Does Some Science Shatter Human Dignity?

[Lightkeeper]

By Philip Pullella

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Benedict said on Thursday that embryonic stem cell research, artificial insemination and the prospect of human cloning had "shattered" human dignity.

In an address to members of the Vatican department on doctrinal matters, Benedict said the Church had a duty to defend the "great values at stake" in the field of bioethics.

The speech was the latest in a series in which the conservative Pope has told his listeners that scientific progress should not be accepted uncritically.

Benedict, who headed the same department for years before his election in 2005, said the Church was not against scientific progress but wanted it based on "ethical-moral principles."

He said this included total respect for the human being as a person "from conception until natural death," and respect for the natural transmission of life through sexual intercourse.

Practices like freezing embryos, suppression of embryos in multiple pregnancies, embryonic stem cell research, the prospect of human cloning and artificial insemination outside the body had "shattered the barriers meant to protect human dignity," he said.

"When human beings in the weakest and most defenseless state of their existence are selected, abandoned, killed or used as pure 'biological material,' how can one deny that they are being treated not as 'someone' but as 'something,"' he said.

Such practices "questioned the very concept of the dignity of man," he said in the speech to the department known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Widespread interest in medicine by the general public, who get most of their information from the media, had made it even more imperative for the Church to take a stand, he said.

Embryonic stem cell research involves the destruction of embryos. Scientists hope to use stem cells to transform medicine, providing regenerative treatments for injuries and seeking new insights into diseases like cancer and AIDS.

Last year scientists reported they had tricked ordinary skin cells into behaving like embryonic stem cells.

The Pope said the Church "appreciates and encourages" research on stem cells that come from other parts of the body and do not involve embryos or their destruction.

Pope says some science shatters human dignity: Scientific American

What do you think?

[metis]

There's no doubt that human cloning would present some major theological and humanitarian problems, but the embryonic stem-cell ban is really quite nonsensical. The embryos come from fertility clinics and they're going to be destroyed anyway. On top of that, these embryos have no nerves and they're useless after just a very short period of time, long before they develop any nerves.

On the other hand, there's the potential that these stem-cells may well be able to heal some with certain medical problems. It was just announced that in another country (I can't remember which-- a senior moment, I guess) that they were able to repair a heart back to normal health with the use of embryonic stem-cells (maybe I need some stem-cells to repair my memory).

Shalom,
Vern

[Mirage]

I agree with Metis here, although I would certainly feel more comfortable if the embryo could consent like an adult organ donor, but that is not possible. I am also concerned that there may be countries in which the embryos might not come from fertility clinics, if not now, at some point.

Here is my bias, and I must make it known before commenting further. My illness is one of the ones which stem cells hold the greatest promise of curing. I have had type 1 diabetes since I was less than 2 years old. What does it do to my human dignity to be told I have no right to the cells which would otherwise be discarded, that it is God's Will I remain sick forever? I have literally waited for a cure since childhood, and it has been promised and promised, and never came until now. What of me? According to the Pope's view, dead embryos deserve more human dignity than I do.

The day it was announced that we may be be able to use other sources like children's lost baby teeth and some adult cells, I literally got down on my knees(not easy for me) and thanked God for the possibility of other ways that people cannot deny me on the basis of a religious tenet that not everyone shares.

Time is running out for many people. Living people. Discarding the stem cells of embryos which never developed to birth will not restore the unborn. I do absolutely agree embryos should never be created and harvested for that purpose.

For perspective, I cannot be an organ donor for most organs, including even skin. That is because the condition I have affects almost ALL of them. I cannot donate whole blood, although I might be able to donate plasma someday depending where I live at the time. In Canada, some type 1 diabetics have already been cured by stem cells.

[metis]

Mirage, I find you post very interesting. I certainly hope the best of health for you. I was diagnosed early last year with type 2, but I'm fortunate in that I can control it with diet. My wife was tested in the fall, and we found out that she's also type 2, and she has to go on some medication.

Shalom and take care,
Vern

[Mirage]

Sorry to hear. I always felt type 2 is actually harder to live with than type 1 because I can count on my body never making any insulin at all.

If your wife is going on oral medication rather than insulin, please make sure you research the medication(s) because some of them greatly increase the risk of heart attack, but doctors are often of the belief that patients will not be willing to take shots, so they don't always discuss the insulin option.

[Astreja]

Fortunately, it turns out that stem cells do not have to originate from embryos after all. I can see them becoming a useful tool in improving health, so no dignity issue there.

As for artificial insemination, if science can make it possible for an otherwise infertile couple to conceive, it enriches their lives as well. Better that it be done outside the body rather than not at all.

Undecided about cloning, though.

[angeleyes]

I agree with metis as well. I have no problem with using human embryos that would be thrown away. But, as we've seen in organ transplants, there always seems to be someone who will exploit human life to make money, so we have to consider how such advances could be abused.

On the flip side, I think the comments of the Pope are way over the top. Things like "shattered human diginity," and talking about the "human being as a person from conception until natural death."....... I guess I just don't see how people can actually equate a clump of cells with a human being.

[Mirage]

Originally Posted by angeleyes

On the flip side, I think the comments of the Pope are way over the top. Things like "shattered human diginity," and talking about the "human being as a person from conception until natural death."....... I guess I just don't see how people can actually equate a clump of cells with a human being.

My understanding of the RC view (and I could be wrong), is that it's not about the cells but the soul. I think the Pope believes the soul is present already at the cell clump stage, thus personhood.

[metis]

Originally Posted by Mirage

Sorry to hear. I always felt type 2 is actually harder to live with than type 1 because I can count on my body never making any insulin at all.

Type 2 doesn't necessarily mean that we don't produce insulin, but that the pancreas has been damaged in some way (older age and being overweight are the biggest contributors). In my case, I'm both hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic, so if I'm eating too many carbs, my blood sugar will spike in an hour or two after I eat and then plummet a couple of hours later. It's like being on a roller coaster-ride that will leave you with headaches and dizziness.

My wife's is different in that her sugar tends to run high through the night into the next morning if she eats too many carbs or eats late at night. Whereas they want me to have a light snack at night, they don't want her to do as such.

If your wife is going on oral medication rather than insulin, please make sure you research the medication(s) because some of them greatly increase the risk of heart attack, but doctors are often of the belief that patients will not be willing to take shots, so they don't always discuss the insulin option.

Yes, we've checked it all out carefully, and I also purchased three books that have helped my understand what's going on. My wife is just on one tablet of Glucafage (sp?), which is a low dose, and I'm not on anything other than a diet restriction.



Shalom & thanks for the advice,
Vern

[Mirage]

I think some type 2s are also insulin resistant, correct. Sorry if I was unclear. A type 1 diabetic, which is what I am, produces no insulin. That's why I say I am glad I am a type 1. My condition is more predictable, although absorption can vary daily, and in my case I am very brittle, which does make things difficult.

For some type 2s I am told that not eating after 5 PM seems to help with your wife's problem. I presume your diet is probably small meals spaced more evenly and avoiding eating large amounts of carbohydrate at once? If so, that actually works well for me, too, but I have to time my meals according to the crossovers of my insulin peaks. I take one shot (rare), a mix of long and short acting insulin in the morning. Breakfast is when the short one peaks, lunch is when the crossover between the short and long one is greatest, and dinner is when the long one peaks. I aim for numbers in the high 70s before meals.