Important updates at the end

Stem cell treatments could unlock a host of new therapies which could turn the tide on many of our toughest diseases. Basically the idea is to do a cell transplant so that genetic defects can be corrected with an infusion of new DNA or of new cells. The problem is that such a new concept in medicine, going well beyond the limb, tissue and organ transplants of today, will have all the challenges those therapies have plus many new ones. The recent Michael J Fox ad for the Democrat in MO has brought this promise and the frauds surrounding it into focus this election. So I am going to do another one of my long posts on a matter I know because it is right up my ally as a biologists and an engineer. Stem Cell research is the epitome of bio-engineering. It is an effort to manipulate life on a scale that is like nothing seen before. And no one is explaining this to the American people they way it needs to be explained. I will attempt to give it a shot.

I will do the science of the challenge, address the science and ethics of Embryonice Stem Cell Research (ESCR) and the killing of human beings, and the snake oil sales pitch that is being hoisted on America. I have to jump from one to the other, but these are the three problems with the debate today. And let me begin with the snake oil salesmen. Micheal J Fox is like so many people facing a terrible and uncorrectable change in their life. He wants out of it. He wants to change course. And he is desparate to try whatever he can to avoid the fate ahead of him. But he is not the bad person here. The criminals are the scientists who know better, who know Stem Cell research will not come in time to save him, who know that adult stem cell research (ASCR) and therapies have a better chance of success than ESCR, and that humans will be destroyed under ESCR unless we can create a pseudo embryo – but even then these are clones and still humans. It is these experts who are clearly not being honest with Fox, and whom I despise the most. They are lying to Fox and teasing him with false hope. So how do I know these are false hopes? The scope of the problem is so complex it baffles the mind, but there are many facts which are known, and not being explained.

The Anchoress, who I ‘met’ over the ESCR issue, has a good post out today highlighting the problematic results of ESCR to date. Especially the consistent problem of tumors and uncontrolled cell growth in response to ESCR therapies. ESCR is a process to integrate cells and DNA in a manner never before tried, and therefore poses a host of challenges. The challenges are manifold and follow the progression from an undifferentiated stem cell (a neutral cell type) to a target cell (a specific cell type like a liver, skin or nerve cell), and then to target tissue and organs (which are a collection of cell types which create the liver, and skin, etc). The first step is for the stem cell to translate into a target cell type. How this happens is completely unknown at this time. We know the general process involves a sequence of activating and deactivating genes under controlled chemical and evironmental conditions – conditions which change from step to step. But that is like knowing that to do brain surgery we need to open up the skull and repair damaged areas. Generally correct, impossible to implement if that is all we know.

When stem cells start changing in an uncontrolled manner you end up with the tumors and other uncontrolled cell growth. The mixing of the DNA from the embryo – which is a unique human individual – with the DNA of the patient leads to all sort of new genetic combinations that could take the stem cell process into any number of deadly paths. Few living organism just randomly throw the genetic code against anothers in this way (virsus are a telling exception). The process of procreation doesn’t work this way. Scientists know this, some just seem unwilling to fess up how different this Stem Cell process is from the natural one.

Thus the ESRC has to go from a totally neutral state to a target state without any flaws in order to work. With tens of thousands of genes that need to be sequenced correctly, each with all the right conditions going into and out of each step, we are discussing a problem with 100’s of millions of combinations to work out. Each experiment to work out one step could take years. Do the math. We may get lucky, but we need to know a lot more than we do today to safely control this process. That is why most therapies are crap shoots. Throw the stem cells into a mix of chemicals and conditions and throw them into the ‘patient’ and see what happens. What happens is a continous set of surprising and wrong results.

ASCR therapies do not suffer the same challenges. The reason is much of the combinations of sequences have been taken off the table because adult stem cells are partially differentiated. They are somewhere between a target cell and a stem cell. They can still adapt and reconfigure the cell to a new configuration. Basically their cell type is not locked in. This is why these cells tend to show better results. Fewer variables means a faster path to a solution. Math 101. Again, scientist know this to be the case, but somehow the snake oil salesmen never admit this to be the case or they simpy attempt to change the subject. That is why I despise them so much.

But the ethics are another big issue here. In adult stem cell research we use cells from the patient (hence the avoidance of tissue rejection and no risk of combining two DNA codes and creating dangerous, hybrid results). ESCR must destroy a human being, because the term ’embryo’ defines a stage of an individual’s life. Only human individuals have an ’embryonic’ phase. Human cells do not. Tissues and organs do not. You must be a distinct human being to be an embryo. A living organism is made up of cells, which make up tissue and organs and fluids (like blood). Embryos are not a group of cells like skin or an appendix. They are a living organism. Science so dictates and this is not open to debate. One can only display ignorance or duplicity (depending on their education in biology and medicine) to argue otherwise.

Strangely enough, this fact can be proven scientifically in a manner that can hold up in a court of law. The method is the same that is used now to convict or free people of murder and rape and other crimes. It is the DNA test. Since we can extract stem cells we have their DNA, and this can be tested against the mother and the father. And the results will be shockingly clear to those who don’t understand biology – but are obvious to those of us who do understand genetics. There will be not even the slightest possibility that an embryo can be considered part of the mother – its DNA is that different. While syblings can be close matches, children and parents are night an day. Of course half the DNA is identical to the parent, but half is not (being from the other parent). That makes the DNA test not even a close call.

DNA is the ultimate test of an individual, biologically speaking. We talk about species and subspecies, but we use DNA now to show one form of frog found on one side of the Amazon is a different species from an nearly identical frog on the other side. When the older measurements of zoology fall by the wayside (e.g., spine or no spine) in identifying the species of any organism, DNA is the final and arbitrating test. Therefore it is also clear an embryo has to be a human being of the species homo sapien sapien, and nothing else.

The DNA test, legally recognized in any court of law in the land, will demonstrate with 100% repeatability the human embryo is (a) human, (b) a unique individual of the human race, and (c) therefore an idividual human organism – a distinct human being. It is well past time these facts be brought to a court and established as a foundation for all policy issues. Because ignorance is not an excuse. Yes, this will roil the abortion issue, but this fact it is a complicating fact of life doesn’t make it any less true.

So why do these snake oil salesmen lie and say they need to kill human beings to save other (rich) human beings from the ravages of their own genetic defects? The fact is ESRC is not required on any human until they demonstrate they can take a stem cell and transform it safely into a state that will correct a genetic defect. Even a simple one (like baldness). This can be done in any mammal (rats, mice, apes) right now. And that is where is should stay until people demonstrate the can control this mixing of genes at a level were all sorts of bad genetic combinations can arise. But the snake oil salesmen know there is no Intellectual Property worth anything at the animal level. To make the billion$ they want they need to be first to the human therapies And so they want to experiment on humans in the hopes they may trip over the magic solution and fulfill their dreams of playing God (and getting well paid for the gig). That is another aspect of the ESCR battle which needs to be explained. As long as an embryo is not legally considered a human being, that human’s DNA is not considered theirs and untouchable by medical business interests. Another aspect the snake oil salesmen never seem to be able to be up front about. So they kill an embryo and steal the DNA and claim they own it (and all cures associated with it). Is there anything more horrific than this?

The ESRC debate has been floating on a sea of misinformation and myth that rivals the Global Warming debate. In the case of ESCR there is not doubt. Embryo’s are human beings. This can and should be proven in a court of law using the same DNA testing that is common today. Once that lie has been exposed, we can work to expose the other lies being sold by those ESCR proponents waving their cure-all snake oil. We do not want to see more victims like MJ Fox on TV begging for something that doesn’t exist. That ad was a terrible abuse of a suffering human being. This abuse needs to end so people know what the reality is.

Addendum: I want to address two posts from the Anchoress which demonstrate my points. They reflect the difference between the ESCR and ASCR approaches and their totally divergent results. But I tripped over somethings so ironic I had to point it out. The doctor, Steven Goldman, who just made headlines about the tumors caused in ESCR works for the Micheal J Fox foundation [scroll to the bottom]. Tragic irony. So while the easily expected devastating results from ESCR continue, the ASCR results show much more promise (and is an area being investigated by Dr. Goldman as well) and no long term issues. Why? The cells are from the patient so the mixing of DNA cannot cause surprises. ESCR claims embryonic stem cells do not cause tissue rejection. That is because they do not trigger the immune system right away and cause the patient to destroy the alien cells. This could be a good thing or a bad thing, as people with AIDS know. Their defense systems do not trigger either. This means any bad genetic intermixing may take days, months or years to show itself. And once it has survived for any period of time in a human, it can become part of a virus and spread to other humans. We are not knowledgeable enough to play God yet.

Update: It seems the good Dr not only works for the Michael J Fox (and Christopher Reeves) foundation, he is one of those who concurs with my view that the adult stem cell solutions are more manageable because the adult stem cells have progressed through some of their differentiation, but still remain pliable and therefore resources for replacement cells. Dr Goodman has used the gene in stem cells (not the stem cells themselves) which holds their differentiation at bay to create nerve “progenitor” cells that can remain in the precursor state indefinitely. This allows the cells to be suspended in a state indefinitely until they are applied to the patient’s damaged area and make the final transition to a neuron cell and possibly replace damaged cells. Here is his comment about the benefit from this adult stem cell path:

While stem cells receive a great deal of attention as a possible source of life-saving treatments, progenitor cells offer great potential, Goldman says. To be sure, progenitor cells lack a key feature of stem cells: Their potential to become nearly any type of cell. But what progenitor cells lack in potential, they make up for with commitment: They have already “decided” exactly what type of cell to become in the body, an advantage when treating a disease where one specific cell type is at risk. A patient with Parkinson’s disease, for example, may only needs to replace dopamine-producing neurons, while in patients with multiple sclerosis, only cells that produce myelin need be restored.

Clearly a leading neurologists working for Michael J Fox illustrates the fallacy of the ad Fox was in. Fox should be promoting Goodman’s ASCR work more and doing fewer political ads.