The polarizing ideology surrounding stem cell usage leaves very little room for thoughtful discussion. All too often the mainstream media frames this matter in such a way that either you support stem cell research to cure cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's - or you're a Neanderthal, opposed to medical progress and dismissive of human suffering. That's pure nonsense. It's far more complicated.
Most agree that stem cells are wonderfully versatile, with great potential to transform themselves within the human body and advance treatments and cures for many diseases. Beyond that, there are actually three important stem cell debates going on. We need to come as close as we can to getting each one right.
The morality debate. Not all stem cells are created equal. There are embryonic stem cells taken from "discarded" human embryos, stem cells extracted from a delivered baby's umbilical cord with no risk to the donor, and adult stem cells derived from skin, organs and other parts of the body with little risk to the donor.
The Rev. Tadeusz Pacholczyk, Director of Education at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, puts the moral argument against using embryonic stem cells this way: "(Clearly) this research exploits younger humans, with lethal consequences, to address the needs of older and wealthier humans. The human embryo is being slowly transformed before our eyes into a commodity to be exploited, a kind of raw material to be utilized on the way to making a brilliant career as a scientist, or making profits as an entrepreneur, or making treatments for myself when I'm sick."
Ruth Faden, Director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics, has a different perspective: "Those who believe that human embryos have the same moral status as the rest of us will and should continue to press their case. For most Americans, however, the president's policy strikes the right moral balance (on) reducing human suffering and improving human health.
The medical debate. With due respect to Ms. Fadden, no one has yet significantly reduced human suffering or improved human health with any stem cell, embryonic or otherwise. That jury will be out for a long time.
Continue reading from second paragraph of the medical debate
