Stem cell therapy: medical advance or moral challenge?

My professional lifetime has seen progress in the biomedical sciences that beggars belief. This has lead to astonishing advances in the ability to prevent and treat disease and, in the developed world at least, people live longer and healthier lives than ever before. Paradoxically, this has gone hand in hand with the growth of a vocal and influential anti-science lobby that not only rejects much modern science-but is also deeply suspicious of new medical interventions. The prospect of cell therapy in the near or middle future is their current target especially where the use of embryonic stem cells or of cell nuclear transfer techniques is concerned. The prospect of cell therapy is welcomed with enthusiasm by patients with genetic and degenerative diseases who hope to benefit from them. On the other hand the whole idea is regarded as repugnant by the anti-science lobby. While some of this opposition is essentially luddite in nature, there are some more persuasive arguments raised particularly to any research than uses embryonic or foetal materials. These arguments will be examined critically. The moral problems of denying the sick the hope of effective treatments have to be weighed against those seen in the development of such treatments. (This article is closely based on an already published paper. P. Lachmann, Stem cell research: why is it regarded as a threat? An investigation of the economic and ethical arguments made against research with human embryonic stem cells. EMBO Rep. 2 (3) (2001) 165-168).