The Controversy of Stem Cells

Professor Hui Ye from Loyola University’s Biology Department gave in our Neuro 300 class about the growing field of stem cells and their uses in neuronal cell regeneration. Neurons do no regenerate on their own because once differentiated, they remain in the working phase of the cell cycle unlike other cells which are constantly dying and replicating. After a severe injury, like a car crash, one might find themselves in a vegetative state because of the loss of neurons. Dr. Ye’s work focuses on the mechanisms of actually moving the precursor stem cells to the correct locations in cultured neuronal precursor stem cells from c157b/6  mice.

Obviously, it would only be worthwhile to study the mechanisms of migration in these cells if they were viable for in vivo applications. Currently his work is only in the in vitro stages, however, there has been promise shown in the field in their viability.  As a student working in his lab, I can truly appreciate what he is setting out to do. He is literally figuring out a way to make something move somewhere it does not want to go. Try making a cat go somewhere without a laser pointer.  But then after you get the cat where you wanted it to, you have to see if it stays there and doesn’t run away immediately.

The neuronal progenitor cells theoretically would insert themselves in areas of damage, differentiate into the desired cells, and then perform their functions as if they had never been damaged in the first place. But like all research, stem cells are under a great deal of controversy.  Kristen Phillipkoski, a science editor from Neural Stem Inc., says,  “Neuralstem uses neural rather than embryonic stem cells, and has already seen remarkable success treating ALS (AKA Lou Gehrig's disease) patients, which I wrote about here. Neural stem cells are not completely free of controversy: they are taken from a voluntarily aborted fetus. But embryos are not destroyed in order to obtain them. And Neuralstem's technology allows them to proliferate all the cells they need from a single fetus.”  This hits the heart of the “pro-life” vs. “pro-choice” debate.

In my opinion I am pro-choice because there are circumstances that may necessitate an abortion (this is a whole other argument on its own!) And if there will already be aborted fetuses, we may as well use them for science to help improve the lives of others. In a sense, our work is helping put use to the lives lost due to abortion.

Sources: http://www.neuralstem.com/neuralstem-in-the-news/98-could-this-be-the-end-of-embryonic-stem-cell-research