Today in “A Stem Cell Report,” Rebecca Oas writes about yet another way in which we might be able to use ethically unproblematic stem cells‑in this case, from hair follicles‑for medical treatment. Again and again, it seems, scientists are finding actual cures that come from adult stem cells instead of undefined potential cures that come from destroyed embryos. The promise, it seems, lies more in adult stem cells than in embryonic ones.
Another indication of this, which few seem to have noted, is that two months ago, the Geron Corporation quietly ended the world’s first clinical trial using embryonic stem cells. The company did this citing costs as the primary reason. Apparently embryonic stem cell treatments would not be as lucrative as other projects. Not only that, the company’s stock had been dropping and has not recovered to what it was even last August. Though there is no way to tell, some doctors also speculate that there were clinical reasons for stopping the research. So said Dr. Daniel Salomon, associate professor in the department of molecular and experimental medicine at the Scripps Research Institute in San Diego: “This company would not walk away from this trial in the absence of an unexpected complication or safety concern, if there was any evidence that it was working.”
Financially and possibly clinically, therefore, embryonic stem cell research makes less sense, regardless of the question of its morality. That’s not to discount the ethics involved, but it is significant that the major player in the field has abandoned ship while more ethical projects continue to sail smoothly.
January 27th, 2012 | 7:11 am
It is good and practical, in defense of life and other values we hold, to meet the utilitarians on their own ground to defeat their arguments if we can.
However, let us never forget the deeper motivation, the real First Thing which guides the opposition to embryonic stem cell use–it is an intrinsic evil, always gravely wrong, to kill an innocent human for the sake of trying to obtain a greater good. When we do, we repeat the sin of Caiaphas and the Sanhedron–”better that one man should die for the sake of the nation.”
Thus, even if we lose the utilitarian argument (which we likely will, sooner or later, as with abortion) we will still have the right answer. And we are reminded that winning the utilitarian argument is never enough. We must pray and work for a change of heart for our poor, broken culture.
January 27th, 2012 | 12:47 pm
I have noticed recently that television reporters are simply saying “stem cell research” (rather than “embryonic stem cell research”) when reporting new advances.
Technically, therefore, their reports are accurate, but are still misleading, since most people hearing them assume the “embryonic.” And the reporters are certainly not going to correct their misunderstandings.
To do so would almost amount to a concession to the pro-life forces–which isn’t going to happen.
January 27th, 2012 | 2:18 pm
@Craig,
I’ve been noticing that for all of the last ten years. In all honesty, I think most reporters have no idea that there is a difference. The public at large is probably equally confused. That is a shame, but it does call for continued education efforts.
February 2nd, 2012 | 11:52 am
[...] “The End of Embryonic Stem Cell Research?,” Nathaniel Peters, First Things [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact