Stem Cell Research: Fact and Fiction

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Stem cells have become the superstars of this election season, with their profiles raised by celebrities and ad campaigns. But this has led to the propagation of certain myths surrounding the issue. An interview with Jesse Reynolds, spokesman for the Center for Genetics and Society, shed some light on the realities of the issue. The center conducts policy research and advocacy on issues surrounding genetics.

Fiction: Embryonic stem cell research is illegal in the United States.

Fact: All forms of embryonic stem cell research are legal at the federal level, but President Bush has cut funding for such initiatives. South Dakota is the only state bans embryonic stem cell research in all its forms, and about a half dozen states ban research cloning. For more information on the specific legalities, visit the website of National Conference of State Legislators.

Fiction: Embryonic stem cell research destroys embryos.

Fact: “Almost all embryonic stem cell research uses embryos left over from [in vitro fertilization] clinics that would effectively be destroyed anyway,” Reynolds told Mother Jones. However, if more labs were to develop cloning of embryos for their stem cells, eggs would be required. Unlike embryos, eggs cannot be frozen – although researchers have been working on the technology. Some opponents of stem cell research like Patricia Heaton are worried that women may be exploited for their eggs. While many pro-life groups are also opposed to stem cell research for the reason that it is destroying embryos, other groups that are pro-choice have expressed concerned over the collecting of women’s eggs. These include the Center for Genetics and Society, the California Nurses Association, and Planned Parenthood Affiliates of CaliforniaEconomic incentives might be offered to have women take hormones to produce eggs that can be extracted for research purposes.

Fiction: All scientists interested in this type of research want to clone embryos.

Fact: According to the Center for Genetics and Society, only about a half a dozen labs in the United States are working on developing stem cells from cloned embryos. “The cloning is a small part of [embryonic] stem cell research and it’s at a very early stage. There are no therapies from it or from any other form of stem cell research,” said Reyolds. But Reynolds also pointed out that cloned embryos could be created to isolate more specific genes.

Fiction: By using stem cells, scientists could develop cures for diseases within the next few years.

Fact: Any type of clinical trial is actually about 15 years away, with another five year waiting period before medications would be prescribed. “We’re not talking about the next political cycle,” said Reynolds.

Fiction: Stem cell research offers a guaranteed cure for everything from cancer to Alzheimer’s.

Fact: As a relatively common disease with very grave effects, Alzheimer’s has a high media profile in the stem cell debate. But, despite Ron Reagan’s appeals for stem cell research on behalf of people who suffer from the same disease as his late father, a cure is not assured through the controversial technology.

According to Reynolds, researchers are much closer to cures for diabetes than they are to cures for Alzheimer’s through stem cell therapy. “I’m yet to see researcher as opposed to a research advocate assert that it’s on a short list,” said Reynolds.

Fiction: Certain opponents of stem cell research point out that further advances have been made in adult stem cell therapy than embryonic or other forms.

Fact: “It’s tricky because opponents of [embryonic] stem cell research like to point out that alternatives exist and the therapies are much further along,” said Reyolds. “That is something along the lines of what is called a red herring.” Adult stem cells are used in procedures such as bone marrow transplants which have been done since 1968. The first stem cell line was created and patented in 1998 by James Thompson, a professor at the University of Wisconsin. “All born humans have stem cells in them that are less ethically problematic but are also less powerful,” said Reyolds.

–Caroline Dobuzinskis

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate