Madam, – William Reville (Science Today, January 21st) reports on stem-cell research. The debate on this subject is important and should be conducted more widely in the public domain. All forms of stem-cell research need to continue and all are important. But a public debate can only be frustrated by claims of the kind Prof Reville provides.
Prof Reville claims adult stem-cell research has produced more than 200 medical treatments. This is categorically false. Even the most optimistic and open- minded researchers of adult stem-cells would not endorse that claim.
In hoping research can dispense with embryonic stem-cell research, Prof Reville also claims that adult stem-cell research and induced pluripotent stem-cell research (IPSCR) are good and ethical alternatives to embryonic stem-cell research. Yet, scientifically valid research on adult stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells normally use embryonic stem cells as a “control” in the research process.
As a scientist, Prof Reville knows this, but fails to include this relevant information. It would seriously weaken his view that embryonic stem cells are dispensable in scientific research.
Neither science nor the public interest are furthered by false claims.
Let us debate the scientific merits and ethics of stem-cell research but let us not rely on unsubstantiated evidence. – Yours, etc,