a number of potential benefits for a range of different diseases and conditions, as well as furthering biological knowledge. However using embryonic stem cells has large ethical issues, as well as the cost, so it is important to compare these factors to decide whether the biological implications or social implications are more significant
Initially stem cell research may be expensive to run and the resulting therapies may be expensive (between $50,000-$100,000), however over time the research will bring in the development of more jobs in the biotechnology sector as well as great benefits for the economy. Not only is the stem cell research beneficial for the economy but there are significant benefits for people’s health and the future of medicine (ie developing new drugs and helping us to understand the human body and treatments for a range of conditions. However there are negative social implications such as the use of embryos for the research. This is seen as unethical as it involves destroying a human life to harvest the cells. However there are ways around this ie using adult somatic cells which are showing more evidence of having the same potential to divide as embryonic stem cells do, while not harming the person that the cells came from. The embryonic stem cells can also been harvested from leftover embryos from IVF treatments, so they will be destroyed either way. As there are ways around the ethical implications, the biological implications are more significant.
My Perspective
After researching stem cell research, I have taken a stance supporting stem cell research with any kind of stem cell, whether it’s embryonic or adult. I have formed this opinion based on a number of factors.
The first factor that has helped me from this opinion is that I believe the positive outcomes of the research outweigh the ethical issues. As discussed stem cell research has immense positive outcomes in terms of the development of drugs and furthering scientists knowledge on the human body, but it also has the potential capability to develop treatments using stem cells to treat many debilitating and life threatening diseases which affect a large amount of people and their friends and family all over the world. These range from diabetes, which I have seen friends suffer with, to alzheimer’s and parkinson’s which I have also been made familiar with.
I have however recognised that there are significant ethical and moral issues surrounding the practise, in particular the use of embryonic stem cells. As I do not associate myself with any certain religion nor are there any cultural beliefs I follow, I don’t have any religious or cultural beliefs to guide and shape my opinion. Thus in order to shape my own personal opinion I had to ask myself a number of questions. The main one being when do I think life begins? And where can the line be drawn? The fetus starts to develop organs at around 5 weeks and the nerve endings start developing at around 7 weeks. Because of this I believe that life starts around 5-6 weeks. Because of this, I support harvesting embryonic stem cells up until 5 weeks of development, when the main organs have started to develop.
I support stem cell research on all kinds of stem cells deemed necessary, however this on a number of conditions: The first condition is that the embryos used to harvest the cells should only be left over embryos from vitro treatments. This is because the embryos are going to be destroyed even if they aren’t used to obtain cells, so why not put something to use that is going to be destroyed anyway. Another condition is that the cells are not taken from embryos that are over 5 weeks old, as this is when the embryo begins to develop a nervous system and the heart begins to develop. to me this is when the embryo is essentially a living being that should be given the same rights as a living human. I also support the use of aborted fetuses for stem cell research, as these have already been killed so it would be worth while putting their cells to use. Another condition is that those embryos that are left over from vitro treatments, and the aborted fetuses must be donated by the parents, they must have given informed consent, and can say no to donating them as I believe in freedom of choice and beliefs, so if it is against their beliefs they do not have to donate the embryo/fetus if they are not comfortable with it being used for research.
I am a strong believer in freedom of choice. As stem cell research, in particular embryonic stem cell research is such a controversial topic I believe that people should have the right to choose whether they support it or not. By allowing the research to occur, people won’t be denied possible life saving treatments which could develop from this research. But for those who do not agree with the research taking place, they can decide not to donate embryos/fetuses if it is against their beliefs, and not be judged for it. Therefore both sides of the argument can be satisfied.
Action
I think the best action to take, is just educating people. I personally was not aware of what stem cell research could develop in terms of cures and treatments and furthering scientific knowledge, nor did I know that the stem cells could be taken from a range of different sources such as embryos and bone marrows, this would also be the case for many other people. I believe by making this information more widely known and available, people can form more informed opinions on whether they are pro or anti stem cell research.
Therefore my proposed action is writing a letter to the Ministry of Education and/or NZQA, to suggest adding stem cell research to the curriculum, whether in the form of a Biology/Geography internal or just extra learning for years 10-13. The letter would outline why I think stem cell research is an important thing for students to learn about – regenerative medicine is being more widely used and is the future of medicine so it is important for people to well informed about how they may be treated in years to come, as well as the fact that is a large ethical debate so could be beneficial to help students take a stance on how they feel about it. I would suggest the course content is unbiased, all facts and figures are taught that are not more in favour of one side, as it is important for students to form their own opinions without being swayed by teacher figures.
By adding stem cell to the research, students will learn how beneficial it can be, whether it’s adult stem cell research or embryonic stem cell research. By educating the future generation of scientists and government officials on the benefits of the research we can have a future country with the latest regenerative medicine and a community without some of the conditions that can be treated if research continues.
As the Ministry of Education and NZQA receive a significant amount of letters constantly it is likely that the letter would go unnoticed and put to the side, therefore it would not have an impact. The curriculums for both Biology and Geography both already have lots of standards for all three levels already, so standards may need to be removed to make room for one on stem cell research which the ministry and NZQA may be hesitant to do. But there is also a chance that it will stir conversations in the two organisations about the possibility of adding it to the curriculum, so some schools may be asked to trial it which is a step in the right direction, however it would take time for it to be added.
Analysis of research process
For each source I looked at a number of factors when assessing whether the source was reliable, unbiased and accurate or not. These included when the source was written, the author/where it was posted and the content. Looking at when the source was written gave me an idea of whether the information was reliable, as it may have been outdated since stem cell research has been around for a number of years and is constantly being developed. For example source #1 was written in 2016, and was the most up to date source of all of the sources I gathered. Because of this I assume that the information must be the most accurate as medicine is constantly changing and being developed. As the information in this source was so up to date, it is also indicates a more reliable source, compared to a source such as #6, which was written in 2001, so would not be as reliable. I looked at the author to see whether they had a background in science to see whether they will be knowledgeable on the topic, which has an impact on the accuracy of the information and also to see whether the author has a religious background or any beliefs that may have made the article bias. For example, source #15 was written by John Kleinsman so I researched him to find out if he has scientific knowledge. Kleinsmith has completed his PHD in science and has a background in disability support and drug and alcohol rehabilitation. I believe because of this that he has sufficient knowledge to write a scientific report, so I deemed his writing reliable and accurate. However, he does have a catholic background so he is against embryonic stem cell research, therefore sections about embryonic stem cell research are likely bias towards anti embryonic stem cell research. I also looked at the content of the source to see whether it was accurate. I compared the content to other sources to see whether the science lined up so can be trusted. An example of this is in source #1 it stated that cells were harvest from the blastocyst between 3-5 days of development and source #14 stated that the cells were harvested on the 4th/5th day of development. As both sources stated almost exactly the same thing, I deemed both pieces of information accurate.