Stem Cell Research: Truth vs. Hype

In 1998, researchers at the University of Wisconsin successfully harvested the first stem cell from a living human embryo. To most Americans, the event seemed an insignificant footnote on the pages of medical history. Little did most of us know how it would direct public debate over the value of human life.

Building blocks of life

Stem cells have the potential to develop into several different types of cells, and everyone’s body contains them.

There are two basic types of stem cells: embryonic and adult. Embryonic stem cells come from human embryos and form in the early days of human development before individual cells receive their "assignment" — for example, before they turn into blood, brain or hair cells. Scientists speculate that these immature (or blank) cells can easily be coaxed into becoming any number of cell types, thereby holding great promise for healing the human body, with possible cures for diabetes and heart disease to treatments for burns and spinal-cord injuries. However, harvesting these cells comes at a tremendous price: A living, human embryo must be destroyed.

Adult stem cells, on the other hand, come from a variety of sources, including the placenta, umbilical-cord blood, brain tissue, skin, bone marrow and body fat. Harvesting these cells requires no destruction of human life.

The use of adult stem cells in medical treatment is not new. For years, leukemia patients have obtained adult stem cells through bone-marrow transplants, and cancer patients often receive their own "cleansed" stem cells after chemotherapy. Adult stem cells have a proven track record of helping patients in the healing process.

Despite what you might hear in the media, embryonic stem cells have yet to demonstrate any therapeutic benefit to patients. Speculation as to the healing power of embryonic stem cells is just that: speculation. Scientists admit they have far to go before mastering the complicated and rapid process of embryonic stem cell growth and development. Yet many Americans incorrectly believe these cells already provide treatments and cures. There is also evidence embryonic stem cells are difficult to control, potentially putting patients who are treated with these cells at risk for serious side effects.

As research with adult stem cells progresses, scientists are learning that these cells may be almost as versatile as embryonic ones and capable of converting into various cell types for healing the body—without destroying innocent human life.

The tendency of media reports to blur the distinction between adult and embryonic stem cells leads some to believe pro-life organizations such as Focus on the Family oppose stem cell research. This is not true. Focus on the Family wholeheartedly supports adult stem cell research. We do oppose research that destroys human embryos.

Protecting innocent life

Congress recognized the threat to this tiniest member of the human family and first banned federal funding for research involving human embryos in 1996. However, that prohibition has no power over privately funded research, which continues to use human embryos for lethal experimentation, as seen by the University of Wisconsin’s successful embryonic cell harvesting.

Last Aug. 9, President George W. Bush announced that his administration would not fund stem cell research that would destroy human embryos. Dr. Dobson recalls the speech as strongly pro-life: "Never before has an acting President made such a bold national address in support of the sanctity of unborn human life." Another positive part of the President’s announcement was his call for the creation of a council on biomedical ethics, headed by Leon Kass, M.D., Ph.D., an ardent and intelligent defender of human life at all stages.

But Dr. Dobson regrets a portion of the President’s announcement. He explains, "We were disappointed by Mr. Bush’s decision to allow federal funding of research on 60 or so existing stem cell lines. The killing of embryos, even if it happened in the past, is never justifiable for scientific gain." With that, Dr. Dobson also explains that good pro-life friends in Congress warned that if Mr. Bush had banned all research, he would have surely been presented with a veto-proof bill allocating federal money for new embryonic stem cell research. That would have assured the killing of more little, preborn children.

Fundamental questions

The question of whether it is acceptable to destroy a human embryo for his or her stem cells raises basic questions about the value of life: When does human life begin? When is human life worthy of protection? Where will science and law draw the line?

Biologically, human life begins at conception (or fertilization) when sperm and egg unite. This new embryonic life is 100 percent human, complete with 46 human chromosomes and his or her own genetic code. As the embryo grows, he or she begins the journey through all of life’s stages: embryo, fetus, infant, toddler, adolescent and adult. To classify any one of these stages of life as not human discriminates based on age, appearance or location.

Scientists’ ability to harvest embryonic stem cells was assisted by the existence of so-called "surplus" embryos, frozen and stored in fertility clinics across the country. Infertile couples created these embryos with the intent of implanting the tiny humans in the womb during a procedure known as in vitro fertilization (IVF). The number of unclaimed embryos has grown through the years as couples are encouraged to fertilize more eggs than are safely implanted in a single IVF cycle. Some scientists, patient groups and politicians argue that any unused embryos should, with parental consent, be destroyed for their stem cells.

Parents of embryos frozen in fertility-clinic storage can implant the embryos, donate the embryos to scientists for lethal experimentation or donate the embryos to other infertile couples for whom IVF has not been successful. Obviously, implanting an embryo in his or her mother’s womb or in the womb of another married woman who desires a child are the best options for the embryonic girl or boy. The latter, called "embryo adoption," has successfully blessed several infertile couples with children, including one child who was featured on a "Focus on the Family" radio broadcast.

Scientists conducting embryonic stem cell research initially said that destroying existing frozen embryos stored in fertility clinics would be sufficient to provide the cells needed for research. However, scientists at two privately funded laboratories recently lamented that additional sources of embryos are needed and announced that they are taking the quest for embryonic stem cells two further steps, shattering age-old limits in medical ethics.

• The Jones Institute, a fertility clinic in Norfolk, Va., announced it is using donor sperm and eggs to create embryos for the sole purpose of destroying the embryos for stem cells.
• Advanced Cell Technology, a private biotechnological company in Worcester, Mass., used cloning techniques to create embryos for lethal stem cell harvesting.

The announcements confirm scientists’ intent to create human life for the express purpose of destroying it and set the stage for laboratories to create "embryo farms" to provide researchers with an unlimited supply of fresh embryonic stem cells. They also confirm what many critics of embryonic stem cell research fear: The thirst for embryonic stem cells is unquenchable.

Proponents of embryonic stem cell research argue in favor of killing embryos (created for reproduction or destruction) for their stem cells based on the notion that is it acceptable to sacrifice embryos for the potential greater good of others. To argue that "surplus" embryos may be thrown away in any case arrogantly glosses over the fact that embryos are living human beings, created in the image of God and deserving protection. They are tiny boys and girls with complete genetic codes, not spare parts for medical experiments. To propose creating human embryos solely for scientific benefit and then destruction is unspeakably evil.

It is never morally or ethically acceptable to advance medical science by sacrificing human life, regardless of the promised result. Modern history is rampant with examples of people who were considered expendable for the good of scientific advancement, including experiments conducted upon concentration-camp victims in Nazi Germany and syphilis-infected African-American men left untreated in Tuskegee, Ala.

Medical research must have limits guided by ethics, morals and Scripture. If we allow researchers to destroy embryos for their stem cells today, what will prevent the same scientists tomorrow from the equally egregious act of dissecting 6-month-old unborn children in the womb for their body parts? Unless we delineate a clear line establishing that life is present and protected at conception, all human life is at risk.