M.D. Sees Embryonic Stem-Cell Researchers Scaling Back ESCR Hype
by Mary Rettig and Jenni Parker
August 23, 2006
(AgapePress) - - Some embryonic stem-cell researchers have begun to scale back their promises of the many cures for disease that stem-cell research requiring the destruction of human embryos would yield. As these proponents of embryonic stem-cell research (ESCR) back down from their previous rhetoric, Dr. David Stevens, executive director of the Christian Medical & Dental Associations, says he is not at all surprised. According to Stevens, many researchers are now talking about the long-term goal of using stem cells derived from human embryos in their study of diseases in order to search for new drugs and therapies. He says these and other ESCR supporters admit that any sort of embryonic stem-cell therapy is at least a decade away.
The CMDA spokesman says many in the medical ethicist and pro-life communities have been saying for a long time that those embryonic stem-cell researchers and their supporters were pushing "vaporware" and making empty promises. "In other words," he says, "they were over-hyping what they're going to be able to do, all to get people's permission to destroy embryos."
What these ESCR proponents have been doing, Stevens explains, is telling the public: "Look, we're going to find these wonderful cures; and if you let us do this, we'll cure your diabetes, your Parkinson's disease, your Alzheimer's or whatever," and "This is the only other alternative we have. We've got to do this or you aren't going to get your cures."
And, of course, the Christian physician observes, "with that kind of argument, people overwhelmingly have supported embryonic stem-cell research." But now, he notes, as new reports emerge, many researchers have begun to realize the limitations of embryonic stem cells.
"I think the chances of us getting a wide range of stem-cell therapies is almost nil because of the tremendous problems in working with these cells," Stevens asserts. "It's difficult to control their differentiation -- how do you get them to become the type of cell you need in the quantities you need?"
And even when medical investigators have managed to derive cells that appear to have differentiated into the specific kinds of cells being sought, the CMDA executive director points out, researchers have still frequently run into problems. "Even when they've gotten cells that look like they could produce insulin [to treat diabetes] or produce dopamine to help with Parkinson's disease or whatever," he says, "they've not acted normally."
For this reason, Dr. Stevens believes the public can expect to hear fewer grandiose promises from the ESCR community about the potential for cures being found through the use of embryonic stem cells and more and more from this community about using embryos to study diseases for drug development and other therapies in the long term.
But no matter how the rhetoric changes, Steven cautions, the public should not lose sight of the facts about ESCR. No matter how the embryonic stem cells are used, he says, research that depends on cells derived from human embryos still results in the destruction of those embryos and ends a human life.
Meanwhile, medical ethicists have observed that embryonic stem cells can be derived from umbilical cord blood, so stem-cell research using human embryos is unnecessary. Also, proponents of adult stem-cell research point out that adult stem cells are not only ethically viable but have already demonstrated their effectiveness in the treatment of many diseases.
