The current fight about "stem cell research" is about a kind of stem cell research, embryonic stem cell research which kills human embryos to obtain those embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cell supporters have promised to paint opponents as anti-patient and anti-science. I'd like to know what those people are smoking or drinking to say that with a straight face. They've had 20 years to come up with some cure, but they haven't. There are over 70 stem cell successes and over 500 human trials under way. Not a single one is embryonic stem cell research. All of the successes and trials are adult/non-embryonic stem cells successes. This accusation of pro-life opponents is an instance of the accuser being guilty of the charge.
Why the push for embryonic stem cells (ESCs). They are theoretically supposed to have the advantages of being easier to grow and being able to become any type of cell. Adult, or non-embryonic stem cells have met this challenge and they are easier to work with. ESCs seem to have inherent problems. They are made to work in embryos, not mature tissue. They seem to be rapid construction cells and when put into mature tissue in animal studies, they cause tumors and teratomas far too often. So why are we still pursuing this unproductive research unless there are researchers out there whose jobs depend on it?
No comments:
Post a Comment