PHIL 12 Lesson 7: Stem Cell and Cloning Research
iPSC
Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells from adult cells are reprogrammed cells (by using an added protein) without embryo use but most scientists argue that both avenues of research needed today.
Are Scientist Playing God? It Depends on Your Religion
"Asian religions worry less than Western religions that biotechnology is about 'playing God,'" says Cynthia Fox, the author of "Cell of Cells," a book about the global race among stem-cell researchers. Most of southern and eastern Asia displays relatively little opposition to either cloned embryonic stem-cell research or genetically modified crops. China, India, Singapore and other countries have enacted laws supporting embryo cloning for medical research (sometimes called therapeutic cloning, as opposed to reproductive cloning intended to recreate an entire human being). Genetically modified crops are grown in China, India and elsewhere. "Most people in Hindu and Buddhist countries," Dr. Silver says, "have a root tradition in which there is no single creator God. Instead, there may be no gods or many gods, and there is no master plan for the universe. Instead, spirits are eternal and individual virtue — karma — determines what happens to your spirit in your next life. With some exceptions, this view generally allows the acceptance of both embryo research to support life and genetically modified crops." By contrast, in the Judeo-Christian tradition, God is the master creator who gives out new souls to each individual human being and gives humans "dominion" over soul-less plants and animals. To traditional Christians who consider an embryo to be a human being with a soul, it is wrong for scientists to use cloning to create human embryos or to destroy embryos in the course of research.
pluripotent
(of an immature or stem cell) capable of giving rise to several different cell types
Sam Harris view: article and film on stem cells
3 day old embryo has 150 cells with no brain/no neurons/no pain. Religious ideology challenges research. A case in point: embryonic-stem-cell research is one of the most promising developments in the last century of medicine. It could offer therapeutic breakthroughs for every human ailment (for the simple reason that stem cells can become any tissue in the human body), including diabetes, Parkinson's disease, severe burns, etc. In July, President George W. Bush used his first veto to deny federal funding to this research. He did this on the basis of his religious faith. Like millions of other Americans, President Bush believes that "human life starts at the moment of conception." Specifically, he believes that there is a soul in every 3-day-old human embryo, and the interests of one soul--the soul of a little girl with burns over 75 percent of her body, for instance --cannot trump the interests of another soul, even if that soul happens to live inside a petri dish. Here, as ever, religious dogmatism impedes genuine wisdom and compassion. A 3-day-old human embryo is a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst. There are, for the sake of comparison, more than 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly. The embryos that are destroyed in stem-cell research do not have brains, or even neurons. Consequently, there is no reason to believe they can suffer their destruction in any way at all. The truth is that President Bush's unjustified religious beliefs about the human soul are, at this very moment, prolonging the scarcely endurable misery of tens of millions of human beings.
Latest Research
3D printing of HESC: fascinating article in lesson plan Ability now to take one cell from embryo without destroying embryo: pre-implantation genetic diagnosis or P.G.D. STAP controversy: In Japan there was research indicating that "cells can be reprogrammed, a phenomenon they call stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency (STAP)... The fate of adult cells can be drastically converted by exposing mature cells to an external stress or injury" (e.g., bacterial toxin, low oxygen or acidic environment).
Richard Dawkin's view on topic of stem cells
Collateral Damage: by-product with greater good; we justify collateral damage in war and real pain incurs there but we should allow it in this research where there is no nervous system/pain but only medical benefits; for every 1 successful pregnancy there is usually 5 miscarriages (nature has its own collateral damage). Remember, he says,3-5 day old embryo not miniature baby but size of pinhead. Collins (Christian and head of Human Genome Research Institute) agrees with Dawkins that research is this field is a good thing. We are not talking miniature babies here. The 'embryos' used for stem cell research are no bigger than a pinhead, and completely lacking in sentience of any kind. The illogical and hypocritical inconsistency between Bush's stance on embryonic stem cell research on the one hand, and on slaughtered and maimed Iraqis and Lebanese on the other, is the subject of this article. It is an inconsistency that you could find only in a mind massively infected with the disease of religion. embryos in stem cell laboratories? Compare it with the pain, misery and bereavement caused by Lebanese and Iraqi deaths and injuries — and of course American, British and Israeli deaths and injuries too. How do those costs and benefits stack up against the corresponding ones for embryonic stem cell research? On the benefit side, there is nearly 100% agreement that the medical benefits of embryonic stem cell research are potentially huge. Not even the most ardent opponents can deny this with any conviction. Even among those who, on moral grounds, prefer the use of adult stem cells, or stem cells obtained from the umbilical cord blood, no knowledgeable opponent denies that, from a purely scientific point of view, there are many purposes for which embryonic stem cells are preferable if not indispensable The embryos that are destroyed in stem cell research are blastocysts consisting of no more than 150 cells. Such a tiny entity, almost too small for us to see, has no nervous system of any kind. Philosophers tell us how difficult it is to know whether a creature such as a lobster feels pain. But it has a substantial nervous system, and many of us feel we should give it the benefit of the doubt — especially as there doesn't seem to be much doubt. But of one thing we can be pretty sure: an entity that lacks a nervous system altogether cannot feel pain. The embryo that dies as collateral damage during stem cell research no more suffers than your hair does when it is cut; the embryo feels no more fear than your toenails do at the menacing approach of the scissors. Large numbers of embryos, in other words, die as collateral damage in any case, side effects of normal, natural attempts to get pregnant.
moral concerns with cloning
Ethical Concerns of Reproductive Cloning: 1. Procedure not safe 2. Psychological harm 3. Objectification of cloned 4. Black market 5. Meglomania 6. Cloning the dead
HESC
Human Embryo Stem Cells on 5th day after fertilization; blastocyst consists of 30-34 cells inside and 200-250 outside.
cloning risks
Reproductive cloning is expensive and highly inefficient. More than 90% of cloning attempts fail to produce viable offspring. More than 100 nuclear transfer procedures could be required to produce one viable clone. In addition to low success rates, cloned animals tend to have more compromised immune function and higher rates of infection, tumor growth, and other disorders. Japanese studies have shown that cloned mice live in poor health and die early. About a third of the cloned calves born alive have died young, and many of them were abnormally large. Many cloned animals have not lived long enough to generate good data about how clones age. Appearing healthy at a young age unfortunately is not a good indicator of long-term survival. Clones have been known to die mysteriously. For example, Australia's first cloned sheep appeared healthy and energetic on the day she died, and the results from her autopsy failed to determine a cause of death. In 2002, researchers at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts, reported that the genomes of cloned mice are compromised. In analyzing more than 10,000 liver and placenta cells of cloned mice, they discovered that about 4% of genes function abnormally. The abnormalities do not arise from mutations in the genes but from changes in the normal activation or expression of certain genes. Problems also may result from programming errors in the genetic material from a donor cell. When an embryo is created from the union of a sperm and an egg, the embryo receives copies of most genes from both parents. A process called "imprinting" chemically marks the DNA from the mother and father so that only one copy of a gene (either the maternal or paternal gene) is turned on. Defects in the genetic imprint of DNA from a single donor cell may lead to some of the developmental abnormalities of cloned embryos.
moral concern with research of stem cells
The moral question is not so much if you should use stem cells but how we get them? Embryonic stem cells are where the controversy lies. Also, a moral concern is the use of animals in stem cell research . The creation of chimeras (animals with human organs) is a moral issue to consider. The ecological ramifications could be disastrous and difficult to control. A hypothetical strain of laboratory mice with enhanced cognitive capabilities could potentially offer a competitive or reproductive advantage over wild type individuals in a given ecosystem, eventually wiping out wild type strains of mouse. The second ethical concern against the use of chimeras is slightly harder to quantify, as it is largely based on fear, speculation, and a healthy dose of science-fiction. How do we deal with the ethical gray area of a hybrid human-animal nervous system? The fear of enhanced chimeric consciousness in animals may be closer than you think. A 2013 study incorporated human glial cells into the central nervous system of mice. The researchers found that many aspects of cognition in the mice were enhanced: long-term potentiation, learning (assessed with maze navigation), object-location memory, and fear conditioning Researchers cannot be completely sure what the each pluripotent stem cell will differentiate into, and where interspecies characteristics may manifest themselves Without requisite limitation and regulation, perhaps the unrestrained creation of chimeras is a line that we should not cross.
difference between iPSC and STAP
There are somatic (building blocks of tissues) and stem cells (repair tissues) in your body. The somatic cells are the ones that are the building blocks of your tissues while the stem cells repair tissues. Scientists recently have been able to take common somatic cells and reprogram them to become artificial embryonic stem cells. 2 ways of making embryonic stem cells... IPS and STAT iPSC or induced pluripotent stem cells are created when new genes are inserted into a somatic cells to transform them into an artificial embryonic stem cell STAP or "Stimulus-Triggered Acquisition of Pluripotency" is when regular somatic cells are exposed to simple stimulus (like an acid bath) to turn them into artificial embryonic stem cells in both instances, more research is clearly needed
cloning types
Three types of cloning: 1. DNA or Gene Cloning: copy isolated genes in lab for study 2. Reproductive Cloning: transfer genetic material from nucleus to egg with no nucleus; then electric current or chemical (such as ionomycin) to stimulate cell division; next transfer to uterus. 100 attempts to get 1-2 viable organisms and then 90% failure with viable organism (pre-mature or unexplainable death). Dolly took 277 tries and then died unexpectedly with no warning. Benefits: may be used to repopulate endangered species 3. Therapeutic Cloning: embryo cloning to harvest stem cells to treat diseases; take stem cells after five days of dividing (blastocyst stage) to make functioning organs with no immune rejection or healthy cells to treat diseases. Pigs to human transfer since compatible. Benefits: fight cancer, Alzheimer, aging process, etc.
Science Friction: Stem Cell Research
about people waiting for cures, people making choices, about science, about brand new discovery that can turn back clock on your cells, could mean end to research using embryonic cells working hard to looking for cures for diseases. body would use stem cells for repair there is no known adult stem sell for treating spinal injuries embryonic stem cells are so valuable because they develop all human cells researchers at harvard think they can use these whole range of stem cells to cure or treat a variety of diseases stem cells are the best promise for new cures to these diseases no go in ireland... causes disruption in embryo. those who are in IVF- fertilization dr antony wolff pioneered IVF in ireland and helped people with infertility embryo needs to be seen in a microscope the fetus is a developed embryo. a doctor sees it not all eggs are perfect, need to collect a lot of eggs multiple pregnancies must be avoided. freeze the embryos and use for future. frozen can be used as embryonic research but not allowed in Ireland the high court believed that embryonic destruction is professional misconduct. potential for making a human, or help people suffering disease seems that human life begins when it is implanted to uterus. we should use these cells, if possible, for stem cell research
CRISPR article
allows scientists to edit genomes with unprecedented precision, efficiency, and flexibility. CRISPR is actually a naturally-occurring, ancient defense mechanism found in a wide range of bacteria. As far as back the 1980s, scientists observed a strange pattern in some bacterial genomes. One DNA sequence would be repeated over and over again, with unique sequences in between the repeats. They called this odd configuration "clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats," or CRISPR.
what are stem cells?
an undifferentiated cell of a multicellular organism that is capable of giving rise to indefinitely more cells of the same type, and from which certain other kinds of cell arise by differentiation.
Bill Nye on loning
coming from one parent sea squirts are the same genes as people, how they are turned on and off dictates to make appearance transcriptor factors turn genes on and off reasons reproductive cloning- takes nucleus and make it think it is a young nucleus... do not know how to do that. nucleus was too old for dolly she died at 7 years, half the age of normal 2 paths- therapeutic and reproductive
Stanford article: main ideas
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stem-cells/ The standard view of those who oppose HESC research is that a human being begins to exist with the emergence of the one-cell zygote at fertilization. At this stage, human embryos are said to be "whole living member[s] of the species homo sapiens ... [which] possess the epigenetic primordia for self-directed growth into adulthood, with their determinateness and identity fully intact" (George & Gomez-Lobo 2002, 258). This view is sometimes challenged on the grounds that monozygotic twinning is possible until around days 14-15 of an embryo's development Some accept that the human embryo is a human being but argue that the human embryo does not have the moral status requisite for a right to life. There is reason to think that species membership is not the property that determines a being's moral status. Some grant that human embryos lack the properties essential to a right to life, but hold that they possess an intrinsic value that calls for a measure of respect and places at least some moral constraints on their use: "The life of a single human organism commands respect and protection ... no matter in what form or shape, because of the complex creative investment it represents and because of our wonder at the divine or evolutionary processes that produce new lives from old ones." Many, if not most, who support the use of human embryos for HESC research would likely agree with opponents of the research that there are some circumstances where the use of human embryos would display a lack of appropriate respect for human life, for example, were they to be offered for consumption to contestants in a reality TV competition or destroyed for the production of cosmetics. Some argue that as long as the decision to donate embryos for research is made after the decision to discard them, it is morally permissible to use them in HESC research even if we assume that they have the moral status of persons. The claim takes two different forms. One is that it is morally permissible to kill an individual who is about to be killed by someone else where killing that individual will help others (Curzer, H. 2004). The other is that researchers who derive HESCs from embryos that were slated for destruction do not cause their death. Instead, the decision to discard the embryos causes their death; research just causes the manner of their death First, one who wants to donate embryos to research might first elect to discard them only because doing so is a precondition for donating them. There could be cases in which one who chooses the discard option would have donated the embryos to other couples were the research donation option not available. The fact that a decision to discard embryos is made prior to the decision to donate the embryos thus does not establish that the embryos were doomed to destruction before the decision to donate them to research was made. Second, a researcher who receives embryos could choose to rescue them, whether by continuing to store them or by donating them to infertile couples. While this would violate the law, the fact that it is within a researcher's power to prevent the destruction of the embryos he or she receives poses problems for the claim that the decision to discard the embryos dooms them or causes their destruction. There is a further concern that research with existing HESCs will result in the future destruction of embryos: Most HESCs are derived from embryos that were created for infertility treatment but that were in excess of what the infertile individual(s) ultimately needed to achieve a pregnancy. The HESCs derived from these leftover embryos offer investigators a powerful tool for understanding the mechanisms controlling cell differentiation. However, there are scientific and therapeutic reasons not to rely entirely on leftover embryos. From a research standpoint, creating embryos through cloning technologies with cells that are known to have particular genetic mutations would allow researchers to study the underpinnings of genetic diseases in vitro. From a therapeutic standpoint, the HESCs obtained from leftover IVF embryos are not genetically diverse enough to address the problem of immune rejection by recipients of stem cell transplants. Recent scientific work suggests it is possible to derive gametes from human pluripotent stem cells. Researchers have generated sperm and eggs from mouse ESCs and iPSCs and have used these stem cell-derived gametes to produce offspring (Hayashi 2011; Hayashi 2012). While it may take several years before researchers succeed in deriving gametes from human stem cells, the research holds much promise for basic science and clinical application. For example, the research could provide important insights into the fundamental processes of gamete biology, assist in the understanding of genetic disorders, and provide otherwise infertile individuals a means of creating genetically related children. The ability to derive gametes from human stem cells could also reduce or eliminate the need for egg donors and thus help overcome concerns about exploitation of donors and the risks involved in egg retrieval.
chimera research
part human/part animal....the goal is to grow human body parts inside animals (pigs). Jan. 24, 2017 it was announced from the Salk Institute in La Jolla that they were successful in creating a pig embryo that contains human cells.
Sam Harris on Stem Cells video
stem cells are promising in biology not being funded at federal level because of religious reasons. if you look at a 3 day embryo. 150 cells it is rather obvious more concerned about killing flies than a 3 day embryo. 3 day embryo is potentially human being everything in your body, cells are potential of a human being embryos can split. morally indefensible. we cant have this dialogue in the way we should if we think the interest of a blastocyst can trump burn 3 year old girl. blinded by religious faith
Robert Lanza Ted Talk: The use of cloning and stem cells to resurrect life
there are 2 ways: 1. cloning there are 2 dozens species that have been cloned 1990s cloned herd of cows two types inter- intra- eggs in same species, cross species to clone cell into another --> used for growing endangered species two genomes- mitochondria genome for energy, maternal egg nuclear genome- makes species technology does work, problems but new technology helps with these you cannot clone from stone extinction is not forever shinya yamanaka discovered ips cells
Clone National Geographic
what will happen if we clone people? genetically enhanced human beings people's opinion- playing god, Hitler aryan beings therapeutic cloning helps with diseases Christopher Reeve superman- is trying to help those with spinal injuries therapeutic and reproductive cloning start the same way- use 100 cells two different paths. tiny embryo= human life or cure to injuries "we need to imagine what its like to be somebody's shoes" "imagine what it is like not to eat on your own or even hug your kids" we can now genetically modify pigs to help people get organs on the transplant list change the genes, rearrange some, etc. first clone, was sea urchins salamanders- two salamaders animals cloning can allow them to die young or grow them too big clones can act differently or look differently
