|
|
May 25, 2007
Stem cells are saving lives
Doctor and religious leaders agree on aspects of complex issue.
GEOFF D'AURIA
There were a number of men saying insightful and informative things
about stem cell research at the Norman Rothstein Theatre May 13.
But none was as eloquent or powerful as a small boy who didn't say
a word.
To understand the significance of the boy's presence at the Canadian
Technion Society, Vancouver chapter, event, it's important to understand
what stem cells are and how they work. That's where the first of
speaker of the evening, Dr. Michael O'Connor, came in.
O'Connor is a postdoctoral fellow in the Terry Fox Laboratory of
the B.C. Cancer Agency. He currently directs a research program
on human embryonic stem cell control and serves as manager for the
Vancouver Human Embryonic Stem Cell Core Facility.
Stem cells, he said, are generic human cells that can replicate
and transform into other cells for specific purposes. Their significance
is twofold, he continued: they can be used to regenerate damaged
or diseased cells in the human body and, in understanding how they
work, they can inform us on how birth defects occur or how cancerous
tumors develop.
There are two kinds of stem cells, he explained. First, there are
stem cells that can replicate into any cell in the human body. These
are called "pluripotent" and are derived largely and most
feasibly (given the current state of medical knowledge and technology)
from human embryos. Then, there are stem cells that can only replicate
into the tissue type where they're from. For example, liver stem
cells can only replicate into liver cells. These are called tissue-restrictive
stem cells or adult stem cells (although they are also found in
children).
Both types have benefits and drawbacks, said O'Connor, but it's
the embryonic stem cells that are controversial, because harvesting
these usually means destroying an embryo – and that leads into
the thorny discussion about where and when life begins.
From O'Connor's perspective, the embryos they use at the laboratory
have the potential for life, but should not be treated with the
same rights as a human life.
"There's no body plan to it at this stage," he said. "There
[are] no recognizable tissues or organs. No nerves. No brain. It's
a collection of cells, but it does have the potential to form a
person."
This was a point echoed by every other speaker at the event.
Dr. Saad Bahr, who is both an imam and a graduate of the Alexandria
University School of Medicine, pointed out that Islam generally
condones embryonic stem cell research.
With respect to embryos that are voluntarily donated from unused
in vitro fertilizations, Bahr asked, "Should an embryo, which
is formed within a few days after an in vitro fertilization and
... not yet in the womb of its mother be considered a human being
with all the rights of a human being? We should make a distinction
between actual life and potential life and we should make a clear
distinction between life in the dish and life in the womb of its
mother. It has the potential to grow into the human being but it
is not a human being."
Rabbi Andrew Rosenblatt of Congregation Schara Tzedeck concurred.
"I told him [Dr. Bahr] after he finished, 'After your lecture,
there's nothing left for me to present because the Jewish position
and the Muslim position are identical,'" Rosenblatt said. "Before
40 days, it is not technically considered a life."
The rabbi continued, "We agree ... with the Canadian standard,
the Islamic standards and the Christian standards that you should
not be creating fertilized embryos for the sake of stem cell research
but if, in the process of in vitro fertilization, where you harvest
many eggs and fertilize many eggs, those that are not destined to
be implanted in the uterus of a woman are certainly open to be used
for research.... So which is better, using them for therapeutic
value or letting them thaw and terminate on their own?"
Not eveyone agreed, however. Rev. Dr. Philip Crowell, director of
spiritual care at B.C. Children's Hospital, pointed out that some
conservative Protestants and the Roman Catholic Church are against
embryonic stem cell research. To them, he said, the embryo equals
human life and should be accorded the same rights.
If Daniel Kim had an opinion on the matter, the audience didn't
hear it. Daniel was the young boy who stood on the stage and overshadowed
the rest of the panel. His father, Richard Kim, told Daniel's story
with a voice that broke with emotion.
He said that, one day, Daniel had developed the flu – a flu
so bad that after four days he ended up in the hospital. After countless
tests, the family learned that Daniel had severe aplastic anemia,
a disease in which the bone marrow stops making enough red blood
cells. After a number of different treatments, the family was presented
with a new alternative. Richard Kim's wife was pregnant at the time,
which meant there was the possibility of curing the disease with
the stem cells from the umbilical cord blood.
"It was like winning the lottery," Kim said, describing
what it felt like when the doctor told him that the blood was a
good match for the procedure.
As he stood with his hand gripping his son's shoulder, Kim told
the audience that the transfusion worked and that Daniel is recovering
well.
"This technology out there is phenomenal," he said, his
voice dropping to a whisper. "Just being able to be beside
my son is ... is just wonderful."
Geoff D'Auria is a Vancouver freelance writer.
^TOP
|
|
