Can We Ever Just Have Some Honesty?

Yesterday's Plain Dealer had an article about a potential new breaktrough in stem cell research. I first saw this mentioned on the net but the PD had a follow-up. Apparently some researchers in Massachusetts have found a way to cultivate healthy embryonic stem cells from the embryos without destroying them. As most people know, because of government restrictions it has been difficult to develop new stem cell lines because using viable embryos is forbidden. Despite the fact that thousands of embryos are discarded as medical waste each year, conservative religious groups have decided that this is better than using them to potentially help actual living people. So, scientists have had to try to develop stem cells in other ways. While there have been some significant steps forward, there are still issues with some of the new methods. The research results reported in the PD yesterday are promising because it apparently allows the use of the best source of productive stem cells while not damaging the embryo itself. This would seem to be the ultimate good news. Scientists still get to develop new cell lines and folks who want to preserve every embryo get their wish.

But hold on. Not so fast. Story Landis, head of the NIH stem cell task force, says it's unlikely that the method could become widespread and truly solve the dilemma posed by the Bush administration restrictions. The reason is that even though the embryos appear to be undamaged by the procedure, the only way to know for sure would be to let some continue to develop into babies and, of course, such an experiment would be unethical. So we have a potentially promising development that may never be able to be used because the only test of its effectiveness that would satisfy people is impossible to ever complete.

Now, Ms. Landis raises a proper scientific point and I don't believe her opinion was in any way motivated by religious or political beliefs. Still, I think the whole stem cell debate is often filled with dishonesty. I believe there are a lot of people, probably many of the ones who pressured Bush to enact his policies, who simply don't want to see embryonic stem cell research continue. They think it is "playing God" or they are are just flat-out afraid of medical science that they don't understand. Whatever the reason, I think the truth is that they would prefer to ban the research. Of course, they can't say that because it makes them seem like they don't care about all the people who may someday be helped by stem cells. So they put so many restrictions on the research that it makes it difficult to proceed. And when some researchers finally develop a procedure that may satisfy everyone involved, it still isn't good enough because the confirmatory work can never been completed.

Again, I understand the ethical issues involved and I'm not saying we should raise some "test babies" to prove a theory. I'm merely saying that I believe some people will never be satisfied with anything scientists can demonstrate with respect to this issue because those people simply do not want it to proceed. They should just be honest about that instead of trying to erect false goals for scientists to meet. It reminds of the recent research study that was conducted to examine the power of prayer. The study failed to find any evidence for the effect of prayer on the variables studied. Of course, many religious people dismissed the study saying that God is not going to permit himself to be "tested" by us. So basically, when prayer seems to work it's because God was listening. When it doesn't, it because he refuses to be tested. Pretty convenient.

It's the same with medical research. You set up a bunch of conditions upon which particular research is contingent. If the researchers appear to meet the conditions, you merely change the rules of the game or invoke another condition that's impossible to meet. Effectively, you're simply preventing the work while acting like you're not. Again, I'd just respect people more if they just admitted that they think all embryonic stem cell research should be banned forever. I might disagree but I'd at least respect that. I don't really see a way that we'll ever be able to harvest stem cells from an embryo and definitively prove that the embryo was not harmed in any way. How could any scientist ever make such a claim without testing it? Still, to me, the argument is just another smokescreen. No one ever suggested that we harvest stem cells from embryos that were slated to be implanted in women. The idea was always to take them from embryos that would otherwise be discarded. If that's the case, then does the proof even matter? I suppose that gets back to the initial debate about "potential life" and that's simply another insoluble problem. As long as every embryo destined for the garbage can is viewed as a "baby", there will always be heated disagreement on the use of these cells. I know I'm out of step with the beliefs of many of my fellow Americans but issues like this one always serve to remind me just how off the pace I am.