Scientists say work smarter not harder in stem cell research

Dr. Peter Hollands is a researcher at the University of Westminster in London and he attended the Vatican sponsored conference on stem cell research held in November.  He gave an interview with the National Catholic Reporter where he illustrated the practical reasons everyone can oppose embryonic stem cell research.  In essence, the old adage, "Work smarter, not harder."  Hollands responds to the NCR's question on why researchers want to work with embryonic stem cells:

I don’t know if there’s anything to learn from embryonic stem cells, but it’s the objections to their use [that’s the problem].

We could grow potatoes on the moon; we could send up water, soil and seeds. We could set it up, grow potatoes, and it would work. But why do that when you’ve got something which is so much easier, and you’re able to grow them in a field?

That’s the difference between adult and embryonic — the technology is already there.

Newer and safer forms of stem cell therapy will likely overtake research into the use of human embryonic stem cells, the scientist whose team cloned Dolly the sheep told his peers at a stem cell conference in La Jolla.

Direct "reprogramming" of adult cells into the type needed for therapy is gradually becoming a reality, Ian Wilmut told an audience of several hundred at the Salk Institute at the annual Stem Cell Meeting on the Mesa. Such a feat was once thought impossible, but in recent years it has been demonstrated in at least two publications, he said.

These reprogrammed cells appear likely to provide the anticipated benefits of embryonic stem cells without their risks, such as forming tumors....

The emergence of direct reprogramming provides a promising new option scientists should consider, Wilmut said.

"I'm not quite sure why this hasn't been pursued more actively," Wilmut said.