Dianne N. Irving
copyright: February 19, 2019
Reproduced with Permission
I. Introduction
Given that iPS research continues to be supported and pushed despite its inherent scientific -- and thus ethical -- defects, the following short article provides both scientific and ethical documentation of these serious problems so that the public and governmental officials can better understand why this research should be permanently banned. The defects inherent in iPS research include not only severe, even deadly consequences to human patients who are injected with these iPS cells to "cure their diseases", but also inherently involve an area (conveniently) not often discussed: the use of iPS cells as sources for IVF/ART and similar facilities to artificially reproduce new whole human embryos for both research and "infertility" purposes.
Note that:
- (1) The starting point for doing an "ethical" analysis is accurate objective scientific facts -- as required by the international guidelines for ethical research, the Nuremberg Code, as well as documented even by natural law philosophical ethics. Thus, since much of the "science" used in iPS research is inaccurate, such research is automatically ethically invalid.
- (2) Because of the erroneous "science" used to "deprogram" the DNA of "adult" cells, such iPS cells contain "foreign DNA" (non-self) from the various "vectors" used for "deprogramming" (e.g., bacterial, viral DNA). Thus if used in clinical trials and medical treatments, these iPS cells would cause major immune response damage, even death, when injected into human patients in order to "cure their diseases". Nothing "ethical" about that.
- (3) Given the false "science" used in most iPS research, prospective patients would be rendered incapable of giving ethically or legally valid "informed consent" or make "informed choices" Nothing "ethical" about that, either.
- (4) Almost never discussed, iPS claims that their cells are "pluripotent". But most of them are not "pluripotent; rather they are "totipotent" -- a critical scientific fact that iPS researchers deny and don't tell you about. Since these iPS cells are really totipotent, they can be artificially reverted back to new whole existing human embryos, and then killed in destructive experimental research, or implanted into unsuspecting women as "infertility treatments". Nothing "ethical" about that, either.
- (5) There is only one kind of human sexual reproduction (fertilization), but many different kinds of human a-sexual reproduction (almost all of which are systematically ignored by some researchers). iPS researchers continually ignore and don't mention these a-sexual reproductive results inherent in their iPS research.
In short, these artificially reproduced in vitro cells are supposed to be injected into patients to "cure their diseases". Yet because of the manner in which they are produced, these cells contain multiple mutations from all the manipulations and "foreign DNA" used to "deprogram" them which render them very dangerous to any human patients into whom they are injected.
And not mentioned by these iPS researchers, most cells of the developing human embryo up to and including those from the inner cell mass of the "blastocyst" are totipotent, not pluripotent (as iPS researchers claim). Therefore these totipotent cells can revert to new embryos by means of the natural biological process of "regulation" (see Playing God article below, section on A-Sexual human reproduction) -- even nervously admitted by a couple of iPS researchers themselves. Indeed, as documented since the Carnegie Stages since 1942, as well as in all genuine human embryology and human genetics textbooks, this MZ "twinning/tripleting" is how naturally occurring human twins/triplets are naturally reproduced in vivo within the mother. Such MZ "twinning/tripleting" can also be artificially a-sexually reproduced outside the woman's body, in vitro, and used in IVF/ART and other destructive experimental research labs or implanted into women at "infertility clinics" (which actually constitutes illegal "reproductive cloning") -- often using evasive benign terminology with these women such as "blastomere splitting", or "blastomere separation". Thus women allowing these artificially reproduced MZ twins/triplets to be implanted, and human patients into whom such iPS cells are to be injected to "cure" their diseases, are not given the accurate science of what is being implanted or injected into them, and thus are precluded from giving ethically or legally valid "informed consent" or make "informed choices"!
II. Suggested Articles, Extensive Documentation (Irving):
--[[articles written before 2015 are using the old URLs for the Carnegie Stages; if checking yourself, need to use the new URLs]] -- Caution Again: Need to Use Newer URL's for Carnegie Stages for Issues Concerning the Early Human Embryo (Jan. 1, 2015), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_226new.url.html
- ** "Playing God by manipulating man: Facts and frauds of human cloning"(October 4, 2003), presented twice at the Missouri Catholic Conference Annual Assembly Workshop, Jefferson City, MO, at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_22manipulatingman1.html
- ** Fake Science News? Yamanaka's iPS Stem Cell Admissions -- and the Other Elephants in the Room (January 29, 2017), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_236fakesciencenews.html
- ** #1 - Totipotency: Scientific References (September 23, 2013), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_217totipotencyscientificreferences1.html
- ** Some scientific references; 'totipotency" and 'twinning" (May 2, 2003), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irvi/irvi_01references.html
- ** On iPS Research: "The Moral Frontiers of Stem Cell Research" (December 6, 2010), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_179moralfrontiers.html
- ** Irving Comments: "Adult stem cells said to 'forget' retooling; Embryonic alternative [iPS stem cell research] suffers setback" (July 21, 2010), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irvi/irvi_69ipsstemcell.html
See Also:
- "Analysis: Stem cells that could become embryos: Implications for the NIH Guidelines on stem cell research, the NIH stem cell report, informed consent, and patient safety in clinical trials" (July 22, 2001); written as consultant on human embryology and human embryo research as Fellow of The Linacre Institute (CMA), The Catholic Medical Association (USA), and The International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations (FIAMC), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_39anlystemcel1.html
- "University Faculty for Life: Submission of Concern to the Canadian CIHR Re the 'Human Stem Cell Research Recommendations 2001'"; written as UFL Board Member on behalf of UFL; submitted to Dr. Alan Bernstein, President, Canadian Institutes of Health Research Working Group on Stem Cell Research, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (June 3, 2001), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_60canadiancihrrecomm1.html
- "Ethical and Scientific Concerns About Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Research -- Yamanaka and Thomson" (June 1, 2008), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_127concerns.html
- Let's Be Clear About the Science and Ethics of iPS Cell Research and Its Reproductive Possibilities (October 23, 2012), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_205ipscellresearch1.html
- 'Pluripotent' Stem Cell (iPS) Research is Not the Usual 'Adult' Stem Cell Research (April 8, 2009), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_138ips_notadultstemcell.html
- "Framing the Debates on Human Cloning and Human Embryonic Stem Cells: Pluripotent vs. TOTIPOTENT" (July 23, 2005), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_100debatecloning1.html
- "Quick Scientific References: Human Cloning, Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research" (Aug. 31, 2004), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_76quickreferences.html
III. Conclusion:
Given the erroneous and/or dangerous "science" used in the production of iPS cells which can severely damage, even kill, prospective human patients into whom they would be injected; and given the insidious false "science" claimed by iPS researchers that these cells are "pluripotent" -- knowing fully that they are really totipotent, and thus that they they and cohorts in the IVF/ART and similar industries can use these "totipotent" iPS stem cells as sources of new whole living human embryos for destructive research and "infertility" treatments -- all iPS research should be immediately banned as dangerous to human consumers and thus unethical, and any researchers who violate that ban should be held legally accountable.
Top