Cord-blood stem cell breakthrough

BatesLine blogged There's news of a woman, 19 years a paraplegic, who has regained some feeling and movement in her legs following infusion of stem cells from umbilical cord blood.

Mister Snitch writes: "If this, again, is valid, it probably also marks the beginning of the end of principled resistance against stem cell research in this country. The political tide will quickly swing overwhelmingly in favor of more research, and quickly."

I am not aware of any opposition to any form of stem cell research.

I believe he means to any thing except embryonic stem cell research.

The principled resistance is to embryonic stem cell research (ESCR). Extracting stem cells from an embryo results in the end of that human life; extracting stem cells from cord blood, bone marrow, fat cells, or mucous membranes -- "adult" stem cells -- does not destroy the living human being from whom the cells are taken.

Adult stem cell research has produced real therapeutic benefits, but for some reason it is overlooked by celebrity proponents of embryonic stem cell research. Perhaps it's because it undermines the argument that ESCR is essential. Some ESCR supporters seem desperate to find some positive benefit that can justify the destruction of human life, but so far, all the results have come from non-controversial adult stem cell research.

The reason that only embryonic stem cell research gets publicity is because the MSM is in the pocket of the Democratic Party, that views acceptance of destroying embryos to help adults will make it easier for them to keep killing babies in abortions.

It reminds me of the lifeboat scenario used to teach "values clarification": There are too many people in a lifeboat, so you have to decide whose life is worth saving and whose should be sacrificed. Ideally, you figure a way so everyone can be saved and no one has to be thrown overboard. That's what adult stem cell research offers.

If there is any political tide resulting from this development, it ought to sweep away federal funding for embryonic stem cell research and deposit those dollars with researchers who are achieving cures using stem cells from cord blood and other sources that respect the sanctity of human life.

The Anchoress blogged Doug rightly points out that, were this account refering to EMBRYONIC stem cells, there would have been a great deal of coverage. I believe he is correct. I have noticed that only the embryonic stem cells excite the press, and that the current US policy about stem cell research - which is that we favor and support research on adult stem cells, but will not federally fund research using new lines of embryonic stem cells - is routinely misreported as “Bush is against stem cell research and science.”

There is another story out there - I cannot find it on google and forgot to save it to my hard drive - about two seperate women who suffered spinal cord injuries in accidents and who were now walking (with canes) after being treated with stem cells from their nasal cavities. I’ve got to look for that piece.

Doug blogged Remember the ad showing a walking Christopher Reeve? Remember John Edwards saying that someday folks in wheelchairs would be able to get up and walk? Both were extolling the virtues of embryonic stem cell research. Turns out that adult stem cell research, which doesn't require the destruction of embryos and has none of the ethical issues, is on its way to fulfilling that promise. The article notes that this is still very preliminary ("one patient does not a treatment make" cautions a bioethicist), but this is very exciting.