Though I promised in my last column to conclude a two-part series on judicial activism in Europe this month, I must postpone that until January. The reason is that an important development in bioethics demands our attention.
A couple of weeks ago, in independent studies, researchers Jamie Thomson of the University of Wisconsin and Shinya Yamanaka of KyotoUniversity (Japan) announced an important development regarding stem cell research. Writing separately in the journals, Science and Cell, respectively, Thomson and Yamanaka announced that they had been able to “re-program” somatic (body) cells into a pluripotent state. In other words, scientists were able to cause these mature cells to “de-differentiate” into their original embryonic state. The cells were denoted “induced pluripotent stem cells” (hereafter, “IPS cells”). As such they are fully as pluripotent (ie, able to differentiate into mature cells of every kind) as are embryonic stem cells derived from the destruction of human embryos.
This discovery has at least two implications. First, embryos need not be destroyed to produce embryonic stem cells. Thus, there is no need for those who wish to pursue embryonic stem cell research to destroy human embryos, or for their supporters to call for it.
As with embryonic stem cells, these IPS cells will still require further research before they can be used in human trials. There is the problem, for instance, that such cells can propagate wildly, leading to tumor formation (as has been observed in animal trials). It is still the case that adult stem cell research is the only kind of stem cell research that has produced successful treatments in human beings (over 73 conditions treated, and thousands of human beings helped – see our web page for papers summarizing this, www.frc.org). While there was some initial concern that IPS cells might be more prone to cancer formation, a subsequent paper by Yamanaka in the journal, Nature Biotechnology, has shown this is not the case.
It is also interesting that while attempts to perfect cloning continue, the announcement of success in primate cloning, which many thought impossible, did not meet with universal acclaim. Shoukhrat Mitalipov of Oregon National PrimateResearchCenter presented his research to the International Society for Stem Cell Research in Cairns, Australia last month. In addition to successful primate cloning, he was able to extract stem cells from some of the cloned embryos and managed to encourage these embryonic cells to develop into mature heart cells and brain neurons. Yet prominent researchers, among them Rudolph Jaenisch and Iain Wilmot, were discouraged. Separately, they remarked that the success rate was so low that it was not a viable option. Indeed, in a stunning development, Wilmot, the first to perfect mammalian cloning with Dolly the Sheep, noted he was abandoning cloning to focus on IPS cell research.
As indicated, the reason scientists have pursued cloning was to produce an embryo from which they could extract embryonic stem cells that could then be used in research to treat diseases in the donor of the genetic material of the clone. (In cloning, one removes the nucleus from an egg cell, replaces it with the genetic material from the donor’s somatic cell, and produces a clone of the donor.) Now, however, as Wilmot indicated, there is simply no reason to pursue cloning. The stem cells one would have derived through this procedure can now be derived by the IPS procedure.
We should pause to recall the recommendation of a president’s council on bioethics, not that of George W. Bush, but of Bill Clinton. In 1999, his National Bioethics Advisory Commission, in its report on “Ethical Issues in Human Stem Cell Research,” stated: “In our judgment, the derivation of stem cells from embryos remaining following infertility treatments is justifiable only if no less morally problematic alternatives are available for advancing the research … The claim that there are alternatives to using stem cells derived from embryos is not, at the present time, supported scientifically. We recognize, however, that this is a matter that must be revisited continually as the demonstration of science advances.”
Now, there is a proven “alternative to using stem cells derived from embryos,” ie, IPS cells. Further, there is no need to pursue human cloning for the same reason. Whatever our political or ethical views generally speaking, can we not unite around this principle from Clinton’s NBAC and end “the stem cell wars”? Surely that is what reason requires.