New research has verified that it is possible to "reprogram" adult cells to an embryonic stem cell state, nullifying the need to manipulate or destroy embryos as sources for obtaining the pluripotent cells. Such pluripotent cells are able to develop into any other tissue in the body, and, it is hoped, could be used to develop patient-specific therapies, such as growing replacement heart tissue, treating Parkinson's, or healing spinal-cord injuries.

Taking a skin cell from a mouse, scientists injected four genes into the cell, prompting it to revert to an embryonic stem cell-like state. The research indicates that the reprogrammed cells possess all the properties of pluripotency that embryonic stem cells possess. If the outcomes can be reproduced using human cells, which presently is uncertain, these "reprogrammed" cells would overcome the immune-rejection problem associated with using embryonic stem cells, because the reprogrammed cells would be the patient's own cells, a perfect genetic match. Reprogramming could also obviate the perceived need to pursue so-called "therapeutic cloning" in order to obtain genetically-matched embryonic stem cells.

Most importantly, the new research suggests a viable way to overcome the two main ethical objections to embryonic stem cell research, namely, the need to destroy human embryos, and the need for a ready supply of female oocytes (eggs). With reprogramming, deriving patient-specific pluripotent stem cells would require only a ready supply of somatic cells (like skin cells). Neither eggs nor embryos would be necessary. Moreover, the technology is inexpensive and simple to carry out and so neither economics nor technical difficulty stand as a dis-incentive to scientists to adopting the technique.

It is important to see how significantly these findings can alter the embryonic stem cell (ESC) debate. Those defending embryo destructive experimentation have told us for ten years that human embryos are absolutely necessary for developing clinical solutions for overcoming terrible and debilitating human suffering. The fact that embryonic stem cells to date have produced no clinically useful treatments (neither are there any experimental treatments even in FDA trials), defenders of ESC research continue to insist that ES cells one day will pay off. They also continue to characterize opponents of ESC research as anti-science. This technology could turn the table on the conversation. Successful reprogramming with human cells would deliver embryonic-like stem cells without ever harming an embryo. Now rather than embryo defenders having the burden to explain why a potentially useful kind of research ought to be avoided, ESC defenders will have the burden of explaining why we should use embryo destructive means when simple and inexpensive alternatives exist.

E. Christian Brugger is an Assistant Professor of Theology at the Institute for the Psychological Sciences in Arlington, VA. He earned his D.Phil. in Christian Ethics from the University of Oxford. He also holds Masters degrees from Harvard Divinity School (moral philosophy) and Seton Hall University (moral theology).

He is the author of Capital Punishment and Roman Catholic Moral Tradition (Notre Dame Press, 2003) and has published widely on the topic of moral theology and philosophy in journals like The Thomist, National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, Josephenum Journal of Theology and Global Virtue Ethics Review.

Send Response