Puncturing the Myths About Stem Cell Research -- Part Two of Two

Editor’s note. Don’t forget that the repeat of the “Fetal Position” episode of House that we’ve written about so much is on tonight on the USA Network. If you missed it the first time, by all means watch it and drop me a line at daveandrusko@hotmail.com.

Near the end of Part One, I alluded to the truism that the claims made about the alleged miraculous “potential” of embryonic stem cells (ESC) seem virtually impervious to contrary evidence. To help you continue challenging the myths about ESCs, I would like to crib from an e-mail sent to me by a friend to point out three examples of how the science of stem cell research is seriously misunderstood.

1. It is a statement found in virtually every story about ESCs—they can make “all the cell types in the human body." It’s true that this can and does happen--when an intact human embryo is allowed to grow into an adult!

It’s altogether different if you pluck these stem cells out of a developing human embryo and culture them in a dish. To date researchers have succeeded in figuring out how to turn them into only a fraction of the more than 200 cell types.

2. So, on the one hand we’re told that ESCs are essentially, if not absolutely, “elastic” (or “pluripotent”) while all others are poor imitations. But a flock of peer-reviewed studies have shown that the alternatives (from “adult” stem cells and/or umbilical cord blood stem cells, for example) are much more elastic than once thought.

Note also, as we’ve written about in this space[www.nrlc.org/news_and_Views/January07/nv011107part3.html], a lot of work has gone into “reprogramming” adult cells to function like an embryonic stem cell.

3. Finally, if you think about it, the hullabaloo made over “pluripotency" is wrong on a number of counts. The pluripotency found in ESCs is characterized by a chaotic development into a variety of cell types at one time—a.k.a tumors! 

Adult stem cells, by contrast, generally don’t pose that problem. They quietly take up residency and make whatever cell type has been lost or battered. In a word it's actually better in therapies to have a stem cell that will make only the type of cell you need.

The crux of the comeback for ESCs proponents is that, well, then you would need a different stem cell for each major type of cells. And that for those adult tissues that don't have their own tissue-specific stem cells, you will need something that is truly "pluripotent" (ESCs), stem cells that can “make anything.”

But with stem cells now being found in more and more non-embryonic tissues (liver, fat, brain, amniotic fluid, baby teeth, etc., etc.), where is the need for one cell that makes every other cell?

Education is a slow, slow process, as you know better than most anyone. But keep at it. The truth will win out, provided we continue to be its unflagging champions!

If you have any comments or questions, please write Dave Andrusko at daveandrusko@hotmail.com.

Part One