Stem cell research is back in the news with several bills before Congress. I have tried to educate myself on this issue.  I'm sure that some of this post will be dated information.  That is always the situation with new technologies.  The basics of stem cells are these. There are two types of stem cells adult and embryonic. All stem cells, share at least two characteristics. First, they can make identical copies of themselves for long periods of time and second, they can give rise to mature cell types that have characteristic shapes and specialized functions. Adult stem cells are rare and are found in a growing list of locations within the human body. No one knows the origin of adult stem cells in mature tissue. Embryonic stem cells are found only one location within an embryo making them easier to identify.

Embryonic stem cells can become all cell types of the body while adult stem cells are more limited. Some evidence suggests that adult stem cell plasticity may exist, increasing the number of cell types a given adult stem cell can become. Large numbers of embryonic stem cells can be relatively easily grown in culture, while adult stem cell methods for expanding their numbers in cell culture have not yet been worked out. This is important because large numbers of cells are needed for stem cell replacement therapies.

There are at least three scientific arguments against the use of embryonic stem cells as a treatment for disease and injury.

First is the previously mentioned rejection issue. One proposed solution is large scale genetic engineering to provide a better match for the patient. There is no current evidence that it can be accomplished at all. Another is "therapeutic cloning". In this scenario genetic information of the original stem cell would be replaced with that of the patient. This human clone would then be grown as a source of stem cells for transplant. Animal cloning experiments indicates that such clones are highly likely to be abnormal and would not give rise to healthy replacement tissue. The final proposed resolution has been to generate a large bank of embryos for use in transplants. I personally find this solution repugnant. The dangers of this proposal should be obvious.

The second argument is that, based on what we know about embryology, many of the factors required for the correct differentiation of embryonic cells are not chemical. Instead, they are structural or mechanical elements uniquely associated with the complex environment of the embryo.

The final argument against using human embryonic stem cells for treatment is based on sound scientific practice: we simply do not have sufficient evidence from animal studies to warrant a move to human experimentation.

Adult stem cells have their own set of problems.

The first as noted above adult stem cells are more difficult to grow in culture and may not be able to produce the very large numbers of cells required for treatment. Substantial progress has already been made towards increasing the rate of adult stem cell proliferation and treatment using cells derived from a patient’s own tissue may not require the large numbers of cells needed to treat patients with foreign genetics.

The more serious concern is that scientists don’t yet know how many mature cell types can be generated from a single adult stem cell population.  It is not clear at this point whether adult stem cells are more restricted to types.  Adult stem cell research is not nearly as advanced as the field of embryonic stem cell research. Scientists have been working on embryonic stem cells for much longer than adult cells.  Embryonic stem cells appear to be a more attractive option because they are clearly capable (in an embryonic environment) of generating all the tissues of the human body. However, it is extraordinarily difficult to get stem cells of any age "to do what you want them to" in culture.

Even if adult stem cells are unable to generate the full spectrum of cell types found in the body, this very fact may turn out to be a strong scientific and medical advantage.  For an embryonic cell to specialize, it must make choices that progressively restrict what it can become. The greater the number of steps required to achieve specialization, the greater the scientific challenge it is to reproduce those steps in culture. If adult stem cells prove to have restricted rather than unlimited potential, this would indicate that adult stem cells have proceeded at least part way towards their final state, thereby reducing the number of steps scientists are required to replicate in culture

This may account for adult stem cell research seeming to demonstrate greater success than embryonic stem cell research.  A Google search was littered with articles the successes of adult stem cell and the paucity of embryonic stem cell research. One article by the Heritage Foundation stated:

No currently approved treatments have been obtained using embryonic stem cells. There are no human trials—despite all the hype and all the media. After 20 years of research, embryonic stem cells haven't been used to treat people because the cells are unproven and unsafe. They tend to produce tumors, cause transplant rejection, and form the wrong kinds of cells.

Private investors aren’t funding embryonic stem cell research. They are funding adult stem cell research, which is an ethical alternative. Some of the most startling advancements using adult stem cells have come in treating Parkinson’s disease, juvenile diabetes, and spinal cord injuries.

Information for this post was taken from:http:  //stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics5.asp, http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0201/articles/condic.html

Update 1: Shame on me, it took this story to remember my personal connection with a stem cell success story. Larry, a friend and neighbor, was diagnosed six years ago with cancer and given six months to live. About a month ago we entertained Larry at our house. The reason he is still here is because we went to City of Hope near Los Angeles. There they treated him with his own adult stem cells. He goes once a year to get A PET scan to watch for a return of his cancer but apart from that lives a normal life.

Update 2: Reading all the articles about stem cell I have found claims, rebuttals, and counter- claims. There needs to be in my opinion an open debate on floor of Congress complete with experts from both the adult and embryion stem cell camps to keep it honest. In the mean time http://www.cafepress.com/boldface  suggests a third alternative-Dem cell research. 

Update 3: OK this is the last one. There is just to much news out there right now to stay up with. If you have to lie to discredit your opposition you reveal the weakness of your case. From everything I have read the ESC crowd is the most deceiptful.  Here is an example of their spinning to discredit ASC research. Why would they do that? Aren't they all on the same team? I think to find the answer to that is just follow the research money. Note above where all the private funds are going!