August 2008
Check it Out: AJOB Issue 8:6 Is Online
The June issue of the American Journal of Bioethics is online--but will only be on the front page of bioethics.net for another few days. So if any of these headlines grab you--read them quick, or else you'll have to scour the depths of Past Issues to find any of these great articles.
First, Howard Brody asks you to ask your doctor "if this genetic test is right for you". This genetic test being--BRCA1, of course, which Matloff and Caplan discuss in depth in their Target Article, "Direct to Confusion".
Let's just be glad that no one is marketing direct to consumers the kind of creatures Autumn Feister is talking about in her Target Article, "Justifying a Presumption of Restraint in Animal Biotechnology Research"--that is unless you are a big fan of fauns or mice with ears on their backs.
Speaking of mice, we have Zoloth, Backhus and Woodruff, talking about the ethical issues of how to ensure fertility for women facing cancer diagnoses and treatment.
Want to learn more, check out http://bioethics.net to read the TOC for Target Articles, Open Peer Commentaries, and more.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Stem Cells: Try This At Home
I'm thinking about having a menstrual blood collection party.
I've just discovered in my pile of goodies from the two stem cell conferences I attended this summer a pamphlet about how one can become a distributor of C'ELLE, a service unveiled last spring to enable women to, well, not flush away a rich source of stem cells. C'ELLE, offered by an established cord blood bank, costs $699 for collection, freezing, and first year's storage, and $99 a year thereafter, a bargain by stem cell storage standards. Plus, an end-of-summer sale is going on right now, and one can even give C'ELLE as a gift.
The science is actually exciting. The cells are a lot like mesenchymal stem cells, which companies such as Osiris Therapeutics have already commercialized. In a nutshell, or rather a lab dish, stem cells from the uterine lining can give rise to nerve, heart, fat, bone, and cartilage. Treatments one day are a real possibility. The company has just announced a project to pursue using menstrual stem cells to treat brain diseases. Can we just skip the R&D and somehow use our periods to treat our brains right at home?
But is it misleading to sell an expensive service when nobody's used a discarded tampon to cure anything yet? I don't think so. Stem cell storage is by definition futuristic, a biological insurance policy of sorts. I've done more research and the period blood stem cell company wants to use the cells to do research on brain diseases! Imagine the possibilities ...
I'm at the perfect stage of life to become a distributor. I'm old enough to remember my mother's Tupperware parties, but still young enough that I'm
sometimes visited by "Aunt Flo" (confused XY's, please consult an XX for translation). And a menstrual collection party will dovetail nicely with other more modern types of parties. Consider the popular sex toy parties. For those on the rag, a menstrual collection fest might substitute, perhaps with a set-up similar to the scene in Fried Green Tomatoes in which Evelyn attends a circa-1970 party where newly liberated women use hand mirrors to scrutinize their nether regions.
The list of potentially useful stem cells in the medical trash heap is already impressive, all backed up by reports in scientific journals. It includes all manner of biopsies and surgical waste, dog testicles, horse hooves, synovial fluid from bad knees, teeth, excess skin, and perhaps the most valuable of all, for it is pluripotent and none of us wants it, liposuction aspirate.
I applaud Cryo-Cell International's inventiveness in finally finding a use for suffering through a reproductive lifetime of cramps, bloating, and bitchiness, and for rejuvenating the idea of women-only parties.
Ricki Lewis is the author of the novel Stem Cell Symphony and the textbook Human Genetics: Concepts and Applications, now in its 8th edition. She is a fellow of the Alden March Bioethics Institute.
Karlawish Votes for Ballots on Wheels
With the upcoming Presidential election, Jason Karlawish, from the University of Pennsylvania, says that he's worried that the elderly in long-term care facilities won't get to vote.
In the story from WPTV.com, Karlawish says that "Elderly voters - especially elderly voters who live in long-term care settings - are at the mercy of others when it comes to exercising their right to vote," and therefore a model of mobile polling should be implemented to ensure that all citizens have an opportunity to vote.
Hey, if Australia and Canada do it, why can't we? As long as those certain Diebold machines don't get lost on their way back from the long-term care facility with their paper copies of the ballots and their data are just as secure--who could argue against our eldest citizens exercising our most valued privilege as members of democracy.
Summer Johnson, PhD
The Face Trust Coming to the UK
In an article published in the Times Online from London, Peter Butler, MD argues that a better quality life made possible through face transplantation outweighs the risks of failure and rejection and possible life shortening that may occur from taking anti-rejection drugs.
The NHS is considering that it will begin funding these procedures sometime in 2009, but in the meantime they will be funded by donations to the Face Trust , (not the best name we know, but leave it to the Brits) for the more than 250,000 Britons who have severe facial deformities today. These operations are slated to start sometime in the next 12 months with Butler's surgical team at the helm.
A must-read for any patient thinking of undergoing the procedure or any surgeon thinking of participating in it is AJOB's precient article on "The Ethics of Facial Transplant Research" published in 2004, a full year before the first face transplant was done.
Now, less than 4 years after this article was published, Butler, a member of the soon-to-be face transplant team in London and CEO of the Face Trust, says that "already the debate has moved on. No longer are we discussing the ethics of whether to perform a face transplant but merely the ethics of how."
I'm not quite so sure that is true, but it would seem that if the money is made available face transplants will be made available for those who want them in the UK very soon. Yet, I wonder--among these 250,000 with severe deformities--who will have the first chance to have the procedure? What will be the criteria by which these individuals are selected? What about those who are able to pay and not use the Face Trust's scarce resources--will they be first in the queue?
Only time will tell what other ethical issues will come up under this scheme. If they can be adequately answered, more widespread face transplantation may improve the quality of life for a significant number of Britons very soon.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Jeremy, You Are Way Way Way too Young for This!
Johns Hopkins School of Medicine has created the Jeremy Sugarman Award to honor individuals who show the potential for excellence in bioethics research. The award is named for Jeremy Sugarman, MD MPH, Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics' Deputy Director for Medicine and Harvey M. Meyerhoff Professor of Bioethics and Medicine. This national award consists of $500 and an all expense paid trip to Baltimore to lecture to the Hopkins crowd. 
The goal of the award is to promote among house staff that they can be bioethics researchers, too. What could be better than those with the hands-on, in the trenches experience in medicine to start studying those deep moral questions to improve the lives of their patients? Hopefully, the mere existence of such an award will not only benefit those who already do good bioethics scholarship, but also encourage those doctors interested in ethics to begin to ask the tough questions in medicine, to write about, and publish about them.
Huzzah to Hopkins who has honored both the man after which the award is named and doctors who do bioethics well.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Top 5 New Stories of The Week on Bioethics.net
Take a look at the 5 most read news stories from bioethics.net this week and you'll see that our readers were most interested in a historical essay on the role of genetics in politics (and its scandals), a story about a new end-of-life care bill in California, and an "empowered patient" story from CNN about knowing whether your physician has financial ties to the devices he or she is implanting in you.
History's DNA
21 Aug 2008 - While the recent admission by former North Carolina Senator John Edwards that he had engaged in an extramarital affair drew criticism of his conduct from across the political spectrum, the decision of his alleged mistress, Rielle Hunter, to refuse paternity testing for her infant daughter went largely unquestioned in the media.
A Bill for Patients
21 Aug 2008 - In the course of treating a patient, there may come a point when the physician says, "I've done all I can. It's out of my hands." The patient may then ask about end-of-life options -- not life-ending options, but end-of-life options, such as palliative care focused on making the patient as comfortable as possible during the final illness.
Don't become a victim of medical marketing
21 Aug 2008 - Linda Lewis says that when she had back surgery two years ago, her surgeon didn't do what was best for her health; he did was best for his bank account.
State Supreme Court says doctors must treat gays and lesbians
18 Aug 2008 - Doctors in California must treat gays and lesbians the same as any other patient, regardless of religious objections, the state Supreme Court ruled today.
Hospitals' spies give client care a checkup
18 Aug 2008 - Wearing slacks and dress shirts, they blended in with the other people waiting near the main admitting desk at the Nebraska Medical Center. But they weren't patients or family. They were "secret shoppers'' -- employees and managers from other departments covertly watching how admission staff dealt with patients.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Harry and Louise Do A Flip-Flop on Health Care Reform
Harry and Louise, foils of the Clinton healthcare reform efforts of 1993-1994, are back on the air again but this time in the service of healthcare reform, says Red Orbit. Organizations as different in philosophies as the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN), the American Hospital Association (AHA), the Catholic Health Association (CHA), Families USA, and the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) are teaming up to resurrect the dynamic duo to talk about the moral imperative of quality, affordable healthcare for all.
The rationale here seems a bit confusing--will most Americans remember Harry and Louise, and if so, won't they be confused that the anti-healthcare reform mavens are now in favor of just what they torpedoed Hillary Clinton for 15 years ago?
Clearly, others think that Harry and Louise are important icons not just for healthcare reform, but for other political issues as well. Lest we think that these two are moral exmplars--Harry and Louise are talking about anyone to anyone who will listen. They can be seen stumping for a Democrat in Colorado below.
For the sake of healthcare reform, let's hope this ad campaign, set to air for the next 3 weeks during the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, will strike a chord, and that no one "swiftboats" Harry and Louise for being flip-floppers on an issue as important as this one.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Will the Real Patient Please Stand Up?
What do your local McDonald's, Macy's and hospital have in common? While you are in line to get your Big Mac, Crocs or to get healthcare, you could be waiting behind a "secret shopper". As reported in Nebraska's La Vista Sun, a number of Midwestern hospitals, as well as others around the country, are turning to the customer service research methods of the retail industry to know how to serve patients better. These "secret shoppers" pose as patients gathering data about how patients are treated, how long they wait, what waiting rooms are like, and more. All in the service of improving customer service. Something seems strange about this...
A 1918 Flu Memoir
My grandfather was an amazing man, biologically speaking. He lived until age 103, so healthy that family lore has it that his cancer-ridden prostate actually grew back, apparently normal enough to have enabled him to survive another few decades. He ate his favorite food, deep fried crabs, until the day he died, and he didn't seem to have succumbed to anything in particular other than perhaps running out of ATP.
Grandpa Sam would amaze people with his memories of having seen Babe Ruth in action. But what always impressed me was his having survived the 1918 influenza pandemic that killed 50 million. My grandmother was his nurse - that's how they met. 
I remember clearly my grandfather teaching me how to blow my nose correctly, my sister and cousins happily spraying all manner of nasty pathogens around the circa-1960s kitchen in Brooklyn. As a child I'd wonder why and how he never had so much as a sniffle, given his constant exposures. Years later, as a graduate student in genetics and entrenched in evolutionary biology, I began to suspect that his having survived the Great Influenza somehow endowed him with a superhuman antibody response that lasted a very long lifetime. Maybe other astonishingly elderly antibodies are what protected him against the various rhinoviruses and adenoviruses that cause the common cold, which he also never seemed to contract.
Top 5 Stories of the Week on Bioethics.net
Just in case you missed them, below are the most-read news stories of the week from bioethics.net.
Summer Johnson, PhD
New possibilities for stem cell research
10 Aug 2008 - As America struggles with such weighty issues as the war in Iraq, the foundering economy and the run-up to a historic presidential election, it may be difficult to recall that seven years ago this month the most wrenching issue facing the nation was human embryonic stem cell research.
As Swimming Records Fall, Technology Muddies the Water
12 Aug 2008 - He swam so improbably fast, making up so much ground in a foaming, desperate attempt to reach the wall first in the 4x100-meter relay, that Jason Lezak not only won a gold medal for the United States on Monday, but he also helped to shatter the world record by nearly four seconds.
Let the Games Be Doped
12 Aug 2008 - Once upon a time, the lords of the Olympic Games believed that the only true champion was an amateur, a gentleman hobbyist untainted by commerce. Today they enforce a different ideal.
Handle With Care
12 Aug 2008 - Last year, a private company proposed "fertilizing" parts of the ocean with iron, in hopes of encouraging carbon-absorbing blooms of plankton. Meanwhile, researchers elsewhere are talking about injecting chemicals into the atmosphere, launching sun-reflecting mirrors into stationary orbit above the earth or taking other steps to reset the thermostat of a warming planet.
The ethics of eating organically and sustainably
12 Aug 2008 - Science, developments in food technology and a free exchange of information mean that the simplest of human reflexes has become a complex moral and philosophical conundrum.
Harvesting Hearts As Fast as One Can: Is It Ethical?
The controversy surrounding the New England Journal of Medicine article about using cardiac death as the criterion for death in pediatric heart transplant has sparked significant discussion among ethicists. Bioethicists have been asked to consider whether it is ethical that precious organs were harvested within literally seconds (75 to be exact) of cardiac death to preserve the integrity of the hearts prior to transplantation into their recipients.
One has to wonder: were the parents' decisions rushed in order to harvest organs, or if not in these cases, could they be in the future if this became standard practice? Does preserving the integrity of the organ justify whatever sacrifices of considered judgment might be made?
Personally, this policy seems to make sense for children who have experienced cardiac death and whose parents clearly have made up their minds that they wish to donate their child's organs to another needy recipient. However, for those parents whose child's death is sudden, which would be the case for many children whose hearts are healthy in the first place, and/or who may not have considered judgments about when they would consider their child dead (a horrible thing to even think about) and under which circumstances they would wish to donate organs, I am concerned that these parents may not be able to make adequately informed and rational choices about organ donation. These three cases presented by the NEJM article clearly did not suffer from these problems--but could other less carefully thought out protocols? No doubt.
Moreover, I question the NEJM authors' assertion that using cardiac death as the definition would increase substantially the number of donors available for pediatric heart transplantation. Certainly, it would make more persons and families POTENTIAL donors, but unless the majority of those parents choose to donate their child's organs one has to wonder if embracing this policy, even just for heart transplantation, would be justifiable in virtue of the number of actual donations gained.
Stay tuned to the blog for more updates as comments and commentaries come in about this issue. There no doubt it is bound to be a conversation starter among ethicists, doctors, and policy-makers all around.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Money! Turns Out Its Bad for You...
Peter Singer opines in today's Accra Daily Mail, one of Ghana's capital city newspapers, about the evils of money. Singer cites a behavioral study that concludes that even the slightest suggestions of money presented to a group of individuals (e.g. money passing on a computer screen) made them less likely to ask for help or even sit next to others. 
Does anyone else think that these conclusions about how money isolates us and makes us less willing to be helpful in our society ring a bit hollow? And what does the conclusion that money is not neutral really get us? We can't function without money in our society and I don't know how we'd try to be more "aware" of money in our lives as to counteract the effects Singer describes in his essay.
Rather than engage with Singer's claims, which fail to "cash out", let me just ask this--does it seem ironic to anyone else that this column, appearing in one of Ghana's major newspapers, written by a full professor with an endowed chair at Princeton University who literally makes, in salary alone, seventy times what the average Ghanaian earns a year (even minus his admirable 20% donation of his annual salary to charity). Strange that this philosopher should be making an argument about the non-neutrality of money to the Ghanaian people--don't you think?
In any case, Singer fails to make a positive suggestion for what we would do to counteract the negative pull that money creates. Start trading corn cobs? No, says Singer, even he acknowledges we can't escape money in this day and age. Then in the absence of a barter system or something to replace money that does not have the negative effects, what can we do?
I'm not sure--but I'm going to go buy a book to find out.
Summer Johnson
Should We Change the Definition of Death? Watch the Video...
Today's, New England Journal of Medicine published a report of successful pediatric heart transplantation from donors who suffered cardiac death. Part of their paper argues that using circulatory system failures as a definition of death would open up a significantly larger portion of cadavers available to donate organs.
To hear the ethics debate about this paper and the arguments surrounding cardiac death as a definition for death, check out NEJM's Perspective Roundtable on video.
The Olympics Heat Up Debate on Enhancement
With the Olympic competitions heating up, the debates on enhancement, sport, and the human form have more than left the starting blocks in the newspapers and online. Personally, I can't muster up more than a review of what's been written as I'm less than convinced that there are any really interesting ethical issues here to talk about.
Andy Miah's commentary in the Washington Post
argues that enhancement is great, but that steroids are not. Huh? In the New York Times, John Tierney says that if we can't test for enhancing drugs, we might as well "let the games be doped". Jonathan Moreno never really stakes a claim, but his Science Progress piece reminds us that progressives care about enhancement too, or at least know how to talk about it over sandwiches, liberal-style. Jere Longman and Gina Kolata, also in the Times, advance the claim that better technology, not better humans, is the reason why records are being shattered in Beijing.
Anyone else have a comment about enhancement? As for me, I'm going back to just enjoying watching the struggle, the thrill of victory, and leaving it to someone else to care whether the ancient Greeks are rolling over in their graves at the events of the 2008 Olympics.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Like blog.bioethics.net? Got an iPhone?
View image Never miss a single post on blog.bioethics.net! No matter if your on 2g, 3g or wifi, bioethics.net will load fast on your iphone. Simply bookmark the easy to remember address. http://www.bioethics.net/i and never miss a single post.
Coming Soon: Robo-Pancreas
Thanks to the folks at Engaget we have learned that researchers have developed an artificial pancreas complete with a remote device that monitors your blood sugar, morning, noon and night. 
This device could be a lifesaver for those with diabetes, particularly juvenile diabetes, if it could be a permanent implant that would allow for constant monitoring of blood sugar levels and injection of insulin from the device, says MIT Technology Review. One would hope that this device can be made accessible, affordable, and is proven to be safe for long-term use by the FDA. This device could potentially make disease management for diabetes incredibly simple and easy.
Yet, one wonders why one would prefer to have the Robo-Pancreas when they could have a real new pancreas grown from their own cells? One wonders why the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation is pursuing this line of research rather than that of Anthony Atala at the Wake Forest Institute of Regenerative Medicine who have already engineered artificial pancrei.
Yet while the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continues to fund this work (see the project here), it is possible that Robo-Pancreas will be available in the not too distant future.
But if it were between a cellular replacement or a robotic one, for those dealing with diabetes, the bottom line is a pancreatic replacement of some kind will result in better health outcomes for all. Only time will tell which will be the better solution.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Beware: Your Doctor May Be a Blogger...
A recent report in the Journal of General Internal Medicine, as reported on US News and World Report, found that more than half of medical blogs allowed the physicans themselves to be identified and even some patients could identify themselves from the blog entries.
Far be it from us to discourage blogging, but we certainly do encourage ethical blogging by doctors who protect patient privacy, disclose financial or other conflicts of interest, and adhere to ethical standards in regard to advertising and promoting medical products (all of which the JGIM article suggests some physician blogs failed to do).
So next time you are in your doctor's office, you might want to casually ask: "Hey Doc, do you blog?"
Summer Johnson, PhD
Who needs Jenny Craig when you can get slim in Second Life?
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that researchers at the University of Houston's Obesity Research Center is using Second Life to help overweight persons learn about and develop habits for a healthy lifestyle.
Hmm...now let's see--there would seem to be a trend here. Earlier this week on bioethics.net, we posted a story about pediatric oncology researchers using video games to teach children to be more compliant with their drug therapy. Now, obesity researchers are using Second Life to have people put down the Cheetos and the remote and hop on the treadmill and eat a salad. Undoubtedly, it's a creative idea, and evidently one that many researchers are turning to in using Second Life to conduct research studies, says the SF Chronicle article.
But why people would care more about their avatar than they do their own health in real life? And if they do, how will this help us know what will motivate people in real life to live healthier lifestyles? Unfortunately, unlike in the University of Houston study, in the real world, no one is handing out "Lindens" (the currency of Second Life) or any kind of "brownie points" for being active or eating well.
So, how will the researchers separate out those persons whose avatars are morphing from chunky to slim out of sheer from competitiveness in the online world and those who truly are learning about how to improve their health and would take something away from Second Life?
But I'm still wondering whether this research will actually result in learning about whether people will acquire healthier behaviors in the real world after living online with a healthier slimmer new avatar. If it does work, watch out Jenny Craig--people will be whittling their waistlines with their avatar online for free with Second Life.
Summer Johnson, PhD
You Read It Here First...Booger's Back!
Last week on our website, you saw the news story from the Baltimore Sun about the woman, Bernann McKinney, who cloned her dog, Booger, to the tune of $50,000. One doesn't even know where to begin to comment on the ethics here: resource allocation, health risks to the animals, and the clear misconceptions of the owner that she is "getting Booger back" by cloning him. 
To read more, check out Wired's piece, which goes into greater depth than I can stand...it's just too much.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Stem Cell Update: Welcome New iPS Cell Lines!
While the media has been sidetracked with the Olympic games, the mental illness of the anthrax scientist, a hyped report about water on Mars, and drugs that turn mice into athletes, stem cells researchers have been quietly announcing truly spectacular work - the creation of 11 induced pluripotent stem (iPS) (aka "reprogrammed") cell lines from sick people.
ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease) iPS cells were announced last week, from Kevin Eggan's group at Harvard, and today George Daley's group at Children's Hospital in Boston unveiled 10 more - and a birth announcement for the Harvard Stem Cell Institute Core lab, which will provide said cells and many more free to researchers (not to patients!).Also in this one-week span came word from Rudolf Jaenisch's lab at the Whitehead Institute that they had found a safer alternative to one of the cancer-causing genes used to reprogram cells.
. "The new cell lines represent a collection of diseases that have no good treatments and, for the most part, no good animal models. This will allow researchers for the first time to watch the disease progress in a dish, opening the door to a new way to treat degenerative disease," said Doug Melton, co-director of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute at a press conference announcing the results on August 6.
Frustrations with using human ES cells helped pave the way for the new facility, added Daley. "Part of the goal of this iPS repository is to make sure these cells get to the largest number of research labs as possible. It is a resource for the entire biomedical community. We hope it will accelerate research and create a climate of openness."
A major goal of stem cell research has been to create cell-based models of human disease. "And this is the paper that says, here they are, the first set," Daley said. This "first wave" of diseases includes an immune deficiency, two forms of muscular dystrophy, Huntington disease, Gaucher disease, a rare blood disorder (Shwachman-Bodian-Diamond syndrome), Parkinson disease, type 1 diabetes, Down syndrome, and a Lesch-Nyhan syndrome carrier. "It's a combination of what we were interested in and those with the most general interest. Over time, the number of iPS cell lines could equal or exceed the number of diseases," Daley added.
And so it is a heady time for stem cell science -- just on schedule for the anniversary of George W. Bush's stranglehold on hES cell lines circa summer's end, 2001.
Stay tuned ...
Ricki Lewis is the author of the novel "Stem Cell Symphony" and many textbooks and articles. She is a geneticist and fellow of the Alden March Bioethics Institute.
Playing Nice with Mr. Egg Man...
The debate continues over on Secondhand Smoke as Wesley Smith and I continue to discuss whether selling eggs for research is acceptable. After he buttered me up, I replied with slightly less sarcasm but just as much fervor!
-Summer Johnson, PhD
Peeling the Egg...
Wesley J. Smith over at Secondhand Smoke is grousing that I took aim at his argument about banning egg donation of any kind, including paid donations of eggs for stem cell research. As he says in his blog post of August 4th, "my intent is to avoid exploitation of the weak by the powerful", an outright ban on egg donation of any kind and for any reason certainly would prevent any women the potential of any kind of risk from donating eggs. However, it also ensures that there would be a dearth of eggs available for IVF and for scientific research, ignoring the needs of others who are "weak" and are in need in our society. It seems like an awfully high "price" to pay to ensure that no woman is ever seduced by the evils of the market.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Suzanne Somers: Stem Cell Master?
In case anyone still has any misgivings about the promise of stem cell therapy, rest assured, for a new expert voice has emerged – the eminent scientist Suzanne Somers. 
Yes, she of Three’s Company fame is the new spokesperson for NeoStem Inc., about to launch a stem-cell-storage campaign in California. In an upcoming not-to-be missed event, she will have her stem cells publicly collected at the California HealthSpan Institute in San Diego, presumably from a lone fat cell or two still lurking in her thigh.
Discovered [Sort Of]: Personalized [Not Quite Therapeutic] Cell Stuff
The latest achievement in the stem cell research community was announced yesterday in ScienceXpress finding that iPS cells can be generated from ALS patients which then can be used to create healthy motor neuron cells. As the authors of study put it, the generation of iPS cells from these patients could allow, in the future, for personalized disease modeling, drug discovery, and therapy.
The way the report and the media articles read one would think that the holy grail for stem cell research, personalized therapies for individuals made from their own bodies' cells, is now within reach--but this is just more of the stem cell hype.
The Egg Man
Wesley Smith writes on Second Hand Smoke that there ought to be an outright ban on the a woman's ability to sell her gametes all together--for fertility treatments, stem cell research, or any purpose at all. He makes this claim that paying women $3000 to $7000 per cycle was troublesome, citing as his reasons health risks and the commoditization of women.
Yet, he argues that altruistic donations of eggs by women would be fine....despite the existence of the same health risks regardless of whether money changes hands or not.
Somehow it seems unjust to me to ask women to undergo what all acknowledge to be a difficult, painful, and for some women risky process to donate eggs--whether for altruistic or other reasons--and at least not compensate her for her time and on some sort of model of "hazard pay".
So explain this argument to me, Mr. Egg Man, why is it okay to ask women to undertake the health risks for no pay, yet compensation for time or effort would be so horrible as to recommending banning the practice?
Summer Johnson, PhD
