Don’t Stop the Stem Cell Fight

Last week, opponents of human embryonic stem cell research declared that new research techniques have cleared away the ethical controversies that have plagued stem cell science. From Vatican City to the Bush administration, spokesmen gave sound bites of “we told you so”; with above-the-fold headlines in every major paper describing how scientists can now create stem cells without destroying embryos, opponents of embryonic stem cell research claimed to hold unbeatable evidence on their side.

Pardon us for raining on this parade of jubilation. A “milestone” the research of groups in Japan and Wisconsin may be, but their method does not yet negate the need for controversial research on embryonic stem cells. Scientists and supporters of stem cell research should not allow conservatives to declare victory and should persevere in their fight to eliminate restrictions on embryonic stem cell research.

The method the researchers in Japan and Wisconsin used to arrive at stem cells involves transferring four genes into the genome of a mature cell through virus. These four genes produce factors that “reprogram” the mature cell’s genome to a stem-like state. No viable embryo, therefore, is either created or destroyed—which is the main qualm of conservative opponents of the research.

Although the produced cells seem to recapitulate many of the properties of embryonic stem cells—including the ability to form cell types of each of the three major types in the human body—many of their major caveats seem to have been ignored. Statements that claim that embryos will never have to be sacrificed to create stem cells again are irresponsible and may well prove to be entirely incorrect.

More work needs to be done to ensure that the stem cells that the new technique produces are truly alike to embryonic stem cells. Furthermore, the new technique—specifically its reliance on viral vectors—may cause oncogenic mutations that result in cancer.

We were also saddened by the Bush administration’s apparent eagerness to twist the new scientific breakthrough for its own purposes. For instance, Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy Karl Zinsmeister told The New York Times that “I don’t think there’s any doubt that the president’s drawing of lines on cloning and embryo use was a positive factor in making this come to fruition.” Far from helping the recent studies “come to fruition,” Bush’s policy decisions’ only effect has been to hinder the field of regenerative medicine as a whole, particularly in the United States. Indeed many stem cell scientists have left the country to pursue their research in nations more hospitable to their work.

There is no doubt that the promise of stem cell technology for the curing of many of the worst diseases to afflict the human race cannot be overstated. But with large possibility comes a duty to be skeptical and cautious. It would be foolish for anyone to construe the recent breakthroughs as a reason to discontinue research on embryonic stem cells or to give up the fight to reverse President Bush’s moratorium on the creation of new stem cell lines with federal funding. The new stem cells have not been proven equivalent to true embryonic stem cells; it will take more than a few months for scientists to make that determination.

In the meantime, scientists, from the Harvard Stem Cell Institute to Singapore, studying embryonic stem cells should be encouraged and restrictions on their work minimized.