The Current Status of
Adult and Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Prepared for Campaign Life Coalition
By John B. Shea MD FRCP(C)
April 19, 2002

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

The Problem

• Three Misunderstandings

The Case Against Embryonic Stem Cell Research

• A Human Embryo Is A Human Being
• Problems With Embryonic Stem Cells

The Case for Post-Natal or “Adult” Stem Cell Research

— Clinical Applications:

• Multiple Sclerosis
• Crohn's Disease
• Cancer
• Parkinson's
• Alzheimer's
• Nerve And Spinal Cord Damage
• Muscular Dystrophy
• Diabetes

— Ethical Considerations

Clarifying Human Cloning:

• “Reproductive” vs. “Therapeutic”: A False distinction
• Other Problems

References

Executive Summary

The Case Against Embryonic Stem Cell Research:

• Since the embryo is an innocent human being, and has the inherent right not to be killed or harmed in any way, it is not morally acceptable to obtain stem cells from embryos
• In the light of recent clinical trials with post-natal or “adult” stem cells, it has become clear that research on embryos, which results in the death of the embryonic human being, is totally unnecessary.
• Human embryonic stem cells have never been used successfully in clinical trials on humans and carry significant risks, including immune rejection and tumour formation.
• Despite extravagant claims for ESCR, post-natal or adult stem cell research, which includes placental and umbilical cord stem cells, is in fact years ahead in terms of experimentation and treatment of disease in patients.
• Human embryonic stem cells are more difficult to work with than post-natal stem cells.

The Case For Post-Natal, Or "Adult" Stem Cell Research:

• The retrieval and clinical use of adult stem cells are morally acceptable
• Post-natal stem cells have been located in virtually limitless supply in numerous cell and tissue types in the human body and can be transformed into virtually all cell and tissue types.
• Post-natal stem cells have been used in many clinical trials with great success and carry no disqualifying ethical restrictions. Research with post-natal stem cells has moved beyond the trial stage and clinical applications have been made successfully in patients with such diseases as:
  • Multiple Sclerosis
  • Rheumatoid Arthritis
  • Crohn's Disease
  • Combined Immuno-Deficiency Disease (SCID)
  • Cancer, including: Brain Tumours, Ovarian Cancer, Testicular Cancer, Leukemias, Breast Cancer, Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma

The Case Against Human Cloning

• The process of cloning objectifies and commodifies the human person and is therefore morally unacceptable.
• There are not two “types” of cloning, “reproductive” and “therapeutic”. The cloning process is the same in both “types”; only the intended use of the manufactured embryo is different. In the one case, “reproductive” cloning, the embryo is intended to be implanted and to live. In the other, “therapeutic” cloning, the embryo is destined to be killed.
• Both the process of cloning and the intentional killing of the manufactured embryo for research are morally unacceptable.

The Problem

Three Misunderstandings

The argument for the use of Embryonic Stem Cell Research (ESCR) is based on three serious misunderstandings.

1. The idea that the fundamental principles of ethics are appropriately based on a ‘consensus’ of interested persons who express their opinions in regard to moral choices, rather than on divine law as understood by human reason, and as given in Revelation.
2. The failure to realize that a human being, innocent and possessing the inherent right to be protected and not killed or harmed in any way, comes into existence at the moment of fertilization of a human ovum by a human sperm. This fact has been denied by those who promote ESCR when they define the beginning of life at implantation rather than fertilization which is a minimum of seven days. That human life begins at fertilization is attested to in the current standard world text books of embryology and in standard medical dictionaries.
3. The misrepresentation of scientific and medical facts in regard to the practicality, therapeutic promise and results, and the dangers to both health and life of ESCR in comparison with adult stem cell research.

Despite extravagant claims for ESCR, adult stem cell research which includes placental and umbilical cord stem cells, is in fact years ahead in terms of experimentation and treatment of disease in patients.

The Case Against Embryonic Stem Cell Research

A Human Embryo Is A Human Being

The fact that the one cell human zygote is a member of the human species, a human being, has been established since the 1880s and is accepted by embryological science to this day. The retrieval of embryonic stem cells from a human embryo, kills the embryo.

Since the embryo is an innocent human being, and has the inherent right not to be killed or harmed in any way, it is not morally acceptable to obtain stem cells from embryos.

Problems With Embryonic Stem Cells

Dr. Peter Andrews of the University of Sheffield, England said, “Simply keeping human embryonic stem cells alive can be a challenge.”¹ Says Doug Melton, Harvard University researcher, “In my view (human embryonic stem cells) would degrade with time.” ²

Human embryonic stem cells have never been used successfully in clinical trials, have a lacklustre success in combating animal models of disease, and carry significant risks, including immune rejection and tumour formation.³

“Transplantation of human embryo stem cells into human recipients may result in… tumours.” ⁴

Speaking about embryonic stem cells, Glenn McGee, a University of Pennsylvania bioethicist told M.I.T.s Technology Review, “The potential that they would explode into a cancerous mass after stem cell transplant might turn out to be a Pandora's Box of stem cell research.” In one instance, fetal tissue derived from early fetuses was inserted into an individual's brain resulting in no visible neurons, but instead producing numerous non-brain tissues in the patient's brain.⁵

In the most extensive controlled study of fetal brain tissue transplantation for Parkinson's disease, the transplant showed little or no benefit for most patients. Fetal brain tissue was transplanted into the brains of patients to regenerate or replace the cells missing or damaged by Parkinson's disease, the theory being, that these young cells would take over production of the missing brain chemical dopamine. However, the results were horrific. In 15% of the patients, the transplanted fetal cells went out of control and produced irreversible and devastating changes in the patients' brains, resulting in muscle spasm, sucking movements and writhing, which could not be controlled by any medicine.⁶

Even if a specific tissue is successfully produced from embryonic stem cells and nuclear transfer cloning, therapeutic use of this tissue may cause abnormalities in the person receiving the tissue graft.⁷

The Case for Adult Stem Cell Research

The retrieval and clinical use of adult stem cells are morally acceptable, provided that there is no unreasonable hazard to the patient and that the relevant persons give fully informed consent.

Adult stem cells have been located in numerous cell and tissue types and can be transformed into virtually all cell and tissue types.

Multipotent Adult Progenitor Cells (MAPCs) are stem cells found in bone marrow in adults that can “differentiate into pretty much everything that an embryonic stem cell can differentiate into. They seem to grow indefinitely in culture, without losing their characteristics, and do not seem to form cancerous masses, or cause tissue rejection. These cells may turn out to be the most important cells ever discovered.” ⁸

Adult stem cells can be produced in “virtually limitless” supply.⁹

Clinical Applications:

Adult stem cells have been used in many clinical trials with great success. Recent examples include:

Multiple Sclerosis
On April 10, 2002, it was reported on CTV News that Dr. Mark Freedman, Director of the Multiple Sclerosis Clinic at Ottawa Hospital, had treated Stephanie Rainville Wray. She had early multiple sclerosis and was given chemotherapy to destroy her immune system, which was attacking her nervous system. She was then treated with stem cells from her own bone marrow, which replaced her immune system and halted progression of her disease. Whether she has been permanently cured will probably not be known for 3 — 5 years. However, this case report is very encouraging.

Severe Combined Immuno-Deficiency Disease
Twenty out of twenty-one babies, who had Severe Combined Immuno-Deficiency Disease (SCID), known as “Bubble Boy Disease”, survived after receiving transplants of adult stem cells derived from bone marrow or umbilical cord blood. If screened early enough, the survival rate is 95%.¹⁰

Crohn's Disease
Two patients at Chicago's Northwestern Hospital with Crohn's disease (a potentially disabling inflammatory bowel disease) are doing “phenomenally well” after being treated with their own blood stem cells. Similar procedures on patients with multiple sclerosis have shown similar progress. ¹¹

Cancer and Others
Adult stem cells have been used in other clinical trials with considerable success in the following diseases: Cancer, brain tumours, retinoblastoma, ovarian cancer, testicular cancer, multiple myeloma, leukemias, breast cancer, neuroblastoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and renal cell carcinoma.¹²

Adult stem cells have also been used successfully in the treatment of numerous animal models of disease which simulate human disease. Some examples are… nerve and spinal cord damage, retinal damage, Parkinson's disease, heart disease, muscular dystrophy, diabetes, stroke and liver disease.¹³

Clarifying Human Cloning

“Reproductive” vs. “Therapeutic”: A False Distinction

There are not two “types” of cloning, “reproductive” and “therapeutic”. The cloning process is the same in both “types”; only the intended use of the manufactured embryo is different. In the one case, “reproductive” cloning, the embryo is intended to be implanted and to live. In the other, “therapeutic” cloning, the embryo is destined to be killed. The process of producing the embryo, “somatic nuclear cell transfer”, is the same no matter what use is made of the embryo.

The process of cloning objectifies and commodifies the human person and is therefore morally unacceptable.

Both the process of cloning and the intentional killing of the manufactured embryo for research are morally unacceptable because of the indisputable humanity of the embryo.

Other Problems

“Therapeutic” cloning, a technique proposed by ESCR advocates, as a means of mitigating the threat of immunological rejection by the recipient's body of tissues derived from embryonic stem cells, is probably impractical. It will require a large number of human eggs to make clones for thousands or even millions of potential patients. Dr. Alan Tronson, Director of Monash Institute of Reproduction and Development Australia says, “They're never going to have enough women's eggs to do it.” ¹⁴

REFERENCES: