President Barack Obama
today signed an executive order that will allow federal money to be used for embryonic stem cell research. This order essentially overturns a ban placed on the use of federal dollars for this type of research during the Bush administration. Embryonic stem cells are taken from a human embryo when it is about 9 days old (at this stage its called a
blastocyst) and is a ball of a few dozen cells. At the center of this ball of cells are embryonic stem cells which have not yet differentiated. To put it in simple terms, these cells are all identical and haven't yet decided what they want to be when they "grow up". Some of these cells will become muscle cells, some heart cells, some nerve cells, some skin cells, etc. This is why we call them stem cells.
In order for these cells to be used in research, scientists must "harvest" them from a blastocyst. Opponents of this type of research argue that since a blastocyst is a human embryo at its earliest stage of development, to destroy it is essentially to destroy human life. Science advocates claim that, since these embryos are the "left overs" from
in-vitro fertilization procedures and would never be implanted in a human womb anyways, then they might as well be put to legitimate use. And since these cells have the potential to become any cell type in the body, their uses in the
treatment of a wide range of diseases is very promising.
The policy adopted by the Bush administration was that federal money could be used to fund existing lines of embryonic stem cells. The idea here is that the "damage" had already been done, so they might as well continue to use them. What was banned under Bush was the funding of new lines of embryonic stem cells, which prevented federal funds from funding the destruction of more embryos. Keep in mind that this research was never made illegal...it just wasn't publicly funded.
Obama's order to lift this ban will allow the National Institute of Health to establish federal guidelines for embryonic stem cell research. It is being widely
praised by pro-science advocates as a return to "science over ideology" in government. On a personal note, I've made references
here before that I support the current administration's efforts to return science to a legitimate place in public policy. However, to equate opposition to embryonic stem cell research (which is based on a fundamental belief as to when human life actually begins) with a denial of global warming (which is based on a consumerism and the influence of the Big Oil lobby) isn't just or equitable. It would do the pro-stem cell folks some good if they could practice a bit of humility in accepting why people may have such a strong aversion to this type of research.
And on the other side, why is it that religious groups (such as my own
Catholic church) are so vocal when it comes to opposing this type of research, yet remain relatively silent on the ethics of the in-vitro fertilization practices that result in the hundreds of thousands of embryos destined to never be implanted and given the opportunity to grow into a person?
Posts
