Young Man Saved Saved from Cancer by Stem Cells from an Umbilical Cord Speaks Against Embryonic Stem Cell Research

When he was quite young Nathan Salley, of Colorado, had leukemia. There was a chance he might die. The miracle of medical science stepped in, and Nathan Smalley is still alive years later. He was saved by stem cells, but not embryonic stem cells, not stem cells from an aborted baby. He was saved by the stem cells from an umbilical cord blood collected at a baby's birth. No baby was harmed to save the life of Nathan Salley. On July 17, 2001, Salley, then 16, testified before Congress, in support of other kinds of stem cell research, but against embryonic stem cell research.

Salley testified that he was living proof that babies do not need to be aborted to save lives through embryonic stem cells. He said he was proof other kinds of stem cell research offer the promise of saved lives.

"I am not a doctor, scientist, or theologian," Salley testified on the website, http://www.cmda.org. "And I am no more deserving than any other of the thousands of cancer patients and cancer survivors to have the opportunity to speak here. But, speaking as one cancer survivor who benefited from cord cell treatment, it does not seem right to me to terminate living human embryos based on mere speculation that they could lead to cures -- when obvious alternatives are not yet exhausted.

"All human life is 'fearfully and wonderfully made,'" Salley continued. " My life is no more valuable before God than the life of an embryo. Everyone wants to live a complete and healthy life, but I do not believe killing a life to save a life is right. Who, besides God, knows what people embryos may become? What we do know is that performing research on a four-day old embryo will ensure that it never becomes a five-day old embryo - much less a 30-year old actor, 40-year old scientist who discovers a cure for Alzheimer's disease, 50-year old Congressman, or 91-year old former President."

According to scientists, stem cells are the starting cells for 210 different tissues of the human body. They are found in the very early human embryo. As humans grow, they can still be found in organs and tissues. Stem cells form the nervous system, the circulation system, and other important parts of the human body. Adult stem cells promote healing in the human body.

According to those who oppose embryonic stem cell research, the embryos involved were donated to science after an abortion. Scientists take out the inner cell mass of 30 or so cells, when an embryo is four or five days old. On day six the human life would implant in his or her mother's womb.

Scientists nurture the stem cells in a laboratory. They can become any type of cell, a heart cell, a heart, a brain, or whatever.

Those who are opposed to embryonic stem cell research point out that not one cure has been discovered for any disease from embryonic stem cell research as yet. They ask; I believe legitimately, why use such cells, when adult stem cells have proven effective? Who could object to using adult stem cells?

One reason some may have been hesitant to using adult stem cells is that they were once thought to not be too plentiful. Scientists now know better. They were also wrongly not thought to be as pliable as embryonic stem cells. Scientists have recently discovered, however, that adult stem cells can be coaxed into forming cardiac muscle cells and skeletal cells.

Adult stem cell research is also being neglected in other countries.

"You would barely know that adult stem cells exist at Newcastle," British stem cell research expert Colin McGuckin, professor of regenerative medicine at Newcastle University, said on the website, http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk. He has been critical of the attention of the media, academics, and Parliament in his own country. He says that is despite the fact that his own work with adult stem cells has offered promising results.

Things are not different in the United Kingdom than they are in the United States. He noted that vast amounts of government money have gone to embryonic stem cell research, despite a limited amount of success. He said adult stem cell research has not been adequately funded.

Promising medical advances in our own country may also never occur because of the bias against adult stem cell research and the desire to use stem cells from aborted or murdered babies. Things are certainly going to go even more that way because of the election of pro-abortion Barack Obama. I did not vote for the man, but the people did and have spoken. I do know that even though I think he may make things worse not better for the economy, he was elected for one primary reason: to improve the economy-not to support embryonic stem cell research. All of us who are pro life need to remind him of this when he works for using the stem cells of murdered babies.

Citations: Testimony high school student Nathan Salley, no author listed, CMDA.org

'You Would Barely Know Adult Stem Cells Exist', by Zoe Corbyn, Timeshighereducation.co.uk