These obstacles include tumor formation, short- and long-term genetic mutations, tissue rejection, prohibitive costs, and the need for eggs from literally tens of millions of women to treat a single major condition, such as stroke, heart disease or diabetes. To overcome these obstacles, crucial funds, resources, and research careers will need to be diverted for many years to come. Speaking recently at a Senate hearing, paraplegic James Kelly put it succinctly: “Huge obstacles stand in the way of cloned embryonic stem cells leading to cures for any condition. Why not support both adult and embryonic stem cell research? It’s too dangerous because of the massive tumors that keep developing. Stem cell researchers haven’t even developed what’s called a “proof of concept” to take the experiment to the next step of using a human. Yes, we’ve all seen the video of the paralyzed mouse that moved its hind legs after stem cell therapy. ![]() Even testing in animals has been fraught with problems. In reality, no researcher has tested a therapy using stem cells from a human embryo in a human patient. The result is a flurry of reports about embryos holding the key to future cures. That means tough ethical questions take a back seat. Cutting-edge therapies attract scarce research dollars. The need to find innovative therapies that have a potential for profit fuels the biotech research engine. So why do we mostly hear about research that uses cloned embryonic stem cells? This practice promises to be more cost-effective, safer, and more ethical. This finding means a physician could use a patient’s own cells in therapy to lower the dangers of immune rejection or tumors. But the Stem Cell Institute at the University of Minnesota found another variety of bone marrow stem cells that may develop into almost any type of cellular tissue in the body. Stanford University Medical Center said that stem cells taken from adult bone marrow do not have the ability to evolve as do those from human embryos. Instead, what is right and good for our future? Researchers still make conflicting discoveries. The question should not be which is more promising. It’s a phenomenal success story, but few in the news media picked up on this breakthrough.īut in the long run, isn’t embryonic stem cell research more promising? One year later, the patient’s symptoms were down by 83 percent. He injected 6 million cultured cells back into his patient’s brain. The doctor cultured the cells and a small percentage of those cells matured into dopamine-secreting neurons. A Los Angeles neurosurgeon harvested stem cells from the brain of a Parkinson’s disease patient. Of the 26, six improved and 20 stabilized. But even Christopher Reeve’s chances for a cure are more realistic using adult stem cell therapies.įor every study he may cite, I can point to scores of success stories using adult stem cell therapies: At the Washington Medical Center in Seattle, physicians successfully treated 26 people with rapidly deteriorating multiple sclerosis with each person’s own bone marrow stem cells. Most Americans, out of a mixed sense of sympathy and awe, look at people in wheelchairs and think: Who would want to deny them a cure? No one better understands the desire for a cure than I do, as a quadriplegic who has used a wheelchair for decades. You reject using embryonic stem cells for research, and champion the use of adult stem cells. ![]() ![]() Here are some of my responses, which contrast strongly with the views of Christopher Reeve. In the course of my ministry, I’m asked many probing questions about cloning and stem cell research. I’ve interacted with thousands of disabled individuals who strongly believe that life is sacred even in this brave new world of biotech research, where humans and their genes may be cloned, copied and altered. I’ve led a national consortium of 80 disability organizations in my role as president of the Christian Council on Persons with Disabilities. I have served on the National Council on Disability for two different administrations. But not all Americans with disabilities believe in using human embryos. The Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation aggressively promotes research using stem cells derived from human embryos that are clones or frozen discards from fertility clinics. I look at the broader implications of medical research as a double-edged sword. But 35 years of quadriplegia since a diving accident in 1967 has honed my perspective. Don’t I want a cure? I would love to walk. Hardly a week goes by that people don’t ask me, “Have you ever talked with Christopher Reeve? I saw him the other day on television and …” People are curious about where I stand regarding the paralyzed actor’s hope for a cure through what he calls therapeutic cloning. By Joni Eareckson Tada Photo by Christopher Voelker
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |