Stem Cell Research: Setting the Record Straight

Stem Cell Research: Setting the Record Straight

By Congressman Joe Pitts

A debate is taking place in America on the issue of stem cell research.

Modern science and technology have presented a brave new world of ethical questions for us to consider, and the various approaches to these questions differ greatly. If there was any doubt about this, it was erased during the recent debate in Washington over stem cell research.

Consideration of H.R. 810, a bill authorizing taxpayer funding for human embryo-destroying stem cell research, set off an impassioned debate in Congress. It's worth setting the record straight.

We need to vigorously pursue new treatments and cures to the diseases and ailments affecting millions worldwide. But in our pursuit of new cures, we must always be guided by ethical principles that respect the dignity of human beings.

Proponents of H.R. 810 insist that the ends justify the means, even when the means include the deliberate destruction of human life at its earliest stages.

This way of thinking substitutes a dangerous brand of utilitarianism for real ethical principles, and is rightfully rejected when people are given all the facts. A recent poll shows that a minority of people support taxpayer funding of embryonic stem cell research when it's made clear that it will require the destruction of human embryos.

The case against this bill is supported further when one considers the ethical alternatives available. The decision does not have to be between doing stem cell research and not doing stem cell research.

I support ethical stem cell research whole-heartedly and have actively promoted it in Congress. Already, Congress has established funding for umbilical cord blood stem cell banks which will help a great number of people. President Bush has signed this funding into law.

Seventy-two therapies using adult stem cells have been reported by researchers who have successfully treated patients with diseases. Not all of these are ready for general use and not all of them have even been peer-reviewed in medical journals. But, nine of them have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for general use by doctors and their patients. More are on the way.

What all of these therapies have in common is that they were developed using "adult" stem cells taken from various parts of the human body. None of them was developed using stem cells from human embryos.

"Embryonic" stem cells can only be obtained by killing a human embryo which might otherwise have the chance to grow to be a child. This is the form of research promoted by H.R. 810 and the form that I, and millions of other Americans, have ethical problems with. Not only is embryonic stem cell research ethically unsound, but it has never produced a single successful therapy for humans and quite possibly never will.

The proponents of embryonic stem cell research argue that over the long term (many decades, they say) it may hold the most promise because embryonic stem cells are "pluripotent"—meaning they can literally turn into any kind of tissue in the body. Unfortunately, they also frequently grow into tumors. "Adult" stem cells were thought to only be "multipotent." That has turned out to be wrong, though, as researchers in California and Germany have successfully produced "pluripotent" stem cells without killing human embryos.

Nevertheless, embryonic and adult stem cell research are both fully legal in the U.S. and always have been. The debate over H.R. 810 was not about the legality of embryonic stem cell research. It was about whether taxpayer money should be spent on killing human embryos to harvest stem cells for research purposes, even though all of the advances in the field are coming from adult stem cells.

When the U.S. House of Representatives voted to sustain the President's veto of H.R. 810, it was taking the side of patients, and affirming the dignity of human life.

http://www.house.gov/pitts/press/commentary/06-07-28c-StemCellVeto.htm