Ryan ChartrandStem cell research has been arguably one of the most debated and publicized scientific research areas in recent years. The debate does not rest on whether it should be researched but more about what types of stem cell research should be studied and also funded.
Embryonic stem cell research involves taking a blastomere (a single cell) from an eight-cell blastocyst (a developing embryo). Theoretically, this single cell has the ability to grow into any one of more than 200 cell types in the body. Adult stem cell research involves removing a cell from a living human and culturing it to become a new tissue. Until recently, adult stem cells were thought to be incredibly limiting, as most scientists thought they could only become a few types of cells.
In 2004, Californians passed proposition 71, which allocated $3 billion to embryonic stem cell research over 10 years. Additionally, our federal government provides funding for 60 genetically diverse embryonic stem cell lines across the country. President Bush has vetoed major legislation that would have expanded embryonic stem cell research twice in the last four years. Until I learned about the entire process and factors involved, I disagreed with this decision.
The advancement and research of adult stem cells is more beneficial then embryonic stem cell research for several reasons. First, the consistent use of adult stem cells in successfully treating patients with injuries and diseases shows significant success in comparison with the same rates in embryonic stem cell research. Adult stem cells have successfully treated over 70 different conditions in humans, including Parkinson’s, spinal cord injury and diabetes. Embryonic stem cells have had few if any successes.
In addition, there are many dangers and consequences involved with embryonic stem cell research. According to the Autoimmune Disease Research Foundation, tumors may arise from embryonic stem cell treatment because “the cells are in such an early embryonic state and can divide quickly, and at times uncontrollably.” Harvard Medical School did a study involving 19 rats, which utilized embryonic stem cells to treat Parkinson’s disease. By the end of the study, five of the rats had developed tumors. Adult stem cell treatments have not produced a phenomenon like these embryonic cells have.
In November, two studies performed by notable scientists proved that adult stem cells have a much wider range of uses than previously thought. One of them, Dr. James Thompson, a scientist at University of Wisconsin, ran one of two labs that in 1998 first begin embryonic stem cell research. In November 2007, he released a study demonstrating that he was able to get an adult cheek cell to appear as an embryonic cell by adding four additional genes to it. In an article published in Time magazine, Dr. Thompson came out staunchly opposing embryonic stem cell research and even went as far as to say, “Isn’t it great to start a field and end it too.”
Utilizing adult cells has many more advantages than simply being “morally upstanding.” Potentially it allows a person’s own cells to be transplanted into themselves to eliminate the possibility of rejected tissue. Scientists at Cornell Medical College have been able to use mouse sperm cells for development into working blood vessels, cardiac cells and brain cells, with none of them being rejected as they were the same DNA.
As a big believer in the free market, I am always anxious to see what directions private companies pursue. According to Forbes, there are 15 companies in the U.S. that strictly research cures through stem cell research. Only two study embryonic stem cells while the rest focus on adult stem cells.
Now many medical professionals are turning their attention and support to adult stem cell research. In May 2007, the American College of Pediatrics released a statement saying, “Every dollar spent on the failed and unnecessary process of embryonic stem cell research steals resources away from the established unity and potential of adult stem cell research. This is fiscally irresponsible and medically unconscionable.”
Many conservatives have fiercely argued against research and funding for embryonic stem cell research, mainly over ethical concerns. Many argue that these embryos have the potential to become lives, and it is not worth sacrificing them in the name of science and research. While these reasons have never had much pull on me, the fact that treatments involving adult stem cells have been wildly successful, are much safer and reduce the rate of tissue rejection make me to realize that we should focus our money and energy on adult stem cell research, and make embryonic stem cell research a thing of the past.
Jacki DiMarchi is an animal science junior, a member of the Cal Poly College Republicans and a Mustang Daily conservative columnist.