[Mb-civic] Stem Cell Hype and Hope - David A. Shaywitz - Washington
Post Op-Ed
William Swiggard
swiggard at comcast.net
Thu Jan 12 03:51:43 PST 2006
Stem Cell Hype and Hope
By David A. Shaywitz
Thursday, January 12, 2006; A21
The apparent fabrication of results by South Korean researcher Hwang Woo
Suk has already prompted a serious reevaluation of stem cell science,
and the release this week of Seoul National University's final report on
the affair is certain to add fuel to the fire. Many detractors of stem
cell research (and, privately, even some proponents) have begun to
wonder whether this might mark the beginning of the end. More likely
this controversy -- and the ensuing scrutiny and self-reflection -- will
provide exactly what our discipline needs most: the opportunity to
modulate the extravagant expectations for this research while we
reaffirm our underlying commitment to it.
The rapid ascent of stem cell research into the spotlight reflects the
collision of exciting science with uncharted ethics. President Bush's
Aug. 9, 2001, prohibition on the use of public funds to create new human
embryonic stem cell lines ignited interest in this field, even as it
made it much more difficult for American scientists to conduct the
research. The concern that important medical science was being
deliberately thwarted by the federal government enraged many patient
advocates and further ratcheted up the demand for results.
Meanwhile, stem cell research itself trudged ahead slowly, for all the
usual reasons -- as well as some unique ones. Scientific research is
notoriously difficult, and progress typically incremental; human
embryonic stem cells also happen to be intrinsically difficult to grow.
Moreover, government restrictions severely hampered the ability of
researchers to pursue the best science and discouraged many bright young
investigators from entering the field.
As the demand for results far outstripped the ability of researchers to
supply them, a seller's market emerged in which goods were overvalued
and even low-quality merchandise was snatched up by eager buyers. This
is the context in which Hwang's studies appeared.
While most in the field of stem cell research were shocked by the
reports of fraud, the shock was only one of degree; it is common
knowledge that the bar for publication in this field often has appeared
remarkably low, with even well-respected research journals seeming to
fall over one another for the privilege of publishing the next hot
paper. The result of this frenzy has been an entire body of literature
that is viewed with extreme skepticism by most serious stem cell
investigators.
The good news is that underneath all this mess, stellar science really
is happening. Stem cells have proved even more captivating than we could
have imagined, and understanding the process by which a stem cell
progressively differentiates into a specialized cell such as a neuron or
a pancreas beta cell is perhaps the most compelling biology question for
our generation. Stem cells have sparked our interest for good reason.
But we're not going to figure out how they work overnight; it will take
a very long time and require our best minds, as well as our collective
effort (and, ideally, our collective dollars). Translating this
knowledge into clinically meaningful applications is certain to take
even longer and present still more challenges -- yet it should be
achievable. If the current controversy were to cause us to precipitously
abandon this exciting area, it would be a catastrophic shame.
What we really need is to refine our expectations for this research.
This doesn't mean we should scale back our ambitions or demand less of
our researchers. Rather, we need to recognize just how arduous and
painstaking good science usually is and remind ourselves that data do
not become dogma when published, but only when independently validated.
Difficult or not, good research is the only responsible way to proceed.
If the promise of stem cells is to be fulfilled, the pursuit will
require a solid scientific foundation, one grounded in reliable,
reproducible facts and not simply supported by hype and hope.
The writer is an endocrinologist at the Harvard Stem Cell Institute.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/11/AR2006011102040.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060112/531aa4a7/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the Mb-civic
mailing list