According to the Catholic Church, harvesting embryonic stem cells kills the living human embryo. The Church and others oppose the direct destruction of what they deem innocent human life for any purpose, including research [Source: Michigan Catholic Conference Focus, February 2005].

The values of people who hold this view should be respected. However, these embryos are not legally regarded as human beings and fertility clinics routinely discard large numbers of embryos which cannot be used for fertility treatment. As a result, laws that restrict the use of human embryos in medical research do not prevent these embryos from being destroyed or discarded, they only delay medical research. Many people believe that since the decision has already been made to discard these embryos, that it does not make sense to deny their use in medical research that has the potential to help thousands of patients. Many religious traditions consider it immoral not to pursue human embryonic stem cell research because it is immoral not to pursue potentially life-saving treatments.

Polls show most Americans believe that it is ethical to use IVF embryos for the derivation of embryonic stem cell lines and that this type of medical research should be supported. Indeed, the National Academy of Sciences has studied this issue and found that “there is widespread agreement in the international scientific community about the potential value of hES cell research” and they have recommended specific guidelines by which human embryonic stem cells can be derived ethically [Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research, the National Academies Press, www.nap.edu]. These guidelines have been broadly adopted by universities across the United States .

In vitro fertilization also was controversial when it first emerged more than 30 years ago. In the end, there remain some people who are morally opposed to it, but many more consider IVF a “pro-life” practice because it allows people to conceive children who otherwise wouldn't have been able to. For similar reasons, many in the pro-life community also consider embryonic stem cell research to be a pro-life practice. Several prominent conservative Republicans argue it is possible to be both “pro-life” and “pro-stem cell.”

“Stem cell research facilitates life,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), who studied the issue for two years before deciding to aggressively lobby the Bush administration. “Abortion destroys life; this is about saving lives.”

“The most pro-life position would be to help people who suffer from these maladies,” Hatch said. “That is far more ethical than just abandoning or discarding these embryonic stem cells.” For politicians such as Hatch, a Mormon, the decision to break with many of their allies in the antiabortion community was closely tied to the enormous medical potential of embryonic stem cells to treat a wide range of debilitating conditions. Hatch is hardly alone. In recent days, the pro-stem cell contingent has come to include HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson, Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA.), and Sens. Zell Miller (D, GA), Strom Thurmond (R-SC) and Gordon Smith (R-OR). [Source: Ceci Connolly , Washington Post, p. A01 Jul 2, 2001]

For many years, scientists have conducted studies to determine whether the stem cells in tissues have the same developmental capability as embryonic stem cells. The general consensus is that adult/tissue stem cells are less versatile. Scientists think that embryonic stem cells have a much greater potential than adult/tissue stem cells, because embryonic stem cells may develop into every type of cell in the human body. Adult/tissue stem cells, on the other hand, at this time are only able to develop into a limited number of cell types. Embryonic stem cells also apparently continue to divide indefinitely when placed in culture, while this is not the case for adult/tissue stem cells.

Opponents, such as the Catholic Church, note that thousands of lives have been saved by adult/tissue stem cells — most often in the form of bone marrow transplants for leukemia and other conditions (since the bone marrow contains blood-forming stem cells). The danger, according to the Catholic Church, is that this progress toward cures will be halted or slowed by campaigns that divert attention and resources toward embryonic stem cell research [Source: Michigan Catholic Conference Focus, February 2005]. Opponents also say doctors know much more about adult/tissue stem cells and should use federal funds for what's best known.

But the vast majority of scientists say it's not a question of “either” human embryonic stem cell research “or” adult/tissue stem cell research, but a matter of pursuing both and choosing the best cells for each application. Scientists and physicians believe that by learning more about embryonic stem cells that we will discover new ways of treating diseases.

Back To Top

According to the National Institutes of Health (which in the United States is the institution that awards federal scientific grants for all fields of health research), research on both embryonic stem cells and adults stem cells has the potential to revolutionize the practice of medicine and improve the quality and length of life. Given the enormous promise of stem cell therapies for so many devastating diseases, the NIH believes that it is important to simultaneously pursue all lines of research and search for the very best sources of these cells.

Back To Top

Facts and Myths

View The Facts and Myths