Stem Cell Advances

WaPo reports If only human embryonic stem cells could sprout anew from something other than a human embryo. Researchers could harvest them and perhaps harness their great biomedical potential without destroying what some consider to be a budding human life. But like a low-calorie banana split or the proverbial free lunch, there is no such thing as an embryo-free embryonic stem cell. Or is there? In recent months, a number of researchers have begun to assemble intriguing evidence that it is possible to generate embryonic stem cells without having to create or destroy new human embryos. The research is still young and largely unpublished, and in some cases it is limited to animal cells. Scientists doing the work also emphasize their desire to have continued access to human embryos for now. It is largely by analyzing how nature makes stem cells, deep inside days-old embryos, that these researchers are learning how to make the cells themselves. Yet the gathering consensus among biologists is that embryonic stem cells are made, not born -- and that embryos are not an essential ingredient.

It would be nice if advances in medicine could be made without destroying life, but I am a little concerned that the scientists are planning on playing God, i.e. Creating Life, and that they will just say "until we can do that, let us go ahead and destroy life"

That means that today's heated debates over embryo rights could fade in the aftermath of technical advances allowing scientists to convert ordinary cells into embryonic stem cells. "That would really get around all the moral and ethical concerns," said James F. Battey, chief of the stem cell task force at the National Institutes of Health. The techniques under study qualify for federal grant support because embryos are not harmed, he noted. And eventually the work could boost the number of stem cell colonies, or lines, available for study by taxpayer-supported researchers. The transformation of ordinary body cells into extraordinary stem cells is not a matter of alchemy but molecular biology. All human cells, be they stem or otherwise, have the same basic complement of genes. What is different about stem cells -- and what gives them their remarkable capacity to proliferate and morph into whatever kind of cell the body may need -- is the specific pattern of activity of their genes. It is all about which genes are working and which are dormant. As cells mature during embryonic and fetal development, certain genes in those cells are switched either on or off. Depending on the new pattern of activity, each cell becomes skin, heart muscle, nerve or some other kind of specialized cell.

Pejman Yousefzadeh blogged Finally, someone understand that the best way to go forward on this issue is to take the moral qualms out of the equation. I hope this isn't overly optimistic. If the report is true, then perhaps we will finally be able to go about the business of saving lives without being encumbered by yet another round of political arguments. I will add though that those who raise ethical and moral concerns--and I count myself as one of them--should not have those concerns so easily and casually dismissed.

James Joyner blogged Scientists are apparently quite close to creating research quality stem cells without having to harvest them from human embryoes. This would be an ideal outcome. Being able to explore the touted possibilities from stem cell research without having to first destroy human life would indeed untie that particular Gordian knot.