Complicity in stem cell research: the case of induced pluripotent stem cells

Abstract

Many who object to human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research because they believe it involves complicity in embryo destruction have welcomed induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) research as an ethical alternative. This opinion article aims to show that complicity arguments against hESC research are prima facie inconsistent with accepting iPSC research as it is currently done. Those who oppose hESC research on grounds of complicity should either (i) oppose iPSC research as well, (ii) advocate a radical change in the way iPSC research is done, (iii) demonstrate that complicity arguments against iPSC research are weaker than those against hESC research or (iv) reject complicity arguments against both hESC and iPSC research, either by adopting a more limited conception of complicity that allows acceptance of some hESC research, or by accepting that destroying embryos for important scientific research is not wrong.

Specimen Collection for Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Research: Harmonizing the Approach to Informed Consent

“…Yet iPSCs are not wholly free from the encumbrances of prior ethical debates regarding hESCs [89 -92]. Global objections to iPSC research related to its complicity with embryonic stem cell research (arising from the necessary symbiosis between the two research programs), its ability to alter our conceptions of human life, and its implications for human-animal chimeras have been raised [66,[93][94][95][96][97][98][99][100][101][102]. Although these questions continue to be debated, both publicly and privately funded research with iPSCs is proceeding with broad scientific, political, and public support and without the heavy regulation that has characterized research with hESCs [103, 104].…”

How can ethics relate to science? The case of stem cell research

“…36,37 These studies demonstrate the possibility of reprogramming adult somatic cells into pluripotent stem cells that mirror embryonic stem cells, using the forced expression of genes shown to be essential in maintaining the main characteristics of embryonic stem cells. 38 IPSCs can then be differentiated into all cell types of interest although it should be noted that embryonic stem cells are still viewed as a 'golden standard' for pluripotency studies, 39 and there may be important epigenetic and genomic instability differences in IPSC relative to this standard that may be relevant for future clinical applications. [40][41][42][43][44] Nevertheless, it is fair to say that current translation-oriented pluripotent stem cell research focuses mostly on IPSC and that embryo-based research is more focused on the study of the embryo itself.…”

Expand and Regularize Federal Funding for Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Research

“…In 2008, Science announced hiPSC as the breakthrough of the year, and in 2009 Shinya Yamanaka, who is widely credited with the discovery of hiPSCs, received the prestigious Lasker Award for Basic Medical Research. Recently, though, the idea that hiPSCs are medical or ethical panaceas has been subject to skepticism (Devolder, ; Kim et al, 2010; Lo et al, ; Pera, ; Zhao et al, ).…”