Why Not Pursue Adult Stem Cell Research?

United States
February 12, 2008 10:10am CST
I can understand why some people are opposed to embryonic stem cell research. So why not pursue adult stem cell research instead? I read somewhere that these can be obtained from umbilical cords, bone marrows, or skin cells. I also read that other countries are making good progress, with demonstrable results, in this area. Unlike embryonic stem cell research that has no demonstrable results. In the Discovery Channel, they featured a heart attack patient who had triple bypass surgery. The doctor also injected adult stem cells, obtained from his bone marrow, into his heart. The result is that he was able to play basketball again within a few weeks after surgery. So given the viability of adult stem cell research, why are special interest groups and their political lackeys so obsessed with embryonic stem cell research only? Don't they realize that adult stem cell research is more viable and will not run into opposition? Or are they more concerned with the profits to be made from embryonic stem cell research rather than saving lives?
4 responses
• United States
10 Oct 08
Thanks for raising this issue but the government is funding adult stem cells research like mad. Yes! they support it instead of embryo stem cells research. Adult stem cells are being use in today's medical care. They're not behind at all. They are in full force. Adult stem cells has no rejection so this is a good thing. It's an ethical question when it comes to the embryo. However, embryonic stem cells has no limitation as adult stem cell.
• India
16 Feb 08
I think the primary reason why stem cell research is not in full swing is basically because some religious guys are very much against it. And I think it was not presented well in the beginning and so the confusion is always there. Embryonic stem cell research has some ethical complication, but I also wonder why people would not pursue for adult stem cell research when it is more or less successful as much embryonic stem cell research is.
@starr4all (2863)
12 Feb 08
I've never understood why some people are so against something that could save lives. It doesn't make any sense to me.
@ClarusVisum (2163)
• United States
14 Feb 08
Adult stem cell research simply does not hold as much promise as embryonic stem cell research. For one, the retroviruses required to revert adult cells back to stem cell-like structure makes it nearly impossible for the cells to ever be able to be directly 'implanted' into a patient. Also, the process through which adult stem cells lines are made produces exponentially fewer stem cells, and for many procedures, we're going to need a LOT of them. Embryonic stem cell research could have more results if FUNDING WASN'T BLOCKED FOR THEM. What an unfair statement to make. It's like "you're not allowed to do it your way, but I'm allowed to do it mine", and then you brag because your way produces more results. No duh! Scientists believe embryonic stem cells have vastly greater potential than adult stem cells. "why are special interest groups and their political lackeys so obsessed with embryonic stem cell research only?" This is a lie--name one scientific organization whose position is to stop adult stem cell research entirely in favor of embryonic. Bet you can't name one. That's because there aren't any. Scientists are in favor of going down BOTH paths, because the more you try out, the better off you'll be. "adult stem cell research is more viable" This is nonsense. It is so much easier with embryos--no need to use retroviruses, and you can make a vastly greater amount of stem cells from an embryo. ================ "9. Are some kinds of stem cells better than others? The field of stem cell research involves the study of these cells for many reasons. Some scientists are examining stem cells to better understand the process of development to learn how specific cell types and specific tissues and organs are formed. Some scientists are looking at stem cells to understand what goes wrong in cells to cause various diseases. For these purposes, valuable information can be gained by studying any of the stem cell types that are currently available. The most publicized use for stem cells, however, is their ability to form different types of cells that can be used to restore or replace damaged tissue in patients with disease or injury. From studies using mice, it was found that mouse embryonic stem cells could contribute to every tissue in the adult mouse. It is believed that human embryonic stem cells have this property, and are called pluripotent stem cells. Scientists now need to compare human embryonic stem cell lines for their potential in tissue repair to that which can be accomplished from adult stem cells. Currently, it is not clear whether stem cells from adult tissues or umbilical cord blood are pluripotent. The comparison of human embryonic stem cells to adult stem cells is currently a very active area in research, and one that will hopefully lead to cures for tissue degenerative diseases in the future." --http://www.isscr.org/science/faq.htm#9 "and will not run into opposition" That's a stupid reason not to do something. Abolishing slavery "ran into opposition" too, you know. Opposition doesn't matter--scientific potential does. These people need to stop trying to squelch scientific discovery in favor of their own preconceptions and biases. There are more than enough embryos just being thrown away in fertility clinics, and we could be DOING RESEARCH THAT SAVES LIVES WITH EMBRYOS THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE G-A-R-B-A-G-E. Yet people are raising a big stink about this! You've got to be kidding me. We know that embryonic stem cells can do things adult stem cells can't, and there is no good reason to disallow research on an embryo that is literally fewer than a dozen cells to begin with.