Stem Cells

I have rather belatedly come across this perceptive post about the recent debate on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill.

This week, Britain's Labour Party made remarkable progress in securing the country's reputation as the most scientifically illiterate and morally obtuse hamlet in the Western world. At the urging of Prime Minister Gordon Brown, both houses of Parliament defeated amendments to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill that would have outlawed the creation of "chimerical embryos."

... Whether from honest ignorance or blatant dishonesty, Brown attempts to convince the public that chimerical research is not only necessary but vital for biomedical research.

Since adult stem cells are "already being used in treatments for conditions including leukemia and heart disease," explains the Prime Minister, "scientists are close to the breakthroughs that will allow embryonic stem cells to be used to treat a much wider range of conditions, especially those affecting the brain and nervous system."

While it is true that adult stem cells have been used in treatments for over 70 diseases and [conditions], it is patently false that "scientists are close" to breakthroughs using embryonic stem cells. The question, as framed by Professor Sherley [from the Program in Regenerative Biology and Cancer, Boston], is not "How soon could human embryonic stem cells be used for cures?" but rather, "Could human embryonic stem cells ever be used for cures?"

Answer: "When the errant biological properties of human embryonic stem cells are considered, it is difficult to foresee them ever being used directly as cures in children or adults...figuring out how to use human embryonic stem cells directly by transplantation into patients is tantamount to solving the cancer problem."

In other words, embryonic stem cell research will start producing cures as soon as we figure out how to cure cancer.

And stem cells derived from cloned embryos are even less useful. Even the New England Journal of Medicine backhandedly admits that such research is likely to be fruitless, because the "technical difficulties and ethical complexities of this approach [cloned human embryonic stem cells] were always likely to render it impractical."

... In clinging to their willful ignorance, Brown and his Labour Party are attempting to deny the reality of bioethics and bioscience. But as Aldous Huxley once observed, "Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

The full article is here.

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill

Inspired by Exiled Preacher, I have just written to my MP, Dr Rudi Vis, about the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill which is making its way through Parliament:

Dear Dr Vis,

I am writing to you about the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill which I understand is soon to be debated in the House of Commons.

Please will you consider voting against the proposals on additional embryo research and for any amendment that would lead to the reduction in the abortion limit?

The Bill raises some serious ethical issues and I find some of its aspects very disturbing.

Researchers should not be allowed to work only on the basis of what is possible in the laboratory without regard to ethical principles. The unique dignity of human life should not be undermined by allowing the production of human/animal embryos for the extraction of stem cells. This is especially the case now that scientists are discovering the potential of adult stem cells, culled from human skin. See, for example, http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/scientists-reprogram-human-skin-44173.aspx. Money should be invested in developing the benefits of this kind of research rather than in ethically questionable work on embryonic hybrids.

I am also very concerned about the proposals in the Bill regarding therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning. These also represent a serious attack on the value of human life.

Regarding abortion, I find it incomprehensible that this country is not horrified that there are now some 200,000 abortions occurring every year. The Bill will give an opportunity for MPs to table an amendment reducing the abortion limit from the current 24 weeks. In specialised neonatal units, up to 82% of babies born prematurely at 24 weeks now survive. Added to this is a new appreciation of foetal sensitivity to pain.

The Christian Institute has a helpful set of resources on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill: http://www.christian.org.uk/issues/2007/hte_bill/index.htm.