The Truth About Stem Cell Research



An official of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) told a Congressional subcommittee that campaigns for increased public funding of embryonic stem cell research have grown “in inverse proportion to the dwindling hopes of medical benefit, as private funding sources increasingly realize that embryonic stem cell research may not be a wise investment.”

“We should not succumb to this latest campaign, but reflect on the ethical errors that brought us this far,” Richard M. Doerflinger said.

Doerflinger, deputy director of the USCCB Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, discussed ethical and policy concerns regarding embryonic stem cell research in testimony last fall before the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space.

His testimony centered on the need for ethical safeguards in human research, the moral status of the human embryo, and the reality of an ethical slippery slope.

He told the subcommittee that the central ethical issue raised by this research arises when proponents of unlimited research freedom complain that ethical restraints get in the way of “progress.”

“This tension between technical advance and respect for research subjects is at least as old as modern medicine itself,” Doerflinger said.

“Because scientists, and the for-profit companies that increasingly support and make use of their research, are always tempted to treat helpless members of the human family as mere means to their ends, the rest of society — including government — must supply the urgently needed barrier against unethical exploitation of human beings,” the USCCB official said.

He added that the principle that the embryo deserves respect as a member of the human family is reflected in many areas of federal law, and has been recognized by all federal advisory groups discussing human embryo research for 25 years.

“Catholic morality regarding respect for human life, and any secular ethic in agreement with its basic premises, rejects all deliberate involvement with the direct killing of human embryos for research or any other purpose,” Doerflinger said. “Such killing is gravely and intrinsically wrong, and no promised beneficial consequences can lessen that wrong. This conviction is also held by many American taxpayers, who should not be forced by government to promote with their tax dollars what they recognize as a direct killing of innocent human persons.”

“But even those who do not hold the human embryo to be a full-fledged human person can conclude that embryonic stem cell research is unethical,” he continued. “Many moral wrongs fall short of the full gravity of homicide but are nonetheless seriously wrong. Setting aside ‘personhood,' surely no one prefers research that requires destroying human life.”

In 1999, he said, President Clinton's National Bioethics Advisory Commission concluded that obtaining stem cells from embryos in fertility clinics “is justifiable only if no less morally-problematic alternatives are available for advancing the research.” The burden of proof needed to justify embryonic stem cell research by NBAC's ethical standard has never been met, he said.

“Problems of tumor formation, uncontrollability, and genetic instability are now cited among the reasons why embryonic stem cells cannot safely be used in human trials any time in the foreseeable future. At the same time, non-embryonic stem cells have moved quickly into promising clinical trials for a wide array of conditions, including spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, heart damage, and corneal damage.”

The USCCB official told the subcommittee that no new breakthroughs have shown that embryonic stem cells are ready or almost ready for clinical use.

“More than two decades of research using mouse embryonic stem cells have produced no treatments in mice that are safe or effective enough for anyone to propose in humans,” he said. “These cells have not helped a single human being, and the practical barriers to their safe and effective use loom larger than ever. Meanwhile, alternative approaches that harm no human being have moved forward to offer realistic hope for patients who many said could be helped only by research that destroys human embryos.”

“Even proponents of the research have admitted that it poses an ethical problem, because it involves destroying human lives deserving our respect,” Doerflinger said.



“Congress should take stock now and realize that the promise of this approach is too speculative, and the cost too high,” he stated.

This story was compiled from reports obtained from the USCCB Office of Communications, Washington, D.C.

A Stem Cell Reality Check

Myth #1: Embryonic stem cells are the most effective for treating disease.

Reality Check: Actually, they’re not. Embryonic stem cells have not helped a single human patient or demonstrated any therapeutic benefit. By contrast, adult stem cells and other ethically acceptable alternatives have already helped hundreds of thousands of patients, and new clinical uses expand almost weekly.

Myth #2: A clear majority of Americans support stem cell research.

Reality Check: Of course they do — but what type of stem cell research do they support? Stem cell research refers to research using various types of stem cells. Stem cells that come from adult tissue, placentas, or umbilical cord blood can be retrieved without harming the donor. The only way to obtain embryonic stem cells, however, is to kill the living human embryo. Embryonic stem cells have not helped a single human patient or demonstrated any therapeutic benefit. By contrast, adult stem cells and other ethically acceptable alternatives have helped hundreds of thousands of patients.

Myth #3: Excess embryos are going to be discarded anyway.

Reality Check: Not necessarily. Today, patients can preserve “excess” embryos for future pregnancies as well as donate them to other couples. Under proposed NIH guidelines, parents will be asked to consider having them destroyed for federally funded research instead.

In a recent study, 59 percent of parents who initially planned to discard their embryos after three years later changed their minds, choosing another pregnancy or donation to infertile couples (New England Journal of Medicine, July 5, 2001).

With the NIH guidelines, these embryos might have already been destroyed. What’s more, we now know that the scientists calling for federal funds have themselves moved on to creating human embryos solely to destroy them for stem cells.

But what scientists or parents might do with the embryos is not the issue. The issue is: Should the government use taxpayers’ money for research that requires destroying human embryos?

The Catholic Church believes such unethical research shouldn’t be done at all. But if anyone does so, it must be at their expense and on their conscience — not that of the American taxpayers.

Myth #4: Human life begins in the womb, not the Petri dish.

Reality Check: Actually, it usually begins in the fallopian tube, but it can also begin in a Petri dish. The testimony of modern science is clear on this point: “At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.”

The issue is not whether human life is present, but how society ought to treat it. Even President Clinton’s bioethics advisors said: “We believe most would agree that human embryos deserve respect as a form of human life…”

“Let’s fund promising medical research that everybody can live with.” — Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

(This article courtesy of St. Augustine Catholic.)

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

MENU