Top 10 myths in stem cell debate
By Rev. Tadeusz Pacholczyk
Special to The CS&T
Is the Catholic Church against stem cell research? Are therapeutic cloning
and reproductive cloning different things? Is every body cell an embryo
and thus human life?
Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, who has a Ph.D. in neuroscience from Yale University
and who did post-doctoral research at Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard
Medical School prior to pursuing advanced studies in Rome in theology and
bioethics, outlines some of the myths in the stem cell research debate.
A priest of the diocese of Fall River, Mass., Father Tad, as he is known,
now serves as the Director of Education for the National Catholic Bioethics
Center in Philadelphia.
1. Stem cells can only come from embryos.
In fact, stem cells can be taken from umbilical cords, the placenta, amniotic
fluid, adult tissues and organs such as bone marrow, fat from liposuction,
regions of the nose, and even from cadavers up to 20 hours after death.
2. The Catholic Church is against stem cell research.
There are four categories of stem cells: embryonic stem cells, embryonic
germ cells, umbilical cord stem cells, and adult stem cells. Given that
germ cells can come from miscarriages that involve no deliberate interruption
of pregnancy, the Church really opposes the use of only one of these four
categories, i.e., embryonic stem cells. In other words, the Catholic Church
approves three of the four possible types of stem cell research.
3. Embryonic stem cell research has the greatest promise.
Up to now, no human being has ever been cured of a disease using embryonic
stem cells. Adult stem cells, on the other hand, have already cured thousands.
There is the example of the use of bone marrow cells from the hip-bone to
repair scar tissue on the heart after heart attacks. Research using adult
cells is 20 to 30 years ahead of embryonic stem cells and holds greater
promise. This is in part because stem cells are part of the natural repair
mechanisms of an adult body, while embryonic stem cells do not belong in
an adult body (where they are likely to form tumors, and to be rejected
as foreign tissue by the recipient). Rather, embryonic stem cells belong
only within the specialized micro-environment of a rapidly growing embryo,
which is a radically different setting from an adult body.
4. Embryonic stem cell research is against the law.
In reality, there is no law or regulation against destroying human embryos
for research purposes. While President Bush has banned the use of federal
funding to support research on embryonic stem cell lines created after August
2001, it is not illegal. Anyone using private funds is free to pursue it.
5. President Bush created new restrictions to federal funding of
embryonic stem cell research.
The 1996 Dickey Amendment prohibited the use of federal funds for research
that would involve the destruction of human embryos. Bush’s decision
to permit research on embryonic stem cell lines created before a certain
date thus relaxes this restriction from the Clinton era.
6. Therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning are fundamentally
different from one another.
The creation of cloned embryos either to make a baby or to harvest cells
occurs by the same series of technical steps. The only difference is what
will be done with the cloned human embryo that is produced: Will it be given
the protection of a woman’s womb in order to be born, or will it be
destroyed for its stem cells?
7. Somatic cell nuclear transfer is different from cloning.
In fact, “somatic cell nuclear transfer” is simply cloning by
a different name. The end result is still a cloned embryo.
8. By doing somatic cell nuclear transfer, we can directly produce
tissues or organs without having to clone an embryo.
At the present stage of research, scientists are unable to bypass the creation
of an embryo in the production of tissues or organs. In the future it may
be possible to inject elements from the cytoplasm of a woman’s ovum
into a somatic cell to “reprogram” it into a stem cell. This
is called “de-differentiation.” If so, there would be no moral
objection to this approach to getting stem cells.
9. Every body cell, or somatic cell, is somehow an embryo and thus
a human life.
People sometimes argue: “Every cell in the body has the potential
to become an embryo. Does that mean that every time we wash our hands and
are shedding thousands of cells, we are killing life?” The problem
is that this overlooks the basic biological difference between a regular
body cell, and one whose nuclear material has been fused with an unfertilized
egg cell, resulting in an embryo. A normal skin cell will only produce more
skin cells when it divides, while an embryo will give rise to the entire
adult organism. Skin cells are not potential adults. Skin cells are potentially
only more skin cells. Only embryos are potential adults.
10. Because frozen embryos may one day end up being discarded by
somebody, that makes it morally allowable, even laudable, to violate and
destroy those embryos.
The moral analysis of what we may permissibly do with an embryo doesn’t
depend on its otherwise “going to waste,” nor on the incidental
fact that those embryos are ‘trapped’ in liquid nitrogen. If
we think about a schoolhouse in which there is a group of children who are
trapped through no fault of their own, that would not make it okay to send
in a remote control robotic device which would harvest organs from those
children and cause their demise.
This article is available as a parish bulletin insert. Please call the
National Catholic Bioethics Center at 215-877-2660 for more information.
