It Is A Good Idea To Use Human Stem Cells To Repair Damaged Or Diseased Tissue in Humans

Karianne Mathiesen

Over the years, many people have died from killer diseases, which involve the irreversible breakdown of important cells or tissues, such as ‘Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, heart disease and diabetes’ [1]. The use of stem cells, a concept that is both new and controversial, could ‘potentially revolutionise medicine’ [1] and provide a cure for people suffering from these illnesses. Stem cells are ‘cells that have the ability to divide for indefinite periods in culture and to give rise to specialised cells’ [2]. There are two types of stem cells; firstly embryonic stem cells (ESC’s), taken from an unborn human embryo and secondly, adult stem cells, obtained from bone marrow, the umbilical cord and other places in the body. This issue of using stem cells to repair damaged or diseased tissue is a very controversial one and many people oppose it, but why? Why are many people against such a huge step forward in medical science?

The more controversial of the two methods is the use of embryonic stem cells, mainly due to the fact that it involves the destruction of an unborn embryo that could potentially become a human. The Bible states that all creation exists for God’s own pleasure and purpose, not ours; ‘all things were created by him and for him’ [3], so Christians, as well as many others do not agree that humans should ‘play God’. Anti-abortion supporters, who believe life begins at fertilisation, also use the moral side of this research as an opposing argument. Professor Jack Scarisbrick, the chairman of the anti-abortion group, LIFE, refers to the use of ESC’s as a ‘horrible, horrible prospect’ [4].

There are also other medical reasons why people oppose the use of ESC’s. They can be very hard to control and there is a possibility that transplants could give rise to cancer. In one example, a man suffering from Parkinson’s died after an ESC transplant. It was ‘later found that these cells had given rise to bone, skin and hair in the patient’s brain’ [5]. So, there are potential health risks when using embryonic stem cells.

Another difficulty faced by researchers using ESC’s is the problem of keeping the stem cells alive and making them differentiate into the correct type ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Another difficulty faced by researchers using ESC’s is the problem of keeping the stem cells alive and making them differentiate into the correct type of cell. Some cells do not readily differentiate in the cells that are needed, and instead they stay ‘together in a disorganised cluster and nearby cells begin to die’ [5]. This could be dangerous if this happened inside the human body, once again highlighting the medical risks of using ESC’s.

Although there are disadvantages to using embryonic stem cells to replace and repair human tissue, there are also many advantages. ESC’s are totipotent, which means that they can give rise to any cell in the body depending on the chemical messages it receives. These chemical messages vary depending on the location in the body, so this allows certain specified cells to develop where certain tissues need to be replaced. So, this one type of stem cell has the potential to become any cell that is needed.

A huge advantage is that ESC’s can essentially live forever. Sir George Radda, the chief executive of the Medical Research Council says ’Once these cell lines are established, they are immortal. You can multiply them and continue to use them…….That means you will reduce the number of human embryo’s you would wish to use in this research’ [4]. This is obviously beneficial.

Another advantage is that ESC’s are readily available. Everyday hospitals and fertility clinics routinely destroy human embryos remaining after in-vitro fertilisation. These surplus embryo’s given scientists a ready supply of ESC’s to use, although this still causes problems with pro-life supporters.

The second method of using stem cells to replace or repair human tissue is by using adult stem cells. This is still a controversial issue, but less so than using stem cells derived from embryos. At the present moment in time scientists are still unsure ‘whether the adult cells necessarily retain the full plasticity of the embryonic ones’ [6]. So, at present, ESC’s may still be the best, although less accepted option, but as research continues more advantages of adult stem cells are becoming apparent.

Unlike embryonic stem cells, adult stem cells are pluripotent, instead of totipotent. This means that they can give rise to most of the cells in the body, but not all of them like ESC’s. So, adult stem cells can only be used to replace a limited amount of tissues in the body.

Another disadvantage of using adult stem cells is that their growth potential is limited. ‘With each division, structures at the end of the chromosomes known as telomeres shorten slightly’ [6]. As a result of this the adult stem cells may ages prematurely and this is a ‘potentially worrisome disadvantage’ [6].

Adult stem cells can be taken from the patient’s very own body. This is obviously a great advantage as it avoids the problem of cell rejection, which may arise when using ESC’s. ‘Supporters and opponents of embryonic cell research are in agreement that the ultimate goal should be to use the patient’s own cells’ [5] and the use of adult stem cells is the only way to achieve this.

Another advantage of using adult stem cells is that it doesn’t involve the destruction of any form of human life, so is much less ethically controversial than using ESC’s. Some people still disagree with the idea of using stem cells, but this method is more accepted and this makes it a lot easier for research to continue.

So, is it a good idea to use human stem cells to replace damaged or diseased tissue in humans? In my opinion, the answer is yes. The main argument that opponents of embryonic stem cells use is the ethical debate of destroying an embryo that could potentially form a human life. I argue that the embryo’s used are already abandoned by their parents and will be destroyed. I believe that ‘it is actually wrong to protect the lives of a few unborn human beings if doing so will delay treatment for a much larger number of people who suffer from fatal or debilitating diseases’ [6]. The medical risks that may occur whilst using stem cells could soon be eliminated by extra research, so in the future this method of treating patients will also be safer. So, all in all, using stem cells to repair damaged or diseased tissue is a positive step forward in scientific medicine. Although there are many arguments against using stem cells, the choice to allow treatment and research to continue is ‘the right and moral one’ [6].