Why Were Researchers Studying Embryonic Stem Cells Before 1998? (original) (raw)
Related papers
Ambiguous cells: the emergence of the stem cell concept in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries
Notes and Records of the Royal Society, 2011
This paper elucidates the origins of scientific work on stem cells. From the late nineteenth century onwards, the notion of stem cells became customary in scientific communities of Imperial Germany. Adopting the term Stammzelle from Ernst Haeckel, Theodor Boveri was influential in introducing the concept in embryological studies and early genetics around 1900, describing a capacity of stem cells for self-renewal as well as differentiation. At the same time, blood stem cells were conceptualized by histologists such as Ernst Neumann and Artur Pappenheim in studies of physiological haematopoiesis and various forms of leukaemia. Furthermore, building on Julius Cohnheim's theory that tumours arise from 'embryonic remnants' in the adult body, pathologists aimed at identifying the cells of origin, particularly in the embryo-like teratomas. Embryonic stem cells thus assumed an ambiguous status, partly representing common heritage and normal development, and partly being seen as potential causes of cancer if they had been left behind or displaced during ontogeny. In the 1950s and 1960s experimental research on teratocarcinomas by Leroy Stevens and Barry Pierce in the USA brought together the strands of embryological and pathological work. Alongside the work of Ernest McCulloch and James Till at the Ontario Cancer Institute from the early 1960s on stem cells in haematopoiesis, this led into the beginnings of modern stem cell research.
From teratocarcinomas to embryonic stem cells and beyond: a history of embryonic stem cell research
Nature Reviews Genetics, 2006
We are currently facing an unprecedented level of public interest in research on embryonic stem cells, an area of biomedical research that until recently was small, highly specialized and of limited interest to anyone but experts in the field. Real and imagined possibilities for the treatment of degenerative and other diseases are of special interest to our rapidly ageing population; real and imagined associations of stem cells to cloning, embryos and reproduction stir deeply held beliefs and prejudices. The conjunction of these factors could explain the recent sudden interest in embryonic stem cells but we ought to remember that this research has a long and convoluted history, and that the findings described today in the scientific and popular press are firmly grounded in research that has been going on for several decades. Here I briefly recapitulate this fascinating history.
Stem cells did not become a proper research object until the 1960s. Yet the term and the basic mindset – namely the conception of single undifferentiated cells, be they embryonic or adult, as the basic units responsible for a directed process of development, differentiation and increasing specialisation – were already in place at the end of the nineteenth century and then transmitted on a non-linear path in the form of tropes and diagrams. Ernst Haeckel and August Weismann played a special role in this story. The first coined the term Stammzelle (stem cell), the second was the author of the first cellular stem-tree diagram. Still today, I shall argue, the understanding of stem cells, especially the popular perception, is to a good extent a Haeckelian-Weismannian one. After having demonstrated this, analysing the terminology, I will in this essay focus on the use of cytogenetic tree diagrams between 1892 and 1925 and on the tacit understanding of stem cells that they transmit.
Embryonic Stem Cell Research Scientists believe that stem cells may be a key factor in finding the cure for many serious medical conditions. While the use of adult stem cells is accepted by many, religious groups and others oppose the research involving the use and destruction of human embryos. The taking of a human life is considered wrong by society today, but taking the life of a baby by allowing embryonic stem cell research to continue is also wrong. Stem cell research is a new, young, pivotal field of research which began in 1988. No other filed of research offers such a great potential for stoping and preventing human suffering, but at a terrible cost. Stem cells have 2 specific properties which sets them apart from regular cells. They can make any type of specialized cell which helps with the restoration of human tissues and organs. They are self-renovating which allows the to be studied in laboratories for long periods of time and allows for long periods of continuous undisturbed research. Another unique characteristic stems cell have is that they can either be pluripotent or multi-potent. Pluripotent cells can form any of over 200 cell types, while multi-potent cells are partially differentiated, but form a limited number of other tissues. Stem cells differentiate into different cells that will later form different types of rises use that are necessary for the human body to
Overview of Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Postmodern Openings, 2016
The purpose of this paper is to debate whether or not the embryonic stem cell research should be permitted, or even encouraged. I will argue that we have a moral duty to encourage the advance of scientific knowledge (by learning how the embryo stem cell works) and to allow developments in medicine (by using therapies resulted from embryo stem cell research), yet understanding the risks that such research and knowledge brings. Therefore, I will discuss a few medical and procedural aspects regarding embryonal stem cells, I will briefly present several perspectives upon embryo moral status and also upon the most important slippery slope dangers concerning embryonic stem cell research. All of these aspects will be approached focusing not only on potential benefits, but mainly on the correct understanding and appropriate calculation of the risks involved.