DeAngelo 1

Joe DeAngelo

Stephanie Wilhelm

ENG 112

December 11th, 2016

Stem Cell Research

The existence of stem cells was first demonstrated by Canadian doctors

James Till and Ernest McCulloch in 1963 while they were studying the effects of

radiation on the bone marrow of mice. Eighteen years later, in 1981 the first

embryonic stem cells were cultured from a mouse (mouse embryonic stem cells, or

mESCs) by British biologists Martin Evans, and Matthew Kaufmann. However, it

would be another seventeen years until the first human embryonic stem cells

(hESCs) would be cultured in 1998 by James Thomson at the University of

Wisconsin. The source of these stem cells were from early stage embryos (also

known as cleavage-stage embryos) which is when the zygote begins to divide.

These stem cells were donated with informed consent by individuals.

The somewhat slow progress of stem cell research over the last 45 years or

so is largely due to the fact that it is extremely controversial. Although most people

probably would agree that the intended goal of stem cell research is to treat

diseases and benefit mankind, it is the methods that are a hot-button topic. The

destruction of early human embryos to harvest human embryonic stem cells is very

divisive, particularly because in the minds of many it draws close comparisons to

the very actively vocal pro-life anti-abortion argument. Thus, it is quite a highly
 DeAngelo 2

politicized topic. However, when compared to the (already complex) pro-life / pro-

choice abortion debate, the stem cell debate is actually even more complex and

layered. For example, beyond the point of whether or not the destruction of an

embryo to harvest stem cells is ethical, consider a whole separate, next level

argument which ensues: Is it ethical to actually specifically create embryos for the

express purpose of furthering stem cell research? Some (especially those in the

scientific community) would say absolutely! Others (particularly some with devout

religious beliefs) would say absolutely not!

So what exactly are stem cells? A very broad and basic definition would be

that stem cells are cells that have three exceptionally unique and important

features. Firstly, a stem cell is a type of cell that is self-renewing (meaning a cell

that can proliferate, or replicate many times). Secondly, stem cells must be a cell

that is unspecialized (meaning it does not have any specific tissue structures, such

as being a skin or muscle or nerve cell). Thirdly, and most importantly, stem cells

have the ability to become differentiated (a process where the cell goes through

multiple stages that essentially turn it into a specialized cell).

When you have heard about stem cells on the news, its very likely that the

type of stem cell being referenced is an embryonic stem cell (ES cells). As the

name implies, this is a stem cell that has been derived from an early embryo.

Another type of stem cell is an adult stem cell, which has been harvested from a

specific mature tissue. Additionally, there are also other types of stem cells,

including two types that are derived from umbilical cord blood. Umbilical cord blood

is the primary source of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) which are cells that can

effectively become various types of blood cells, which are very important to

potential treatments of a number of diseases. However, one serious limitation to

 DeAngelo 3

current stem cell therapies and research is the fact that the stored supply is

woefully small. Another reason we need more of a push forward on stem cell

research, and the collection and safe storage of stem cells.

Much of the heated debate has focused on embryonic stem cells versus adult

stem cells. Adult stem cells are much less controversial, because a human embryo

is not destroyed in the process. However, most scientists have agreed that since

adult stem cells are not pluripotent (pluripotent meaning that the cell possesses the

flexibility to become any type of cell) that they are less useful. That being said,

newer advances in induced pluripotent stem cells (a type of pluripotent stem cells

that can come from adult cells) could possibly become a game-changer. If indeed

these induced pluripotent stem cells are eventually proven to be as effective as

embryonic stem cells, it should greatly increase the availability of stem cell

therapies, likely reduce the cost of stem cell treatment, and also very importantly:

Put the stem-cell debate in the rear-view. Once the ethical concerns are put to rest,

stem cell research will finally be able to move forward unhindered.

However, for the effective use of the less-controversial induced pluripotent

stem cells (highly preferred by those who oppose embryonic stem cell use) to

become a reality, the paths of research have travelled, and must continue to travel

down some of the more controversial avenues of human embryonic stem cells. In

short, without the embryonic stem cell research that has already come before and

paved the way, we wouldnt now be knocking on the door of adult induced

pluripotent stem cells. Still, even now, although we are closer to having legitimate

treatments using adult stem cells, we arent there yet. In the future we must

continue moving forward until the most effective methods are perfected. This
 DeAngelo 4

includes additional funding, additional collection of stem cell material, and a

willingness to make tough decisions for the betterment of humanity.

Although most of the argument against embryonic stem cells is over the

destruction of human embryonic tissue, there is another, almost totally separate

debate. Many (in both the religious community as well as some in the scientific

community) argue that some scientific pursuits simply cross the line into scientists

playing God, and essentially meddling with the fundamentals of life. Perhaps the

two topics that have been the most accused of playing God in the history of

humanity are cloning, and stem cells. Where is the boundary of how far science

should go? Critics also argue that some stem cell researchers and doctors are

performing experiments that are monstrous and unnatural. Some of the harshest

critics go so far as to accuse stem cell scientists as being something akin to real-life

versions of Doctor Frankenstein. Some also question the commitment of certain

scientists to helping humanity. May some perhaps be more concerned with the

adulation they receive from their peers for being pioneers? Are excessive pride and

arrogance the real motivating factors for some scientists and doctors, rather than

the health of humankind moving forward?

Beyond the ethical arguments over stem cells, there are also legal

arguments. Various nations have taken official legal stances on stem cell research,

including the United States. The United States has actually taken several very

specific different stances over the years. In 2001 President George W. Bush signed

a bill banning federal funding of embryonic stem cell research in the United States.

Although these restrictions were just a ban on government funding of stem cell

research, not an outright ban of stem cell use, such restrictions have slowed the

advance of stem cell research in the United States. These federal funding
 DeAngelo 5

restrictions would ultimately be removed several years later by President Barack

Obama.

Besides the stem cell research difficulties in the United States, stem cell

scientists in other countries have faced similar (or in some cases even bigger)

hurdles. For example, in Italy, hESC (human embryonic stem cell) research is

regulated by a 2004 law that actually doesnt have anything to do with stem cells at

all. This law was put into place to regulate medically assisted fertilization (also

known as in-vitro fertilization). Although this law does not outright ban embryonic

stem cell research, Italian scientists are forced to use imported embryonic stem

cells. Italian stem cell research is also hugely hampered by having absolutely zero

federal research funding. Although other factors are in play, the main opposition to

stem cell research in Italy is the Catholic church, which wields considerable

influence in that country. So, primarily this debate in Italy comes down to

secularists being the pro-stem cell research group against Catholics being the anti-

stem cell research side. This is really a somewhat similar (though exaggerated)

version of what happens in the United States, where the Protestant Christian

majority is one of the strongest opponents of embryonic stem cells. Besides Italy,

other countries across Europe have at least partial stem cell bans, such as

Germany, which also requires German scientists to use imported stem cells.

Many may wonder: why is stem cell research so important? The answer to

that question is actually quite simple and straightforward: The sheer number of

devastating diseases that could potentially be treated (or, in some cases even cured

outright) with stem cell therapies is quite staggering.

 DeAngelo 6

Heart disease is one of the most widespread diseases in the world today, and

it should surprise no one that it has a taken a massive toll on humanity. In America

alone, over two thousand people die each day of cardiovascular heart disease.

Thats one death nearly every forty seconds in this country. The good news is that

stem-cell based treatments for cardiovascular disease have been shown to improve

ventricle (heart chamber) function. Additionally, the implanting of stem cells can

potentially replace heart scar tissue. However, these promising treatments arent

quite fully fleshed out yet, and need more funding, research, and further human

trails. Hopefully, one day stem cells will allow us to successful treat, or perhaps

even cure heart disease.

In addition to heart disease, other less well known vascular diseases could be

treated with stem cell therapies. An example would be thromboangiitis obliterans,

commonly called Buergars Disease. This is a painful and debilitating disease that

causes inflammation, clotting, pain and eventually the destruction of blood vessels

of the hands and feet. It can eventually lead to skin ulcers and gangrene.

Buergars disease has no known cure. However, there is one potential treatment

on the horizon: Stem-cell therapy. Actual human studies using MSCs, or

mesenchymal stem cells (stem cells derived from leukocyte antigen-matched

human umbilical cord blood) have had astonishing results. By implanting stem

cells, the patients experienced the complete disappearance of pain that was caused

by the restriction of blood supply (ischemia) in their extremities. Additionally, the

stem-cell implantation was able to heal the necrotic (dead tissue) skin lesions

caused by Buergars in as little as only four weeks. Even though these treatments

are in their early phases, they are already more effective than any other treatments

currently used.
 DeAngelo 7

Cancer is of course another disease that claims a devastating number of

lives. In fact, I would say that Cancer is essentially the great plague of the

Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries. Perhaps there is a light on the horizon

though. Haematopoietic (blood) stem cell transplants have shown great promise in

treating one particular common form of cancer, leukemia. Additionally, other types

of stem cell treatments have shown promise in treating various other forms of

cancer, including melanoma (skin cancer), kidney cancer, pancreatic cancer,

colorectal cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, retinoblastoma (a rare form of retinal

eye cancer that typically only affects children), Hodgkins lymphoma, non-Hodgkins

lymphoma, and several different forms of ovarian cancers.

Neurological diseases are another area that could benefit immensely by

further stem cell research. One example would be Parkinsons Disease, which is a

relatively common and extremely serious degenerative neurological disease.

Parkinsons is an incurable disease, and traditional treatments can only give some

limited relief of symptoms. Some researchers believe that stem cell procedures

could offer the best hope for a Parkinsons cure in the relatively near future.

However, stem cell treatment for Parkinsons Disease is still in the highly

experimental stage, and thus far the majority of the major Parkinsons stem-cell

studies conducted were done on animals, not humans. Hopefully that changes in

the next few years.

Additionally, research progress has been made in potentially treating or

curing a massive number of other very serious diseases. Amongst them, immune

system disorders such as HIV / AIDS, various type of anemia, Alzheimers disease,

chronic liver diseases such as hepatitis and cirrhosis, arthritis, cystic fibrosis, chronic

bronchitis, emphysema, diabetes (type I and II), muscular dystrophy, asthma, as

 DeAngelo 8

well as digestive / intestinal diseases such as ulcerative colitis and also Chrons

Disease. All of those diseases share two things in common. Firstly, they are all

currently incurable (though some do have symptomatic treatments, such as

diabetes, and Chrons Disease). Secondly, with more open-mindedness, less

restrictive laws, and better funding, perhaps eventually stem cell treatments could

one day wipe them all out once and for all.

The major arguments against stem cell research simply dont hold water. The

idea of equating stem cell research closely with abortion is completely incorrect.

There arent (nor are scientists advocating for) abortions performed to harvest

embryonic stem cells. The reality is that embryonic stem cells are harvested from

very early embryonic tissue, and umbilical cord blood that would otherwise be

destroyed as biological waste.

Those that argue for adult stem cell use instead of embryonic stem cell use

may possibly be somewhat vindicated one day, if pluripotent adult stem cells are

eventually perfected. However, even if that is the case, the advances in pluripotent

adult stem cells have been achieved in large part to the embryonic stem cell

research those same individuals oppose.

To those that argue against the very character of the stem cell scientists and

doctors (the Frankenstein argument), this is the most illogical argument of all.

Its a blatant logical fallacy of attacking the individual because there is no other

argument for those critics to make. Frankly, its quite shameful to attack the

brilliant, hard-working scientists who are devoting their entire lives to saving or

improving the quality of life for countless others.

 DeAngelo 9

Of course it is fair to say that we should think about what we are doing when

pushing the boundaries of science and medicine. Indeed, we can and should use

reason and common sense. We can all agree that thoughtfulness is a virtue.

However, when it comes to benefitting mankind, we shouldnt be scared to make

the world a healthier and better place. The use of stem cells has great potential to

do just that.

I feel confident in saying that almost every person reading this has had their

life somehow touched by disease, whether it was a personal illness, or the illness of

a loved one. Whether cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Alzheimers, or others, we

have all most likely felt the heartbreak and suffering caused by these diseases.

Imagine a world without cancer. Imagine a world without heart disease. It sounds

like its such an unrealistic dream, but the truth is that one day it can be a reality.

We have to be willing to do what we can to make that future a reality. Supporting

stem cell research is our best hope for that brighter future.
 DeAngelo 10

Works Cited

S, Holm. "Going to the Roots of the Stem Cell Controversy." Bioethics, vol. 16, no. 6,

2002., pp. 493-507

Robertson, John A. "INTRODUCTION: Law, Science, and Innovation: Introduction to

the Symposium." The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, vol. 38, no. 2, 2010.,

pp. 175-190

Power, Carl, and John E. J. Rasko. "Will Cell Reprogramming Resolve the Embryonic

Stem Cell Controversy? A Narrative Review." Annals of internal medicine, vol.

155, no. 2, 2011., pp. 114.

Weiner, Leslie P. "Definitions and Criteria for Stem Cells." Methods in molecular

biology (Clifton, N.J.), vol. 438, 2008., pp. 3.

Robertson, John A. "Embryo Stem Cell Research: Ten Years of Controversy." The

Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a Journal of the American Society of Law,

Medicine & Ethics, vol. 38, no. 2, 2010., pp. 191-203

 DeAngelo 11

Armstrong, Lyle, et al. "Our Top 10 Developments in Stem Cell Biology Over the Last

30 Years." STEM CELLS, vol. 30, no. 1, 2012., pp. 2-9

Beltrame, Lorenzo. "The Italian Way to Stem Cell Research: Rethinking the Role of

Catholic Religion in Shaping Italian stem Cell Research Regulations."

Developing World Bioethics, 2016.

"Human Embryos in the Age of Obama: In the Wake of a Recent Court Ruling, the

First Annual Neuhaus Colloquium Calls for a Permanent Reversal of America's

Misguided Stem-Cell Policy." First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and

Public Life, no. 206, 2010., pp. 57.

Guinan, Patrick. "Bioterrorism, Embryonic Stem Cells, and Frankenstein." Journal of

Religion and Health, vol. 41, no. 4, 2002., pp. 305-309

Li, Mo, and Juan C. Izpisua Belmonte. "Looking to the Future Following 10 Years of

Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Technologies." Nature protocols, vol. 11, no. 9,

2016., pp. 1579-1585

Deeks, Steven G., and Joseph M. McCune. "Can HIV be Cured with Stem Cell

Therapy?" Nature Biotechnology, vol. 28, no. 8, 2010., pp. 807-810

 DeAngelo 12

Kim, M., et al. "Hemolytic Anemia with Null PKLR Mutations Identified using Whole

Exome Sequencing and Cured by Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Combined with Splenectomy." Bone Marrow Transplantation, vol. 51, no. 12,

2016., pp. 1605

Liau, Mooi T., Farahnaz Amini, and Thamil S. Ramasamy. "The Therapeutic Potential

of Stem Cells and Progenitor Cells for the Treatment of Parkinsons Disease."

Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, vol. 13, no. 5, 2016., pp. 455-

464

Kim, SungWhan, et al. "Successful Stem Cell Therapy using Umbilical Cord Blood

Derived Multipotent Stem Cells for Buerger's Disease and Ischemic Limb

Disease Animal Model." STEM CELLS, vol. 24, no. 6, 2006., pp. 1620-1626

Jameel, Mohammad N., and Jianyi Zhang. "Stem Cell Therapy for Ischemic Heart

Disease." Antioxidants & redox signaling, vol. 13, no. 12, 2010., pp. 1879-

1897

Pineault, N., and A. Abu-Khader. "Advances in Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cell

Expansion and Clinical Translation." EXPERIMENTAL HEMATOLOGY, vol. 43, no.

7, 2015., pp. 498-513

 DeAngelo 13

Mimeault, M., R. Hauke, and S. K. Batra. "Stem Cells: A Revolution in Therapeutics-

Recent Advances in Stem Cell Biology and their Therapeutic Applications in

Regenerative Medicine and Cancer Therapies." Clinical Pharmacology &

Therapeutics, vol. 82, no. 3, 2007., pp. 252-264