Skin cell breakthrough: "new method includes risky steps, like introducing a cancer gene"

QUESTION: In all the excitement about "quelling the ethical debate" over stem cell research, i.e. placating religious fundamentalists more concerned about a cell than a suffering human, is this "catch" being overlooked?

"The reprogrammed skin cells may yet prove to have subtle differences from embryonic stem cells that come directly from human embryos, and the new method includes potentially risky steps, like introducing a cancer gene. But stem cell researchers say they are confident that it will not take long to perfect the method and that today’s drawbacks will prove to be temporary....

(Dr. Thomson) and Dr. Yamanaka caution, though, that they still must confirm that the reprogrammed human skin cells really are the same as stem cells they get from embryos. And while those studies are under way, Dr. Thomson and others say, it would be premature to abandon research with stem cells taken from human embryos. Another caveat is that, so far, scientists use a type of virus, a retrovirus, to insert the genes into the cells’ chromosomes. Retroviruses slip genes into chromosomes at random, sometimes causing mutations that can make normal cells turn into cancers.

One gene used by the Japanese scientists actually is a cancer gene.

The cancer risk means that the resulting stem cells would not be suitable for replacement cells or tissues for patients with diseases, like diabetes, in which their own cells die. But they would be ideal for the sort of studies that many researchers say are the real promise of this endeavor — studying the causes and treatments of complex diseases."

QUESTION: Are we just seeing a political issue "defused"?

"The need to destroy embryos has made stem cell research one of the most divisive issues in American politics, pitting President Bush against prominent Republicans like Nancy Reagan, and patient advocates who hoped that stem cells could cure diseases like Alzheimer’s. The new studies could defuse the issue as a presidential election nears.

Researchers and ethicists not involved in the findings say the work, conducted by independent teams from Japan and Wisconsin, should reshape the stem cell field. At some time in the near future, they said, today’s debate over whether it is morally acceptable to create and destroy human embryos to obtain stem cells should be moot.

'Everyone was waiting for this day to come,' said the Rev. Tadeusz Pacholczyk, director of education at the National Catholic Bioethics Center. 'You should have a solution here that will address the moral objections that have been percolating for years,' he added. The White House said that Mr. Bush was 'very pleased' about the new findings, adding that 'By avoiding techniques that destroy life, while vigorously supporting alternative approaches, President Bush is encouraging scientific advancement within ethical boundaries.'"

These quotations are from NYT, page one, lead: Scientists Bypass Need for Embryo to Get Stem Cells
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/21/science/21stem.html?ref=todayspaper

Just a method to placate the ravings of lunatic religious fanatics. If only "christians" loved children as much as they love blastocyts.

Lunatic logic: this is a good thing because you have to be born before you get cancer.

I believe that the article I read tried to make that point. Embryonic stem cells have their drawbacks too, but if we cannot work with them, we cannot attempt to correct these problems. I agree with your point though. Certain people will jump on this great news and seize it to say "see, we should stop all embryonic stem cell research". This is good news, but we may be passing up great opportunities by ignoring embryonic stem cells. Thankfully though, while the U.S. may not pursue this research, at least other countries will.

the ethical debate can go hang.

is because the "new" embryonic cells are now a genetic match. Using stem cells from embryos always posed the difficulty of rejection.

like diabetes, cystic fibrosis, and lupus and other autoimmune disorders won't benefit from this approach.

At least, not without some major gene jockeying.