Scientists Remove Stem Cells from Embryos without Killing Them

I’ve still got an long essay on stem cells in the wings, but couldn’t help highlighting this story: researchers have perfected a method by which stem cells can be removed from developing embryos without inevitably preventing them from developing further.  Pragmatically, this is a hopeful step towards allowing important research to proceed without pissing off large portions of the country.  In terms of science, though, I’d say it’s another pretty dramatic demonstration of how wrong many of the “embryos are morally important people from conception” are about the reality of human reproduction, which is endlessly more complex and ambiguous than this position can account for.

This particular story continues to drive home the point that we’re looking here at a biologic process for building human beings, not the human beings themselves.   That construction process can be stalled or hindered or stopped, but the fact that the cells involved are genetically homo sapien, and that they are playing out instructions on how to build a person, just aren’t compelling reasons to view the process and a rather meager amount of the necessary raw materials as being the end result themselves, any more than a set of blueprints and a hammer are a house.

As the story notes, there is also the question of whether the removed cells would themselves be capable of growing into new people: a point I’ve raised several times in the case of the supposedly more politically-correct adult stem cells.  Reproduction is a particular cellular process, not a spark of magic.  The magic is the final set of functions this process achieves: the feeling, caring, hoping that beings with brains can experience.  A cell alone, nor even a group of them organized into an embryonic template, simply isn’t the same sort of being.

Advertisements

5 Responses to Scientists Remove Stem Cells from Embryos without Killing Them

  1. staticity says:

    Do you agree with coloning?

  2. Bad says:

    I don’t “agree” or “disagree” with it, in and of itself. Cloning is simply an artificial way of producing twins, and there’s nothing good or bad about genetically identical people: they are just more people. My objections to various reproductive technologies come when technologies cause hurt and harm to beings that experience hurt and harm. It’s certainly possible to imagine scenarios in which cloning causes harm, but also scenarios in which it does not. I’d focus on making sure the former are prevented in their own right, rather than attacking cloning as a whole.

  3. lejr says:

    Great response to the article. Your views on life got me pondering. Many philosophers and psychologists (Like Locke and Freud) have agreed on the experiential development of a being. A person is defined by his/her experiences over the course of their life, not by the organization of cells as you described.

    In my opinion most people have been misled by the definition of one’s disposition or even the nature of a soul. One’s tendencies and behaviors are created after the fact.

    Again great writing.

  4. Hello! I just would like to give a big thumbs up for the wonderful info you’ve got here on this post. I will be coming back to your blog for much more soon.

  5. If you would like to obtain much from this post then you have to apply these methods to your won web site.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: