Related articles and links |  1 of 6

•

Three years ago, Kim and Adam Lewis decided they wanted to start a family, and like most people they hadn't given much thought to what an embryo actually is. Then Kim's doctor gave the married couple from Johnson City, Tennessee, some bad news. Kim, then just 22, had been diagnosed with premature ovarian failure. The condition, similar in effect to menopause, meant that she had no healthy eggs with which to become pregnant.

To use an old-fashioned term, Kim was barren. Wanting to bear a child nonetheless, Kim carefully considered her options and God's leading. A year later, when her physician mentioned something called embryo donation, Kim went home and searched the Web. There she learned about the National Embryo Donation Center (NEDC). The center, in nearby Knoxville, seeks to match married couples with "excess" embryos created through in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Genetic parents often authorize fertility clinics to create many excess embryos. There are now 400,000 stored in clinics nationwide. Most are held for possible future treatments; a relative few of the extras are designated for scientific research.

The NEDC works with clinics and parents to see that some of these embryos are born, encouraging their adoption by infertile married couples, such as the Lewises.

Before the transfer, Kim was not really sure whether the two frozen embryos she adopted were human beings, but after carrying them for 27 weeks and 2 days, she gave birth to two healthy preemies, Katie and Sam. Though tiny the day they were born (at a bit more than two pounds each), today the children are thriving.

"I have a picture of Sam and Katie when they were literally only five days old. They were a clump of cells," Kim says.

"To now hold them in my arms and look at them," she adds, "I can't imagine that I ever thought that there was a debate."

Actually, if there is a debate over the status (and possible scientific uses) of the human embryo, it is one that pro-lifers are having largely with themselves. Most of the rest of society has a hard time grasping the human value of this tiny life. Instead they are eager to reap the potential scientific benefits available through harvesting embryonic stem cells (ESCs), without asking too many uncomfortable questions.

In fact, the well-funded push for ESC research has become a juggernaut that is threatening to swamp pro-lifers, who are scrambling to mount an effective response in the political realm, the private sector, and in overseas arenas. The early returns are not encouraging, but the outcome is far from decided.

There are two kinds of stem cells—cells from which more complex cells and tissues develop. The first are so-called adult stem cells, taken from umbilical cord blood and other areas of the human body, such as bone marrow and muscles. The second kind comes from human embryos. While there are no ethical dilemmas involved with harvesting adult stem cells, extracting ESCs, first isolated by scientists only in 1998, involves killing human embryos.

Many pro-lifers have taken a firm stand against any research that kills human embryos while supporting research with adult stem cells. It is a political stand that appears to be increasingly unpopular. The public remains eager for cures, and the biotech community opposes government restrictions on its race for medical panaceas.

Currently, public support for ESC research appears to be broad. According to an ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted in April, 63 percent of adult respondents said they support ESC research, while 28 percent oppose it. A mid-July poll by CBS News reported that 56 percent of adults approve of ESC research, while 30 percent disapprove.

next page... |  1 of 6

October 2005, Vol. 49, No. 10