Embryonic Stem Cells Are Here to Stay.

Science/Business | Evan Safi | September 21st, 2023

The human body, a complex system composed of 79 organs and 206 bones, was at one point simply a cluster of these very unique cells called embryonic stem cells (ESCs). When an egg is fertilized, human embryonic development begins, and after about five days, a ball called a blastocyst is formed. Embryonic stem cells can be found inside the blastocyst, and after two more days, they differentiate into the three embryonic layers: the ectoderm, endoderm, and mesoderm, which then form all the organs and tissues in the body. However, all of the embryonic stem cells disappear after this, and everything else becomes somatic cells. Unlike embryonic stem cells, which can differentiate into any cell, somatic cells have specialized functions, for example, blood cells, skin cells, and tissue cells. 

When scientists realized that embryonic stem cells essentially create every organ and tissue in the body, they started researching them to see if they could manipulate the stem cells to create their own artificial organs and tissues. This research has been ongoing since 1998, and scientists have discovered countless ways stem cells can be used, ranging from helping with diabetes, growing organs, or curing tumors. 

However, there has been a lot of controversy surrounding the use of embryonic stem cells in research because of the method to obtain embryonic stem cells. The embryo must be five days old in order to harvest the cells. At this stage of development, the embryo has all 46 chromosomes, which is why many religious groups object to this practice.  In fact, at one point, the harvesting of stem cells was so opposed that President Bush banned federal funding for laboratories that fertilize embryos for the purpose of procuring their ESCs. Because of the decreased funding, it became harder for scientists to study embryonic stem cells and make new breakthroughs. This has brought up the argument about whether or not embryonic stem cell research should be encouraged and funded. Although embryonic stem cell research raises a moral opposition as to how they are extracted, they have so many potential benefits, and if their research is supported more,  incredible breakthroughs could be made. Despite its moral and ethical drawbacks, embryonic stem cell research should be funded and encouraged because of its great potential to cure various diseases, conditions, and injuries. 

For years, scientists have been making many discoveries and promises about the potential benefits of stem cells, many of which include better treatments for diabetic people. A common complication related to diabetes is diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN), which affects about 50% of people with diabetes. DPN is notorious for causing foot infections and ulcers that may result in foot amputation. The cause of DPN is peripheral nerve dysfunction, which is essentially when peripheral nerves become damaged. Because the cause of DPN has to do with nerves, scientists have looked to embryonic stem cells to see if they can contribute to neuronal survival. A group of studies show that ESCs can differentiate into different cells with “morphological and molecular characteristics of myelinating Schwann cells.” For context, these cells stimulate neuronal growth and can be used to repair them. This would help those that suffer from DPN because it's a condition that affects one’s nerves, so if ESCs can be used to repair these nerves, then one of the most devastating complications of diabetes can be cured. Essentially, because ESCs can be manipulated into any type of cell, they can be used to fix grave conditions such as DPN.  However, they cannot be used to treat DPN right now because no “available research shows the use of ESC for treating DPN,” and no clinical trials have been conducted due to strong ethical objections. If more time and money are put into the research of ESC to treat DPN, then it is very possible that this detrimental disease can have a cure. But for this to happen, people will need to overlook the harm of ESCs and look at their vast realm of benefits.

Curing DPN is just one of the many uses ESCs could have. Stem cells have shown that they can differentiate into cardiac disease phenotypes and help patients with cardiovascular disease. In addition, another place where ESC can have a great impact is the repair of tendons. 

A very common injury that is usually related to sports is tendinopathy, when one’s tendons are unable to heal due to continuous overload. “Tendinopathy is a clinical condition widely distributed around the globe” and currently has no definitive treatment. Tendon injuries are so prevalent, in fact, that “[i]n the United States, the cost of tendon injury treatment reaches 30 billion U.S. dollars annually, and in Europe, it reaches more than 115 billion Euros per year.” Even though this is such a common injury, no treatment methods are guaranteed to bring the tendon back to its original strength. Athletes are greatly affected by this the most because their performance can be restricted significantly by just one injury. This is because tendons are unable to repair themselves effectively “given the[ir] low cell density, low vascularity, and low metabolic activity of tendon tissue.” While searching for a solution to this widespread problem, scientists found that embryonic stem cells could very well be a viable treatment option. Since ESCs can differentiate into any cell type, they can transform into tenocytes, which make up about 95% of tendon tissue. “Moreover, they secrete paracrine factors and exert immunomodulatory effects for boosting tendon healing.” However, just like DPN, ESCs are not yet ready to be used to heal tendons because more conclusive research and testing are needed. While scientists have done enough research to determine that it is possible for stem cells to help with tendon repair, there have yet to be any trials done on them. There are many reasons for this, including the moral dilemma behind embryonic stem cells, and in order for this research to be able to progress, these barriers holding it back must be broken. Tendon-related injuries are one of the most common among athletes, and a solution to it would be groundbreaking. However, in order to reach that point, scientists must be able to conduct trials and further their understanding of tendon repair. However, sidestepping moral boundaries is not always a great idea, so it is still important to understand the argument the opposition has.

Since the process of obtaining embryonic stem cells requires the fertilization of an embryo, many moral and ethical concerns have been raised about their usage in research. Although stem cells are extracted from a five to seven-day-old embryo, people still voice their disapproval that the embryo has the potential to develop into a human being. The biggest reason for this is because “biologically, every embryo -- with its 46 human chromosomes containing the full genetic code -- represents a human life”. Because of this fact, “Congress banned federal funding for research involving the destruction of human embryos beginning in 1996”. Although it is true that embryos are being destroyed for their stem cells, these embryos are only a cluster of cells that have not even been differentiated yet. At the point when the embryos are harvested, it is literally just a ball of cells. In addition, embryonic stem cell funding was banned when abortion was still legal, and abortions would be performed after months of embryonic development. In 2005 and 2007, Congress looked back on this ban and decided that embryonic stem cell research would be fine only with donated embryos, but “President Bush used his veto power to prevent the bills from becoming law.” Because of these bans, federal funding for embryonic stem cell research is still banned, and labs can only receive funding from private donors. 

Another argument that people have come up with against embryonic stem cell research is that it is dangerous to women. Many women's rights groups have objected to stem cell research because it increases the demand for eggs, and extracting eggs can be dangerous for women. In order to extract an egg, women are given hormones that enlarge the uterus, then a needle is used to extract the egg. Although this seems like a pretty safe and straightforward procedure, the American Journal of Medical Science claims that “as many as 10 percent of egg donors can develop ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.” Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome “affects blood flow to the ovaries and can lead to potentially life-threatening blood clots.” Since one research project can require thousands of eggs, women's activists claim that these researches are putting thousands of women at risk. Although stem cell research does fuel the egg donation industry, women still get to choose whether or not they want to donate eggs. The risks of egg donation are made clear to women before they donate, and if they still want to go through with it, then that is their choice. The bottom line is that stem cell research cannot be blamed for hurting women by using their donated eggs because those women made the choice to donate them. 

Another reason why people disapprove of stem cell research is that “proponents of stem cell research have shown a tendency to focus on the positive aspects while avoiding any examination of the failures and side effects of the experiments.” While it is true that researchers tend to only make the breakthroughs and discoveries they have made public rather than their failures, this does not discredit their findings. Many critics also claim that stem cell researchers say many great things about the potential of stem cells but have yet to use them for any medical purpose. However, stem cells cannot be used medically yet because they’re still a relatively new concept. Scientific research can require years and years of research, and conclusive applications can take decades to develop with something as complex as stem cells. However, this does not mean that stem cell research should be halted because results may take longer to develop, in fact, the opposite should be done. If more resources and funding are put into stem cell research, then the results and applications can come faster. However, since it is unlikely that critics will approve of researchers using embryonic stem cells,  scientists have been pushed toward using induced pluripotent stem cells, artificial embryonic stem cells made without an embryo.

Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS) are reprogrammed adult cells and function like stem cells; they are capable of differentiating into all 200 cell types. iPS cells have been used in many laboratories and could be a controversy-free solution to the embryonic stem cell crisis.  In 2006, Professor Yamanaka from Japan discovered a method to turn somatic cells from adults back into stem cells with embryonic stem cell properties. These stem cells are thus capable of forming all 200 cell types, just like the embryonic stem cells, but with the great advantage that no embryos are needed for these cells. Professor Yamanaka won the Nobel Prize in 2012 for this discovery. Today, there are many methods for making iPSs, and although they are not technically embryonic stem cells, they act just like them and even have some benefits over them. One of the biggest concerns with embryonic stem cells is that they are susceptible to hyperacute and acute rejection, which is when the body rejects transplanted organs and cells. ESCs are prone to this because they are cells from other people, so there's a chance that one’s body could reject them. However, with iPSs, they are derived from one’s own cells, so they cannot be rejected by the body. This prevents donors from needing to take immunosuppressive drugs in order to accept a transplant. Despite this, iPSs come with their own set of problems. Since they are reprogrammed cells, “undesirable integration of viral genetic material into [the] genome” can occur, letting unwanted viruses into the body. However, iPSs were discovered a little over ten years ago, so they are still very young and are constantly being refined. Since they are still young, iPSs cannot replace ESCs, but using both can make the research process much more efficient. 

Through extensive research and many tests in the lab, scientists can confidently say that stem cell research has the potential to take off if more time is put into it. Stem cells are something that can really change the world, and because of the tremendous change they can have in medicine, nothing should come in the way of their research. Stem cell studies have shown that they are capable of curing many conditions and health issues, but more research must be conducted in order to apply these findings. Even though embryonic stem cell usage has moral concerns, these can be overlooked because of the massive benefit they can provide society. If stem cell research is fully funded and supported, there will be no more restraint on the effects it can have on the world.