Actually, the benefits of these restrictions may outweigh the negatives. So before people are to quick to latch on to this argument, they may want to examine the counter scientific argument (the ethical one is pretty clear).
The counter scientific argument is that by limiting the use of fetal stem cells, science has been forced to explore alternatives. As a result, a great deal of research has been put into converting adult semi specialized stem cells into embryonic stem cells also called “reprogramming”. Why is this important?
Besides the ethical issues surrounding embryonic stem cells, reprogramming adult cells means we will the supply of stem cells necessary to use them therapeutically in large numbers of people. Something embryonic stem cell research cannot promise.
Forcing science to invest heavily in re-programming adult stem cells has led to a rash of gene technologies that hold tremendous promise in the treatment of inherited as well as acquired genetic diseases and mutations. As more and more energy and research focuses on reprogramming cells rather than using embryonic stem cells, the demand for those cells are declining and the supply should be adequate without needing to argue in favor of relaxed abortion laws.
There was a short term supply problem of embryonic stem cells as more and more restrictions on the acquisition and use of embryonic stem cells occurred, but in the long run the benefits that came from doing so should more than offset the alternative.
Some articles:
- Already in 2008 reprogramming was beginning to replace the need for embryonic stem cells…
https://www.livescience.com/5169-embryonic-stem-cells.html
2. A good overview, I have copied the conclusion below…
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK190607/
If the study of cell reprogramming continues to deliver on its promise, human cells of the sort most desirable for research and treatment may eventually be obtainable without the use of embryos or nuclear transfer at all. This would fulfill a long-held dream of redeploying mature cells to behave like embryonic cells, then using those cells to treat patients from whom the cells were derived. For the foreseeable future, however, early human embryos and cells derived from them will be a staple of research, providing the “gold standards” against which reprogrammed cells must be compared. The absence of absolute prohibitions of embryo and stem cell research has allowed such research to proceed in this country, if not in an optimal fashion, despite restrictions on federal funding. Because of their promise, embryonic stem cells have become a useful political bellwether and have kept the promise of biomedical research at the forefront of public discourse. All in all, not bad outcomes.
