• Question: Do you not consider it immoral to carry experiments and research out on animals, or living totipotent cells?

    Asked by canunot to Anzy, Aoife, Dave, Matt, Tomasz on 12 Nov 2013.
    • Photo: David Christensen

      David Christensen answered on 12 Nov 2013:

      Hi canunot,
      I do not consider it immoral to do experiments and research on animals, if the experiments and research will lead to new treatments for diseases that affect huge numbers of people around the world. I think that research on animals is unfortunately necessary if we want to find new ways to treat diseases. In the future, it may be possible to reduce the numbers of tests done on animals by developing ways to do more experiments on computers or with cells grown on a plate instead of using animals, but at the moment, we can’t get enough information from only using cells in a plate or computers.

      For totipotent cells, I’ll just define those for you quickly in case you have misunderstood. A totipotent stem cell is a cell that can become any cell of the body and also the placenta. The only truly totipotent cell is a fertilised egg. Research using human embryos is highly restricted and scientists can’t use embryos beyond a certain stage of development, but at this stage there aren’t any totipotent stem cells. So, I’d say, for me personally, I don’t have a problem with use of totipotent or pluripotent stem cells in research and don’t consider that research immoral. For research on human embryo development, I do see that it is a morally/ethically difficult area around when the embryo is developed enough to really be living and I am glad there are restrictions to prevent some research.

      It is all a question of when you believe life starts properly in a developing embryo. I don’t believe that the ball of the cells from which we get embryonic stem cells is alive, so I don’t consider their use immoral, but I respect other people that do believe that.

      Sorry for such a long answer!

    • Photo: Aoife O'Shaughnessy-Kirwan

      Aoife O'Shaughnessy-Kirwan answered on 13 Nov 2013:

      Hi canunot,
      I have to echo what David has already said. I also do not consider it immoral. We have to weigh up the cost and benefits and in my mind the things we can learn and treatments we can develop are a huge huge benefit.
      What are your own opinions on this?

    • Photo: Matthew Tomlinson

      Matthew Tomlinson answered on 13 Nov 2013:

      I would agree with Dave and Aoife in that I don’t think it is immoral to work on animals or embryonic stem cells, but we should not undertake this research lightly. Animal studies are often an essential step to take a therapy from the research lab to the clinic because we have to show that the treatment is effective and not dangerous, although no animal research can happen without researchers showing some evidence that the experiments are needed. There are lots of ways to reduce animal research and the NC3Rs has done a great job in getting researchers to come up with alternatives to animal studies. However, this can’t always be the case. I would also say that in the UK we have some of the strictest ethical guidelines when it comes to animal studies, so if it has to happen it is better that it happens here rather than other countries with more dubious ethical climates.

      As for embryonic stem cells, again my opinion is that a ball of 150 cells, when ES cells are taken, is not alive. It is also preferable for me that embryos created for IVF are used for research rather than being thrown away. It is a difficult ethical area and to be honest I’m glad I work with adult stem cells where the ethical issues are a lot less controversial!

Comments