By Jeremy Bratcher
Elementary science teaches that cells are the building blocks of the human body. We all begin as a single cell in our progression from development to birth to life itself. Stem cells are only found in fetuses of organisms or certain types of adult tissue, such as bone marrow, and scientists study them for their potential regenerative qualities. However, the current presidential administration has banned stem cell research for cell lines obtained from fetuses. The development of a fetus involves differentiation (or, specialization) of multiplying cells. Termed “stem cells,” these are the progenitors of all the varying types of cells ultimately present in a developed human. Recent research has suggested that they can be induced or “trained” to become specific types of cells, similar to the way that the process occurs in a developing fetus, but with an artificially determined result. The controversy surrounding this research doesn’t lie in the regenerative capabilities of the stem cells, but in the process by which stem cells are currently obtained Opponents of this research claim that the destruction of unused fetuses from which stem cells are obtained is destruction of human life, and thus subject to ethical or moral critique. These critics overlook the fact that the fetuses in question are going to be disposed of, with or without stem cell research. In vitro fertilization involves producing multiple embryos and then choosing the most viable ones. The fetuses studied by stem cell researchers are the leftovers from fertilization clinics and will eventually be destroyed anyway. President Bush has stated that he refuses to back any measure to help save life by destroying life: a funny statement, coming from a proponent of pre-emptive strikes by the military. By that same reasoning, we should not fight terrorism by killing terrorists, even though that would also save lives. In general, it seems the public has some skewed views on how researchers carry out their work. Contrary to popular opinion, we don’t like to kill babies or fuzzy animals — most of us actually like babies and fuzzy animals. The image of the “mad scientist” has a damaging effect on the popular conception of laboratory research. Nevertheless, Sen. Bill Frist, who was once a physician, has finally stepped up and opposed the President’s position. The senator supports a bill that allows stem cell research, but still makes his pro-life views evident. Some experts even say that the most ethical use of these extra fetuses would be a medical endeavor such as stem cell research. This way, the life held in the frozen fetuses would be used to help regenerate and save other lives, instead of going to waste. All in all, this is a very complex issue with valid points on both sides. Boundaries drawn in chalk will often be washed away, and in the long run, an ideal compromise is whatever will be best for us as a species.While I wish no harm to unborn embryos, a treatment for multiple sclerosis might be worth the cost.
JEREMY BRATCHER is a graduate student in the department of Pharmocology and Toxicology, and a guest writer for The Louisville Cardinal.
Contact him at:opinion@louisvillecardinal.com
