December 17, 2007

Harvard Pledges to Continue Research Into Embryonic Stem Cells

Harvard University has vowed to continue its work on developing controversial embryonic stem cells through cloned human embryos, according to today’s Boston Globe.

Last month American and Japanese researchers announced they had developed a new technique for reprogramming adult cells to act like embryonic stem cells — a method that could bypass the contentious issue of whether researchers should be allowed to destroy human embryos to develop lines of stem cells for research or therapies. At the time of the announcement, many researchers predicted that the new technique, called induced pluripotent stem cells, would eventually replace embryonic stem cells.

But researchers also predicted that embryonic stem cells would continue to be useful for research and that they might provide the foundation for therapies before induced pluripotent stem cells could yield treatments. The problem with the new technique is that researchers must insert viral genes into the adult cells to reprogram them — a technique that could alter the cells in detrimental ways.

The Globe reports that Harvard researchers are continuing with their $60-million stem-cell effort, part of which is devoted to developing lines of embryonic stem cells from cloned embryos. “There is a core of scientists, myself included, who deeply believe this an ethical and highly valuable area of research,” said George Q. Daley, a Harvard stem-cell researcher, in the Globe article. —Richard Monastersky

Comments

1. This research has produced nothing, and yet there are still those who call themselves scientists who want to pursue the practice of creating genetically distinct human beings for the sole purpose of destroying them and harvesting their genetic material. The only thing that separates these creatures from the rest of us is sentience and the ability to feel pain. And believe me, those obstacles will be easily ignored when the time comes. Oh, and by the way, there is a movement afoot to have the government control the medical profession. People want to know how Pol Pot happens, how Hitler happens, how Mengele happens. This is how they happen. Americans are nothing special; there’s nothing but our values to keep us from committing the same atrocities as have occurred in so many other “civilized” countries around the world. Once certain barriers are crossed (and considering some human beings “disposable” is among those barriers), the rest will follow. Pathetic. These people may be scientists, but they are certainly not historians.

   — Ergum Soloff    Dec 18, 09:08 AM    #

2. I need only one word with which to respond to Ergum Soloff’s post — AMEN !!

   — Don    Dec 18, 09:50 AM    #

3. “The only thing that separates these creatures from the rest of us is sentience and the ability to feel pain.” Are you daft? Or simply uneducated? That is an entirely unsubstantiated claim. Utterly. What is the evidence for it? Counter-point: there is every difference that exists in the world between a blueprint and a building. You need some education.

   — David    Dec 18, 10:41 AM    #

4. “Harvard Pledges to Continue Research Into Embryonic Stem Cells”

   I must say it’s refreshing to see the fraternities involved in science rather than drunkeness.

   — marci    Dec 18, 11:39 AM    #

5. “This research has produced nothing, and yet there are still those who call themselves scientists who want to pursue the practice of creating genetically distinct human beings for the sole purpose of destroying them and harvesting their genetic material.”

   The attack on stem cell research based on a claim that it “has produced nothing” is ridiculous. By that logic, no scientific research should ever be conducted and no one should ever seek a PhD because they don’t already have it.

   “The only thing that separates these creatures from the rest of us is sentience and the ability to feel pain. And believe me, those obstacles will be easily ignored when the time comes.”

   This is an ill-formed red herring argument which in no way relates to the ethical or morlal dillemas created by embryonic stem cell research.

   “Oh, and by the way, there is a movement afoot to have the government control the medical profession. People want to know how Pol Pot happens, how Hitler happens, how Mengele happens. This is how they happen.”

   This is a completely irrelevant “slippery slope” argument. The implication that embryonic stem cell research will lead to genocide is completely implausible.

   “Americans are nothing special; there’s nothing but our values to keep us from committing the same atrocities as have occurred in so many other “civilized” countries around the world.”

   The premise here is debatable. A careful examination of the civilian death tolls in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past 5 years would likely result in the conclusion that there is, in fact, nothing that keeps us from committing atrocities. Certainly, scientific research using embryonic stem cells has a great potential for improving the lives of many around the world.

   “Once certain barriers are crossed (and considering some human beings “disposable” is among those barriers), the rest will follow.”

   Another “slippery slope” argument? The implication of a domino like toppling of all of society’s values would be initiated by stem cell research science is completely implausible.

   “These people may be scientists, but they are certainly not historians.”

   Is this a call for historians to pick up microscopes and don lab coats. What an interesting world that would be…

   — Adzam    Dec 18, 01:02 PM    #

6. Before the first atomic bomb was tested, and then again when the first hydrogen bomb was tested, many scientists working on these weapons feared that the chain reactions would ignite the entire atmosphere and incinerate the earth. Oppenheimer himself had grave concerns that such a holocaust might ensue. But they went ahead anyway in the name of the military industrial complex. What does this tell us about science?

   — monk    Dec 18, 01:09 PM    #

7. I work at Harvard Medical School, and the stem cell research here has more to do with politics than science. The science has not produced many tangible results, and by simply saying “embryonic stem cells,” these teams are getting cash hand over fist. Those who fund them aren’t demanding results in the same way other funding sources do. While embryonic techniques have helped other groups in work on other types of stem cells, Harvard isn’t going to let go of this even if better science comes along. There is too much financially and politically at stake to quit now.

   — Anonymous    Dec 18, 01:12 PM    #

Previous: N.Y. Report Recommends Ways to Improve Higher Education
Next: New Editor of 'Science' Is Former National Academy of Sciences President