The news that South Korean scientists have successfully cloned human embryos, removed their stem cells for medical use, and destroyed the leftover embryonic material, raises again the question of how far medical research along these lines ought to be permitted
The news that South Korean scientists have successfully cloned human embryos, removed their stem cells for medical use, and destroyed the leftover embryonic material, raises again the question of how far medical research along these lines ought to be permitted to go – or, for that matter, can be prevented from going. (Cloning simply means that the original embryonic cell was “cloned” from the patient being treated, rather than from a normally fertilized egg, thus eliminating or reducing the danger of tissue rejection.)
There is no doubt that stem cells, which can be directed to develop into any of the huge variety of cells in the human body, hold out the hope of being able to cure many diseases, including Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. Their proponents have not always been responsible in the promises they have extended to victims and their families, but the importance of stem cell research to medicine is undeniable.
The trouble is that, while adult stem cells can also be used in this research, stem cells “harvested” from human embryos are, for various technical reasons, considered more desirable. Harvesting these, however, destroys the embryo. If you happen to believe that a human embryo, whether cloned or normally created, is a nascent human life (and there is no obvious reason why it isn’t one), then raiding it for its stem cells and discarding the rest of the embryonic material begins to look uncomfortably comparable to taking an organ from the body of a healthy baby, implanting it in a diseased person, and throwing the remainder of the baby away.
The first thing we had better realize is that, since medical science is now capable of harvesting stem cells from human embryos, somebody, somewhere, is going to do it. There is simply nothing the United States can do to prevent this, whether the embryos used are normally created or cloned. The South Korean scientists have just demonstrated this.
Moreover, “in vitro” fertilization is now common among parents who are having difficulty conceiving in the ordinary way. That is the practice of uniting male sperm and female eggs in a petri dish and implanting one of the fertilized eggs in the woman’s uterus, where it then develops normally. This process results in lots of leftover fertilized eggs (i.e. human embryos), and these are either thrown away, or frozen and thus preserved pending a parental decision on their use. But their stem cells are, of course, a tempting target for medical experimentation.
There isn’t much that can be done about this, either. About the only practical question is whether federal funds should be used to promote such experimentation. (California has already passed a popular initiative that will spend billions doing so.) President Bush has said he will allow stem cells to be harvested from leftover embryos already in existence and doomed to destruction, but will veto spending federal money on harvesting them from new embryos.
That compromise hasn’t satisfied the stem cell enthusiasts. They want federal money plowed into stem cell research, and if that involves the destruction of human embryos, that’s just too bad.
But, to repeat, all we’re haggling over here is whether U.S. government money will be spent on the project. What science can do, some scientist will do. The Science section of The New York Times, a couple of weeks ago, discussed implanting the genes of one species in another – implanting the genes of a human brain, for instance, in a mouse. The writer conceded that this might be impossible in species so different, but added that it seems perfectly possible to mix the genes of a human being and our closest relation, a chimpanzee, in such a way as to produce a creature with aspects of both. Science marches on!
A little knowledge, as Alexander Pope wrote, is a dangerous thing. Mankind has now acquired enough knowledge of genetics to do what only yesterday seemed comfortably impossible. No mere law will prevent someone from doing it.
If America is to lead responsibly, we must develop the moral courage and imagination to cope with a new and vastly stranger world.
- William Rusher is a Distinguished Fellow of the Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy.
