Stem Cell Research: Boon or Bane

President George W. Bush has vetoed legislation for the second time that would have allowed the use of federal funds to support embryonic stem cell research. “Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical – and it is not the only option before us,” said Bush and asserted, “If this legislation became law, it would compel American taxpayers for the first time in our history to support the deliberate destruction of human embryos. I made it clear to Congress and to the American people that I will not allow our nation to cross this moral line.”
However those who oppose the President on this issue say that embryonic stem cells research holds potential to battle diseases like diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, heart disease, stroke, arthritis, burns and spinal cord damage. They say that Bush failed to direct the full force of American scientific ingenuity towards responsible, life-saving medical research for the sake of pandering to a narrow segment of his political base.
Proponents of Bush counter by pointing out that the President issued an executive order to the National Institutes of Health asking scientists to pursue research on stem cells that “are derived without creating a human embryo for research purposes or destroying, discarding, or subjecting to harm a human embryo or fetus.”
Most adult cells in the body have a fixed role which cannot be changed. For example, an adult liver cell cannot be changed to perform as a heart cell. Stem cells are however different because of their pluripotent nature. These cells are typically taken from lab-created embryos that are just four or five days old and as they are at an early stage of development, they have the ability to turn into many different types of cells. Scientists believe that this ability can be utilised to turn stem cells into a super “repair kit” for the body, wherein stem cells may be possibly used to generate healthy tissue to replace those either damaged by trauma or by disease. Stem cells are also useful to test the effects of experimental drugs.
To understand the Islamic perspective towards stem cell research, let us look at some of the questions posed by Dr. Imran Siddiqi, a Ph.D. in Genetics, son of Dr Muzammil Siddiqui, former head of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).
Q1 ) Should an embryo, which is formed within a few days after an artificial fertilisation and is not yet in the womb of its mother, be considered a human being, with all the rights of a human being?
According to the Shari’ah, we should make a distinction between actual life and potential life. Also we should make a clear distinction between the fertilised ovum in the dish and the fertilised ovum in the womb of its mother. Indeed an embryo is valuable. It has the potential to grow into a human being, but it is not yet a human being. Similarly there is big difference in having something in a test tube or dish or something in the body of a human being. As mentioned above, these embryos were developed initially in the laboratory solely for the sake of reproduction and, due to limitations of the in-vitro fertilisation technique, they were produced in excess of what was required for this purpose. As a result, the remaining embryos would have either been frozen indefinitely or destroyed. If these embryos were treated as full human, it would have been forbidden to produce them in excess and to destroy them later. No one treats them as humans. Destroying such embryos is not called and cannot be called abortion. We disagree with the Catholic position that this is “equivalent to infanticide”. Muslim jurists have made a clear distinction between the early stages of pregnancy (first 40 days) and its later stages. It is mentioned that if someone attacks a pregnant woman and aborts her baby in the early stages of her pregnancy, that person’s punishment will be less than that of the person who does that during full pregnancy. And if he kills the child after the birth, then he is liable to be punished for homicide.
Q2 ) Is it acceptable by Shariah to destroy an embryo for the sake of research, if it can potentially cure many otherwise fatal diseases?
Our answer is that the embryo in this stage is not human. It is not in its natural environment, the womb. If it is not placed in the womb it will not survive and it will not become a human being. So there is nothing wrong in doing this research, especially if this research has a potential to cure diseases. However, it is important that we establish strict rules against the misuse of embryos. Research on embryos has the potential for misuse, for instance in regards to the donors of these cells, and we should anticipate what these misuses might be and establish safeguards against them. For example, doctors might have infertility patients go through extra cycles of ovulation just so they can obtain more embryos or they might pay women to produce embryos or the embryos might be obtained without the consent of the donors. In making rules the authorities should also clarify that there is a difference between the use of “spare” embryos from in-vitro fertilisation procedures which would be destroyed regardless, as compared to the deliberate production of embryos for stem cell research. Each year thousands of embryos are wasted in fertility clinics around the world. Such embryos should not be wasted; they should be used for research. It is also good to encourage the research on the alternative: to use adult stem cells instead of embryonic or foetal stem cells. This would be much less controversial. However, it seems from the discussion of the experts in the field that adult stem cells are not nearly as useful as embryonic stem cells in their ability to give rise to different cell types and would therefore not be as applicable in treating many diseases.
Dr Imran makes the following recommendations:
1. It is claimed by the experts in the field that the research on stem cells has great potential to relieve human disease and suffering. If this is the case then it is not only allowed but obligatory (fard kifayah) to pursue this research.
2. The use of embryonic stem cells should be very heavily limited, by confining it to the isolation of stem cells from frozen embryos that were created for the purpose of in-vitro fertilisation and would otherwise have been destroyed. In addition, full consent must be obtained from the donors, and there must be safeguards against monetary compensation to embryo donors and against the creation of embryos in excess of what is required for in vitro fertilisation.
3. Perhaps research using stem cells derived from adults will eventually prove to be most promising. We should encourage further research on the use of adult stem cells, to the point where it will be unnecessary to use embryos for this purpose. Specifically, we should find better ways to isolate existing stem cells in the human body.
Dr Imran’s opinion is definitely not the last word on such a delicate yet important issue. More debate and discussion is always welcome.