Some six years ago, a bright scientist at the University of Wisconsin introduced his work to the public through the prestigious journal Science. He reported the first case of isolating human embryonic stem cells. The ground breaking announcement made the scientific, and particularly the medical community, sit up and take notice; the possibilities appeared astonishing.
Biologist James Thompson’s work entailed isolating human cells during the earliest stages of human development. Cells could be cultured in laboratories to grow into any one of the 220 types of tissues and cells in the human body. Effectively, creating a potential replacement parts for any damaged organ in the body, and more importantly, offering the cure for many untreatable cell-based illnesses, such as Alzheimer’s, diabetes and many others; it is even offering human-organ models for scientific research, and potentially for transplants.
Expectations ran high.
From a scientific point of view, stem cell research offers priceless and limitless possibilities; however, it is not the last advancement humanity needs to wipe out all of its problems. Naturally, scientific research takes time; more often than not, researchers learn many ways in which they cannot do some thing, before they learn one way to do it. Hence, if stem cell research runs ideally, it will be a few years before it cures some of the illnesses we are hoping it would.
The prolonged research and investigation process does not top the list of the problems restraining the advancement of stem cells. In recent memory, not a single issue in science has become subject to Washington politics more than stem cells. Religious leaders have maintained their strong and vocal opposition to it on the grounds that the research destroys human lives in the process; human life in this case is defined as the cluster of cells originated days earlier in a test tube.
When stem cells are isolated, perhaps fewer than those peeling off your skin when you scratch it, they are yet to be manipulated into becoming a brain, a heart, skin or even a nerve, to speak of feelings.
The White House’s ruling on the issue of stem cells was to appease both sides, as if it were a partisan matter. President Bush declared the administration would allocate federal funding, however minimal, towards the use of already existing lines of stem cells. Since that decision in 2001, the National Institute of Health has spent some $170 Million on stem cell research, but only $10 Million were spent on human embryonic cells.
Politics have effectively brought the research near to a screeching halt, with the exception of some protracted developments in the last couple of years. Given the vast enthusiasm and interest the idea was greeted with around the world, it could have been the most advancing new technology in a long time.
Conservative elements in the supposedly secular administration have dominated the country’s economic, political, social and evidently the academic discourse for the last four years, eliminating many personal freedoms and imposing religious directives on all of the population, in violation of their basic constitutional rights.
The hypocrisy in this matter is in dismissing stem cells for it destroying human life. Those politicians concerned with a cluster of cells, fewer than those in a nail-clip, are standing motionless while millions of children and adults around the worlds are dying of war, famine, pollution and other causes. Yet more troubling is the fact that thousands of innocent individuals around the world, as the case in Iraq and Afghanistan, are dying because of the direct acts of those individuals, staunchly opposing their development.
It is more fitting to deny funding for the development of new weapons, as they do destroy human life. As a matter of fact, they seem to have no other purpose.
The benefits of the research carrying on are indisputable. Many suffering from terminal disease are patiently awaiting a solution promised by stem cells. Scientists all over the globe are awaiting the offerings of the technology to proceed with their research at new levels. They are awaiting the opportunity to perform tests on lab-grown heart muscles, arteries, skin, bones and other organs, instead of extracting them from human bodies, and holding the research hostage to their supply. They are awaiting the opportunity to simulate human disease in lab tubes, test drugs and treatments promptly, and simultaneously make cures available and knowledge widespread.
Stem cell technology is for humanity, not to be tampered with by select political agendas, not even those with religious packaging.
Fayyad Sbaihat ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in chemical engineering.





IP hash: 02a4ee75
Way to go, Fayyad! Something else besides anti-Israeli diatribes. Keep up the good work, dude!
IP hash: 0fce79b0
Ahem
Anti-occupation-of-Palestien is not the same thing as anti-Israel.
IP hash: 02a4ee75
Hey Ahem, does that mean that strapping explosives onto yourself and detonating in the midst of innocent women and children is not anti-Israel either? We’re just happy to see that Fayyad has found something more meaningful to write about, that’s all.
IP hash: 50d176b7
“Ahem
Anti-occupation-of-Palestien is not the same thing as anti-Israel.”
Ahem
EVERYTHING FAYYAD WRITES ABOUT THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT IS ANTI-ISRAEL!!!
IP hash: 02a4ee75
Hey Ahem, Fayyad finally got over his hatred of Jews. Why don’t you do the same!
Fayyad, you wrote a stellar article. Nice work!
IP hash: 5bac6a82
I don’t think I’ve ever seen an opinion piece in support of stem cell research, or abortion, that addresses the underlying ethical issue, which is whether or not the embryo deserves status as a human being. Mr. Sbaihat makes no argument, merely dismissing the embryo as a “cluster of cells originated days earlier in a test tube.” I would remind him that he, too, was once a cluster of cells only days old, and I presume he is happy that he wasn’t medically harvested at the time. He also employs another common tactic by claiming that the ethical concerns of stem cell research are invalid because they are religious. As if the deeply held beliefs of millions are less valid because they come from a religion than, say, a political philosophy. “Religious” people don’t oppose stem cell research because they read it in the Bible or because they like Parkinson’s; we oppose it because we believe that the intrinsic worth of human beings lies in simply being a member of the human species, not in intelligence, self-sufficiency, the capacity to feel, how many cells one has or any other arbitrary characteristic. The fact that human beings are dying of other things—war or famine or disease, as Mr. Sbaihat mentions—does not mean we can cavalierly dismiss the moral objections harvesting embryos as unimportant. Science cannot operate in moral vacuum; in this case ethical considerations must take precedence over scientific potential.
IP hash: 452f6998
As a matter of fact, I found Fayyad’s previous articles to be pro-Israel. He’s doing Jewish Israeli’s a favor a trying to save them from their war hungry, blood-thirsty leaders, as well as those of you sitting here in the US, sending money to Israel, and asking people over there to die for your imaginary profecies.
IP hash: 452f6998
Matt,
I respect your beliefes, and I apologize if my comments sounded as if they were mere dismissal. But you need to recognize that your beliefes do not mean the same to me, nor do they to roughly half the population of the United States.
Sicience cannot operate in vacuum, that’s why I’m against human cloning, and so are many scientist, that can be actually very harmfull. But also religion cannot claim to know more about science that science itself.
There are no scientific evidence that life exixts at such early stages in human formation, therefore, the interpritation is merely a matter of opinion, and I personally tend to have faith in scientific explanations. If I were medically harvested when I was a few dozen cells, I would not have known about it, and no damage would have been done, many potential replacements were available, and they are all just as good, because I made a meaning and sgnificance to my life by living it, and the uniqueness of it is what makes me an individual. That takes time to build, that’s it’s hard to recognize life exists that early.
IP hash: 452f6998
The above comment (response to Matt) is by Fayyad Sbaihat. Sorry I forgot to sign it.