|
the Stem Cell Page time and ignorance are the enemies |
|
On Election Day, November 7, 2006, Missourians led the nation |
|
- by Pat Jackson
November 16, 2006
Good people were moved by faith and love on both sides of the stem cell initiative debate. Good people were convinced there must have been something sinister about an attempt to amend the Missouri Constitution, especially because there was a lot of money backing the initiative at the very outset. An elderly couple placed their money, like a large wager, on the citizens of Missouri. Thank God they bet to win. It took every penny of their donations, the race went down to the wire, and the win was by a nose. It is none the less an overwhelming victory, even though they may not live to see results. I am a member of the original patient families who went to hear testimony and testify in Jefferson City. We understood that ours was a reactive response to an effort already underway in Missouri to criminalize any participation in research, cures and therapies that was or would be conducted legally elsewhere if the process of SCNT was involved. I listened to that testimony in Jefferson City several years ago. I was a pro-life Republican and the mother of a child with juvenile diabetes. There were scientists and doctors in favor of the research. There were ethical experts declared to have nothing to gain from opposing the research. It was suggested that the scientists were biased by their stake in the wealth the new research could bring. The ethicist quoted below wrote a book on ethics, and the existence of the book itself qualified him as an ethics expert. I wish I had written down the man’s name, or the book title. Personal gain from book sales wasn’t mentioned. The question was asked, “If you left the cells of a fertilized egg in a dish, and “fed” them a nutritional mix to sustain them over a period of time, would they start to grow arm buds, leg buds, and the other components we recognize as a human being?” The ethical expert said, “Yes, the cells in the dish will develop arm buds, leg buds, and a beating heart.” The scientists laughed out loud. One turned to the ethicist and said he couldn’t believe the man said that, as there was no possible way for the cells to develop. Because of the womb’s unique hormonal content, there is an interactive response that allows the egg to implant and the cells to receive instructions to differentiate into the specialized cells that become a human form. Absent that combination, cells in a dish are what they are: undifferentiated cells in a dish. I watched the ethicist. He could have said, “Really? I didn’t know that,” and learned something with the rest of us. Instead, he stated that he understood the question to mean that the unique hormonal content present in a womb would be provided as part of the “nutritional mix” within the dish. We were there to seek the truth. The bottom line was and remains that cells in a dish can’t do anything they aren’t instructed to do, and they receive no instruction unless human intention and action are applied to them. Therein lies their potential. The second question that interested me is: could an SCNT egg make a human cloned baby? The ethicist claimed the SCNT egg was identical to a fertilized egg. The scientists explained with a visualization we could understand: the fuse box in your home. The fuse box contains a number of switches for the electric circuits that send electricity to various locations in your home, and you flip the switches to control the flow of electricity to each location. Chromosomes in an egg were compared to the switches. The egg and sperm are germ cells with 23 chromosomes. Somatic cells are all other body cells, and have 46 chromosomes. When an egg is fertilized by a sperm, there is a precise sequence in which the switches flip. That is the effect of DNA recombining. The switch sequence controls the flow of information which gives instruction to the cells. When the egg is stripped of its nucleus, and a nucleus is added from a somatic cell, the egg is then chemically or electrically stimulated to begin cell replication. The switches do not follow the precise pattern that recombinant DNA follows. That is why it took over 250 tries to make a single Dolly the Sheep, why Dolly was not healthy, and why Dolly died young. Scientists testified that they believed it to be unlikely that we could ever produce a human baby by this process. They stated that any attempt to do so was widely perceived to be a cruel and unethical act, as it was known that the result would not have the benefit of the precise and complete recombination sequencing of information. They strongly opposed it. It was clear that the scientists believed the SCNT eggs to be very different from those resulting from fertilization, though upon microscopic examination they may give the appearance of being the same. All of the genetic information may be present, but the order which gives it meaning would not. There was also discussion of the difference between adult and embryonic stem cells. On this the scientists were also clear. Adult stem cell research had been going on for 50 years and should continue, but adult stem cells had limits to what they could be and do. It appeared that the potential of the embryonic cells was to become any cell type we could learn to direct them to become, with the possibility of being a tissue match for patients. The research was in its very infancy, and deserved its own 50-year window to develop accordingly. It was also clear that only undifferentiated tissues are considered embryonic. Also in those early years, to be able to testify meaningfully myself, I took a class in Jefferson City offered by the Eagle Forum. Remember, I was a pro-life Republican when I began this educational process, with an investment in understanding whether this could help my son or not. My husband was already well informed, having spoken with numerous doctors about the research. Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research was the testimony topic. Senator Matt Bartle himself came in to provide information to our class of about 60, all presumed to be pro-life Republicans. Senator Bartle began by telling our class that we had to change the definition of when life begins, because “scientists found a way around conception.” It had been accepted by the pro-life community that the moment a fertilized egg implants in a womb, this is a human life. The new definition had to include any egg, any where, whether it was fertilized or not, as long as it had a full compliment of 46 chromosomes. I think that is interesting for a number of reasons. One is that the opposition to the research keeps trying to tell the world that we are clouding the issue with changing definitions. The ballot language of Amendment 2 was written to convey in meaningful terms what is accepted and what is not accepted as the research proceeds. At its core was the universal position that nobody wants a human Dolly. To attempt to make a human Dolly has been clearly banned, and for that Missouri should be commended. There could have been definitions written into the initiative that would have distinguished between therapeutic and reproductive cloning, then banned reproductive cloning and allowed therapeutic cloning. The same people who are against it now would be against it then, as they believe any egg with 46 chromosomes is the moral equivalent of themselves. Then-Congressman Jim Talent and an aide met with my husband and diabetic son in Washington, DC and the subject of their discussion was the Brownback Bill. Talent was a co-sponsor. Christopher Reeve, an advocate for SCNT research, was paralyzed and in a wheelchair. My husband explained to Jim Talent that if the Brownback Bill became law and Christopher Reeve were to fly to Israel for an embryonic stem cell treatment that allowed him to step off the plane, cured, in these United States, he would be arrested as a criminal. Talent said, “No, I don’t think it does that.” His own aide said, “Um, yes sir, it does.” Remember that Christopher Reeve was still alive. Fast forward: it was not until this year, 2006, when Claire McCaskill announced her support of Embryonic Stem Cell Research that Jim Talent removed his Brownback co-sponsorship. I have heard the science. I have confronted the facts, the truth, and the experts. I have seen their acceptance of the role doctors, scientists, and technicians in white coats are playing, and it is not God. They observe cells in a lab, uncombined and combined, and have not declared themselves responsible for bestowing life. They simply believe that without a womb, creation of a human life is not possible. Senator Bartle told my class life used to begin in a womb, until scientists found a way around that. The Missouri Roundtable for Life would have you believe what the scientists did was to conspire to get women to give them eggs so they could kill them, but because they can’t say that, they merely pretend to want to alleviate human suffering. Leaders in positions of trust have led the charge to suggest the worst of all possible dark and sinister intentions motivate this search for cures. Many church leaders gathered their faithful in fear and prayer, but not as we are directed to pray in Matthew 6:5-13, understanding that our Father knows what we need before we ask Him. They led the faithful to pray for the defeat of Amendment 2. We voted. His Will be done. For how could it be otherwise?
—— To be notified by email of new editorials, CLICK HERE —— |
|
To contact us: Click Here |