Real Stem Cell Research

Hello again. I came upon this article and it really made me think. We have been hearing for years that embryonic stem cell research, the kind you actually have to kill an unborn child to do, is going to lead to a new world of medical breakthroughs curing all kinds of diseases. Yet time and time again we see that the real breakthroughs are being done by adult stem cell research, where an adult gives cells from their own bodies to help another human being in need. This is a really touching story about a woman who donated stem cells in her eyes so that her sister could see. It was a huge medical breakthrough. No one is against advancing science or saving lives, and this is a great example of doing this without having to go down that dark road of judging how many lives you must end to do it. Kudos to all the people out there who are doing real stem cell research, and have the courage not to sacrifice human life to do so.

An evening discussing stem cells

Tomorrow evening (October 19) the Toronto Right to Life Association and the University of Toronto Students for Life will be hosting Dr. Clem Persaud at Hart House. He will be discussing stem cell research and how this relates to ethics. Be sure to check it out if you can. Here is the poster:

Adult Stem Cells FTW!

Researchers in Italy have successfully treated dozens of patients, who were blinded as a result of chemical burns, with their own stem cells. The list of potential uses for adult stem cells keeps rising while embryonic stem cells haven’t really hit the mark.

The treatment worked completely in 82 of 107 eyes and partially in 14 others, with benefits lasting up to a decade so far. One man whose eyes were severely damaged more than 60 years ago now has near-normal vision.

In the study, published online by the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers took a small number of stem cells from a patient’s healthy eye, multiplied them in the lab and placed them into the burned eye, where they were able to grow new corneal tissue to replace what had been damaged. Since the stem cells are from their own bodies, the patients do not need to take anti-rejection drugs.

This is another advantage of adult stem cells. The body recognizes the cell already so rejection is not a major factor, unlike embryonic stem cells.

Adult stem cells, which are found around the body, are different from embryonic stem cells, which come from human embryos and have stirred ethical concerns because removing the cells requires destroying the embryos.

Pro-lifers are not against science. As time goes on and more research becomes available adult stem cells will be the difference maker in healing, not embryonic stem cells. Plus they are ethically sound! Win Win!

Who says embryos are not human? Just consult your local embryology textbook

 To follow up on Blaise’s post on Dr. Gerard Nadal, I bring you quotes from regular embryology textbooks that students can purchase at their local university bookstore.  It always seems like people don’t want to say when human life begins.  The funny thing is that the actual experts in embryology have no problem saying when life begins.  But what do they know really?  It’s not like embryologists are interested in science or anything.

Part I:

Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression ‘fertilized ovum’ refers to the zygote.

Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed

This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.

Read the rest here:

http://gerardnadal.com/2010/01/05/the-identity-and-status-of-the-human-embryo/

 Part II:

The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.

The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.

Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).

Read the rest here:

http://gerardnadal.com/2010/01/07/more-from-the-scientific-community-on-the-identity-and-status-of-the-human-embryo/

Pampers Ad Features Babies in the Womb

I’m no fan of the iPad, but this new Pampers ad is pretty great and it’s been making the rounds in pro-life circles.

Jill Stanek provides some context by pointing to an old G.E. ad from 2002 for 4D ultrasounds that apparently raised ire from pro-choicers because… um… I guess… babies?

Neither of these ads are intentionally pro-life, but if you take a look at what “a pregnancy” actually is, it’s hard not to consider what would happen if these children weren’t “wanted.”

(ps don’t buy an iPad)

Amazing Photographs of Unborn Animals

Just as you may have expected, they’re just “blobs of cells.” Except, not at all.

These amazing embryonic animal photographs of dolphins, sharks, dogs, penguins, cats and elephants are from a new National Geographic Documentary called “Extraordinary Animals in the Womb”. The show’s producer, Peter Chinn, used a combination of three-dimensional ultrasound scans, computer graphics and tiny cameras to capture the process from conception to birth. They are the most detailed embryonic animal pictures ever seen.

File this one away under “duh—life begins at conception.”

Citizenship Lessons Teach Children To Respect Living Beings, No Matter How Small

New curriculum guidance in the UK says that citizenship classes should teach respect for tiny, living beings (via ProWomanProLife):

Good citizenship is not just a question of respect for one’s fellow humans, it seems. The government has decreed that children should be taught not to hurt a fly.

New curriculum guidance says citizenship classes should pay due regard to the wellbeing of what it calls “mini-beasts”, including bees, ants and worms.

The classes are part of the “animals and us” section of the primary school citizenship curriculum. It says children can become “active citizens” by learning that “other living things have needs and they have responsibilities to meet them”.

By the age of seven pupils should have learnt that “humans have a responsibility to ensure the wellbeing of animals, including mini-beasts” and will have been told rules for “behaviour in areas where animals live”: for example, “not stamping on insects”.

But don’t tell anyone not to hurt an unborn child! That would be hate and harrassment.

Oh, did we mention life begins at conception?

I wish it didn’t need repeating (but we’ll repeat it until it doesn’t): human life begins at conception.

(via Matthew Warner)

More at abort73.com…

Once Again: Life Begins At Conception

One of the most influence pro-life essays I’ve read was in grade 12 philosophy class, an essay titled Is every human being a person? by Patrick Lee (IIRC).

So, when I see Patrick Lee’s name as one of the authors of this article, I know it’s worth reading.

For people who advocate the killing of embryonic human beings in the cause of biomedical research, the Holy Grail is an argument that would definitively establish that the human embryo, at least early in its development, is not a living human organism and therefore not a human being at all. The problem for these advocates is that all the scientific evidence points in precisely the opposite direction. Modern human embryology and developmental biology have shown that fertilization produces a new and distinct organism: a living individual of the human species in the embryonic stage of his or her development.

Some proponents of embryo-destructive research are willing to face up to these biological facts. They concede that human embryos are living individuals of the human species, but deny that this gives them the moral status of being persons… There is much to be said against this position, but its defects are philosophical, not scientific. Its proponents recognize that there is no Holy Grail out there to find, and they are willing to defend the killing of human embryos while facing up to the biological facts.

Sound familiar?

But then there are the Grail searchers. These people are determined to prove that what modern human embryology has been telling us is wrong, and to this end they scavenge the fields of molecular biology and human genetics.

It’s a worthwhile read, if you have the patience for a thorough debunking of arguments from those who’d like to rewrite biology textbooks to justify abortion (rather than be honest about things).

A human being, from the point of conception

Matthew Warner has a great post over at FallibleBlogma.com outlining the scientific basis of the origin of life. Quite frankly, it’s disappointing that it needs repeating, but some people just don’t want to believe it.

“It’s just a clump of cells.” Mmm… yes, as we all are. But, that there’s a unique human life, a new organism, from the moment of conception is not a matter of debate for any man or woman of science.

“That is, in human reproduction, when sperm joins ovum, these two individual cells cease to be, and their union generates a new and distinct organism. This organism is a whole, though in the beginning developmentally immature, member of the human species. Readers need not take our word for this: They can consult any of the standard human-embryology texts, such as Moore and Persaud’s The Developing Human, Larsen’s Human Embryology, Carlson’s Human Embryology & Developmental Biology, and O’Rahilly and Mueller’s Human Embryology & Teratology.” – Dr. Robert George

Then, this is where the twist usually comes.

At this point in the debate, some try and introduce a separate distinction and question of “personhood.” Aside from this usually being a convoluted way to try and create classes of human beings and that it doesn’t hold up to any consistently logical scrutiny, it’s also not at all a scientific argument. It’s a philosophical one. So it is totally irrelevant to the scientific question of when human life begins.

How often do pro-choicers change the topic mid-debate? It’s important to separate the science from the philosophy. Scientifically speaking, there is no distinction between a human being and a human person.

It’s sad that this needs repeating, but Matthew does a great job of repeating it.