embryonic – Fountain Magazine

Embryonic Stem Cells

The Fountain — Fri, 01 Jan 2021 02:43:36 +0000

In 1981, scientists discovered ways to derive embryonic stem cells from early mouse embryos. Since then, they have been the subject of intense scrutiny, controversy, and advocacy.

They are unique cells, which can be derived from human embryos and can be differentiated into virtually any kind of different cells. In humans, there are about 200 different types of cells including bone, muscle, and nerve cells, and within these cells there are about 20 different types of structures or organelles. Essentially, stem cells can be derived from human embryos, and with the right enzymes, can be stimulated. For instance, bone cells can originate from osteocyte cells, or liver tissues can come from hepatocytes.

Stem cell types and research

There are three types of stem cells:

Embryonic stem cells
Adult stem cells
Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSC)

Embryonic stem cells are derived from human embryos. Adult stem cells are undifferentiated cells (meaning “clean slates” with the potential to change into another cell variant) found throughout the body after development; they multiply via cell division to replenish dying cells and regenerate damaged tissues. Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSC), which were discovered in 2006, are derived from skin or blood cells that have been reprogrammed back into an embryonic-like pluripotent state that enables the development of an unlimited source of any type of human cell needed for therapeutic purposes. While these types of cells are interesting and certainly worthy of research, this article will focus on embryonic stem cells as they are consistently the most well-known and discussed type by the general public.

Embryonic stem cells are potent and often sought after due to their abilities to proliferate without limit and contribute to any cell type. However, with great power comes great responsibility and stem cells are no exception. Poorly processed cells have been documented to mutate into cancerous tumors that can wreak havoc upon people’s bodies. Bearing this in mind, scientists also do not believe that this should derail stem cell therapies considering that there are DNA tests to check if stem cells will turn out to be problematic or not.

The stem cell project is regularly a subject of ethical debate in both the academic and public sectors. Most embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos that develop from eggs that have been fertilized in vitro—in an in vitro fertilization clinic—and then donated for research purposes with the informed consent of the donors. People willingly donate their eggs for this research, and this process does not constitute child-killing since the eggs are near their zygote phase, not a whole mature embryo. Scientists obtain those types of cells from an embryo which has not yet completed its formation to develop into a human being. Researchers then use these cells for various treatment and research purposes. It is important to stress that they are not derived from eggs fertilized in a woman’s body and that they are produced in a plastic laboratory culture via clinics in vitro.

Some examples of embryonic stem cells being used in research include the following:

1. UCLA stem cell gene therapy cures bubble baby disease

Researchers at UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) have developed a cure for babies born with Bubble Baby Disease, a rare and life-threatening condition that can be fatal within the first year of life, by using stem cells from multiple patients and gene therapy to correct the genetic mutation of these patients.

2. Asterias biotherapeutics restores some independence to those suffering from paralysis caused by spinal cord injuries

Asterias Biotherapeutics spent much of 2016-2017 developing a stem cell therapy to restore upper body motor function to quadriplegic spinal cord injury victims. Through lengthy and rigorous testing in human clinical trials, the therapy was found to be safe for use in people with all patients treated reporting at least some improvements. Asterias is now expanding its clinical trials to include patients with sub-acute injuries.

3. UC Irvine scientists engineer stem cells to destroy cancer

In a study conducted by University of California, Irvine researchers, a stem cell-based technique was devised to find and destroy breast cancer cells that had already metastasized. The cells “feel” the stiffness of the surrounding tissues and destroy the cancer-causing cells.

Embryonic stem cells can remain undifferentiated when they are grown in a well taken care of culture that is under stable conditions. Problems primarily begin to arise if cells are allowed to clump together to form embryoid bodies in which they begin to differentiate, or change into more specific cell variants, spontaneously. Although spontaneous differentiation is a good indication that shows which cultures of embryonic stem cells are healthy, the process is uncontrolled and, therefore, an inefficient strategy to produce cultures of specific cell types.

The ability of stem cells being able to differentiate into hundreds of other types of cells continues to amaze scientists as this is no small discovery. Researchers believe that the possibilities with stem cells are near endless, especially in regard to “regenerative medicine,” the process of “replacing, engineering, or regenerating human cells, tissues, or organs to restore or establish a new function.” It is even believed that even whole organs could be synthetically grown by using them.” Additionally, stem cells have the potential to rebuild healthy tissues, help people with heart disease, diabetes, ALS, Alzheimer’s disease, liver disease, Parkinson’s disease, cancer, and many more illnesses.

In a stem cell transplant, embryonic stem cells are first specialized into the necessary adult cell type. Then, those mature cells replace tissue that is damaged by a disease or injury. This type of treatment could be used to:

Replace neurons damaged by spinal cord injury, a stroke, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, or other neurological problems.
Produce insulin that could treat people with diabetes and heart muscle cells that could repair damage after a heart attack
Replace virtually any tissue or organ that is injured or diseased.

Sometimes scientists use stem cells as a drug. For example, it is possible to inject a stem cell into joints to reduce swelling and pain, or in order to promote the healing processes of soft tissues. Stem cell therapy is performed by injecting the patient’s own stem cells to stimulate the body to repair and replace damaged tissue in any joint or soft tissue structures – such as knees, shoulders, hips, wrists, ankles, elbows, tendons, ligaments and non-healing bone fractures. Cellular Dynamics, a large biotechnical company, sells human heart cells called cardiomyocytes that are derived from induced pluripotent stem (IPS) cells. Pharmaceutical companies are adapting to this new and innovative trend on a day-to-day basis. Stem cells can also be used to test the quality and safety of investigational drugs by testing them on stem cells that have been transformed into tissue-specific cells. Researchers are able to monitor the side effects before exposing the drug to a patient and thus have a greater expectancy of how their body may respond to the drug. This allows us to test for cures for potentially fatal diseases in ways that would otherwise be risky or unethical.

With all of the aforementioned advantages, stem cells are a fairly new, but exceptionally promising, research area. For some people, it may seem unethical to use stem cells on the grounds that extracting stem cells damages the blastocyst, which is a structure formed in the early development of mammals, more specifically the sixth or the eighth day of the development of an embryo. In 2006, President Bush vetoed the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act stating that the federal government should not support “the taking of innocent human life.” Although stem cells are very promising for science and can open new doors to many new treatments in the medical field, it looks like there are still differences of opinion on their ethical use. This is perhaps because there is need for more convincing evidence or people are not informed accurately on the details of this research area.

References

Embryonic Stem Cells: What Do They Hold in Store?

Louima Cunningham — Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:00:39 +0000

Embryonic stem cells are cells in the early stages of embryonic development when a fertilized egg cell is divided first into two cells and then into four, eight, and sixteen. Each grows into a brand new cell type and multiplies as per the codes present in its DNA program as tissues form and organization starts.

After twenty years of research and accompanying debates on the human embryo, we are finally on the threshold of both reshaping our present concepts in biology and moving on to clinical case studies. The first human embryonic stem cells were produced in 1998. Studies researching the question, “Can we treat diabetes by reprogramming the DNA in these cells at the beginning of life?” switched first to how human genes worked and which genes are responsible for the development of particular tissues and then to the embryonic stem cells for these areas and ultimately to replacing or reprogramming a “faulty or deficient” gene.

The most controversial topics in genetics and embryonic studies are related to bioethics. Many scientists are grappling with questions like whether is it ethically correct to intervene with the genetic programming of a fertilized human egg (zygote)? If so, what should be the limits? Are we trespassing a divine domain?

Embryonic stem cells have been an excellent source of information that we lacked throughout history about how living organisms started to develop. Like astronomers who trace their knowledge to the Big Bang in order to obtain fundamental information about the origin of the universe, biologists have been researching how the molecules in a single cell went through sequential and planned changes, how they transformed and acquired new functions that triggered the mind-blowing developments in diverse, miraculous living organisms. Scientists have found out how primordial embryonic cells transformed into more than 200 cell types that constitute various tissues and organs. The number of studies has skyrocketed about which molecule types can be used to regenerate the damaged tissue, say, after a traffic accident. Embryonic studies that focus on the regeneration or reparation of medulla cells (spinal cord) have been a source of hope for some patients with permanent paralysis because of a broken back injury or severed spine in a traffic accident or those who are still stranded in wheelchairs. Similarly, the preliminary findings of research into Parkinson’s and diabetes are extremely promising, and a new study reports of two blind people with macular degeneration (which causes blindness) who have been treated.

Initial studies

In 1981 researchers successfully obtained stem cells from a rat embryo culture. They soon realized that the cells held a secret potential: they could grow into 200 different types of cells. Later Wisconsin-Madison University biologist James Thomson derived stem cells from primates for the first time. Three years afterwards, Thomson derived the first human embryonic stem cells from donated but unused embryos.

The increasing number of research studies into embryonic stem cells sparked off intense debate both in religious circles and among the science community that care passionately about the sanctity of humans. Allegedly, lab studies were conducted on human embryos without restrictions, which were grown until tissues and organs formed but were then killed. In 2001, the US president George W. Bush slashed federal funds, stating that stem cell research was not strictly ethical. Deriving embryonic cells was banned in many countries including Germany and Italy. In other countries, however, studies went full speed ahead. Indeed, reports flooded in about stem cells grown by researchers in Australia, Singapore, Israel, Canada and the USA into nerve cells, immune system cells, and heart cells.

Before long, a new idea emerged about transferring new cells into the egg cell – like nuclei of body cells used in cloning Dolly the sheep – to produce various tailor-made, fully DNA-compatible tissues and organs, as they had the same genome as the donor’s. It became a topic of everyday conversations that spare organs could be cultivated for the human body just like spare parts of cars or other machinery were produced to replace a faulty or damaged part. In fact, if it were not for claims such as “creating a new human” there would be no objections against producing a kidney, lung, or heart from the DNA of a patient and thus overcome the major problem of tissue rejection in transplantation of organs.

If faulty or defective genes could be removed and replaced by healthy genes in the DNA of stem cells, many incurable genetic diseases could easily be fixed and many prospective parents who avoid having a child because of a defective gene they carry would welcome the development enthusiastically.

We are on the threshold of reshaping our present concepts in biology and moving on to clinical case studies. Embryonic studies have been a source of hope for even patients with diseases like paralysis and blindness.

Just in time and in the right amount

Embryonic stem cells are cells in the early stages of embryonic development when a fertilized egg cell is divided first into two cells and then into four, eight, and sixteen. Each grows into a brand new cell type and multiplies as per the codes present in its DNA program as tissues form and organization starts. It is most mysterious and miraculous that the molecules that lead a stem cell to transform into a new type of cell are synthesized at exactly the right moment and in the precise amount. Scientists are currently trying to figure out which molecule leads a cell to become a nerve, muscle, or bone cell when attached to it. They are likely to decode the molecules by monitoring the tissues that remain undeveloped because of missing genes resulting from DNA mutations observed in certain genetic diseases.

The new field that has developed in the last two decades called regenerative medicine is predicated on tapping into the potential of stem cells by repairing missing or faulty tissues, or completing a link in the chain necessary for the functioning of a dysfunctional metabolic process. In 2006, stem cell biologist Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto University in Japan successfully transformed adult rat cells into an embryonic state. The following year, human body cells were transformed into embryonic stem cells. The ensuing research has led to the acknowledgement that it was theoretically possible to transform stem cells into any cell type, a promising cure for diseased embryos that have genetically missing parts.

The major problem, however, is keeping these delicate cells alive in a culture medium. In 2007, Yoshiki Sasai discovered a molecule called rock inhibitor that nourished the cell colonies he grew. The success rate in generating new cell colonies rose to 27%. Parmar from Swedish Lund University heralded “a new golden era” by producing new neurons from embryonic stem cells for the treatment of Parkinson’s.

As new techniques were developed for producing cells fast and reliably, these cells turned out to involve a very low risk of developing cancer. “We don’t yet know how this hidden power and balance that can be transformed into any cell type is controlled,” states Hiromitsu Nakauchi, a stem cell biologist at Tokyo University who researches making blood platelets out of stem cells derived from the embryo or somatic cells.

Experiments are underway that aim to treat disorders by activating stem cells stored in the body that have not yet differentiated through the help of proper stimulating molecules.

Miraculous differentiation

As the techniques for producing and feeding stem cells got easier, researchers aimed at growing and forming tissues and organs. A connective tissue or an outer covering like the skin that lacks a shape but takes the shape of the underlying muscles and bones can be produced even in a Petri dish and then transplanted to a burned or missing area of the skin. The present aim is the production of organs such as the kidney or the heart that has a particular shape and is made up of a number of different tissues. If the correct signal molecules responsible for cell division and differentiation can be identified and readily used where necessary and at the right amount, then organs including any type of tissue can be produced. Researchers like James Wells at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital in Ohio have tested the damage of drugs on intestines by using the partial intestines they developed from stem cells rather than administer them to normal humans, thereby hailing the imminent age of intestine transplants.

In 2004, the doctors who did tube baby experiments for a patient in Chicago known to have a genetic disorder started to produce a series of stem cells from generated embryos. They made models at the cellular level of the emergence of such genetic disorders as thalassemia, Huntington’s disease, Marfan syndrome, and muscle dystrophy. In 2007, they used embryonic stem cells to suppress molecular changes that trigger mental disorders caused by a genetic disorder called fragile X syndrome.

Research shows that multipotent (mesenchymal) cells stimulated at the outset of tissues are even more promising than embryonic cells with respect to diseases because it is easier to repair damaged or missing tissue by guiding them. However, it is essential in a genetic disorder that cells derived at the beginning of the embryonic stage should be used in order to replace faulty genes with healthy ones and address the disorder at its outset.

Experiments are underway that aim to treat disorders by activating stem cells stored in the body that have not yet differentiated through the help of proper stimulating molecules. In this way, as many as ten illnesses are likely to be treated, some of which include diabetes, macular degeneration in the eye, and neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s.

Douglas Melton from Harvard Stem Cell Institute in Cambridge has worked for fifteen years to transform embryonic stem cells into insulin-producing β-cells. He has produced pancreatic cells that sense glucose and produce insulin and he hopes to transplant them to end the dependence of patients of diabetes type-1 on insulin shots. The last obstacle remains to be the introduction of these cells to the system so that they are not destroyed by the patient’s immune system.

Clinically, it is believed that stimulated multipotent cells have a greater advantage than embryonic cells because the produced cells and tissues have the same DNA as the patient and thus do not cause any immune reaction when they are transplanted. The problem for many genetic disorders including type-1 diabetes is that the patient has the same mutation in his or her genes, and a method should be devised for cleaning and replacing these cells.

Another problem is the cost. It is reported that preparation of a series of multipotent cells will cost about one million dollars. However, the cost is expected to decrease and cells will be developed for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease, which is caused by a loss of neurotransmitter substance, which enable communication between nerves, and dopamine.

Treatment of macular degeneration is a popular target in this field. Patients gained the ability to read, though slowly, one year after the transplantation of part of stimulated multipotent cells to a damaged retina.

Such research studies normally cause some opposition. Playing with genes and embryos involve certain ethical and health risks. Yet, as reported in a Prophetic tradition, with all our God-given abilities like intelligence, curiosity, and willpower, humans can, and hopefully will, find cures for all diseases. Research into stem cells has the potential to provide many breakthroughs in these efforts to find healing for every human. Scientists and ethicists have to work together to determine our direction not to cause any unintended harm to any single soul while moving forward with this research.

Ensoulment: When Does Human Life Begin?

Louima Cunningham — Fri, 01 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0000

One of the most controversial topics in modern bioethics, science, and philosophy is to try to pinpoint the beginning of an individual human life. The consequences of this discussion are vitally important, as they may help to articulate more adequate arguments on some bioethical issues, like the definition of the moral status of the embryo, abortion, and embryo research.¹ Many philosophers and scientists have argued about the definition of personhood and when the beginning of a human individual’s life occurs, however an acceptable explanation has not yet been provided. In this field there is a temptation to ask science to choose between opinions and beliefs, yet these neutralize one another. We thought that the question of when human life begins requires the essential aid of different forms of knowledge. Here we become involved in the juncture between science and religion, which needs to be carefully explored.² In this article we will therefore try to explore this issue from different perspectives. To begin with, we can agree, as pointed out by Mason and McCall Smith, that what constitutes the state of being a person, or personhood, is a moral decision.³ Most religious traditions hold that what makes one a person is the possession of a soul.⁴ When the body meets with the soul, what results is a human person, with all the attendant rights, especially the basic right to life. Under the light of these considerations our duty is to search for the exact time of ensoulment, in order to prevent us from terminating the lives of actual “human persons,” namely by abortion or embryo research. The purpose of the present study was therefore to determine when, in the course of normal development, a human being begins to exist.

The availability of embryonic stem (ES) cells isolated from human blastocysts may open novel avenues for medical treatment of otherwise incurable diseases.⁵ ES cells are pluripotent, apparently able to make any cell, except placental cells, and are also immortal.⁶ However, the generation of human ES cells requires the destruction of early human embryos. This raises the same ethical questions and conflicts that are often heard when the ethics of abortion are discussed: Most people in the pro-life movement regard an embryo to be a full human person with a soul. It has all of the rights of any citizen-including the right to life. Thus any procedure that injures or kills an embryo is seen as murder. However, most people in the pro-choice movement regard the beginning of human personhood to occur much later in pregnancy. Thus, killing a recently fertilized embryo is not seen as the murder of a human person.⁷ What is the status of the embryo when it is several days old? Is the embryo alive? Yes, from its beginning the embryo is cellular and it is alive; no one questions this. But, is the embryo human? If we could catch the embryo before it reaches a stage where it is judged as human, we would be able to take the ES cells without any concern. In an earlier paper⁸ it was argued that human life begins when the newly formed body systems begin to function as a whole, towards the end of the embryonic stage. Seeing that twinning can occur as late as day 14 after conception and that such identical twinning will produce two individuals with different lives, this could be proposed as a pre-embryonic stage, i.e. the stage where the single individual person has not yet been determined. In this respect, The Ethics Committee of the American Fertility Society defines an embryo as distinct from a pre-embryo, based on medical science and legal precedents. According to that report and the Warnock Report, which lay behind the 1990 Human Fertilization and Embryology Act, the pre-embryo stage is considered to last until 14 days after fertilization,⁴ and the pre-embryo is to be respected, but not accorded absolute protection. Today, on the basis of these reports and subsequent legislation, embryo research is allowed up to 14 days of development, up until the formation of the so-called primitive streak, or the beginning of the nervous system, after which the splitting and the forming of twins is no longer possible.

The Christian tradition on this subject is interesting, but can be read in two ways. In that tradition, abortion at any stage has always been regarded as gravely sinful. However, for many centuries the termination of a pregnancy at an early stage carried lesser penalties than a later one. This was related to the view that the human soul did not enter the embryo until 40 days or so after conception, an understanding that was taken over from Aristotle.⁹ Thus, most Christians make a distinction between the moral status of the unformed and the formed embryo, and think of the human person in the full sense, coming only with a delayed ensoulment. For other Christians, however, fertilization is the point at which human life begins.

Human Life (Personhood) May Begin at around the 9th Week of Development

While we were searching for the time of the beginning of a human individual life, we encountered a statement from God about the time of ensoulment (the infusion of a human soul in biological matter) in His last book.¹⁰ God says in His book (the Qur’an) that, We made out of the “embryo” bones, and clothed the bones in “muscles’” (23:14). This statement indicates that in the embryonic stage, first bones and then muscles form. This is in accordance with embryological development. First the bones form as cartilage models at the 7th week, and then the muscles develop around them from the somatic mesoderm at the 8th week of development. Then We developed out of it another creature. This next part of the statement (23:14) implies that the bones and muscles result in the formation of “another creature.” This may refer to beginning of the personhood (ensoulment) after the end of the eighth week. At this stage, the embryo has distinctive human characteristics and possesses the primordia of all the internal and external organs and parts, and after the eighth week, the human embryo is called a fetus. After He gave it (the embryo) the most appropriate shape, He gave it a soul and then He gave you hearing and sight. This statement (32:9) supports the statement mentioned above (23:14) in that after the embryo takes shape, the soul is infused into the fetus. This statement also indicates that the special senses of hearing and seeing develop in this order, i.e. after the ensoulment; this too which is consistent with embryological knowledge. The formation of the internal ears occurs before the beginning of the eyes, at about the 10th and 11th weeks of development, respectively. Moreover, it is very meaningful that God calls the fetus “you” after the beginning of personhood (ensoulment) (32:9), while the embryo before ensoulment is called “it” (23:14; 32:9) indicating the status of the embryo as only a “thing” or a cell cluster. 10

We suggest therefore that the beginning of a human person as an individual living organism is when the embryo develops into fetus at around the 9th week of development (after the 57th day) after the bones and muscles form, but before the development of hearing and sight. Only at this point do we have a multicellular organism and not merely a mass of living cells stuck together. The soul requires that there is an individuated matter present and prior to this period, that there did not previously exist an individual human organism. A sperm or ovum that exists independently of the other only has a potentiality for human personhood. An embryo which is merely biological material that contains human DNA also has only a potentiality for being human personhood, which implies that it is not yet an actual person.¹¹ Two things may both have only a potentiality to be something else, but one of the two may be closer to actualizing that potentiality than the other. Thus, it could be contended that the embryo is closer to being an actual human person than the sperm or ovum is.¹¹ Therefore, we can say that the informational capacity of the zygote and the early embryo is not sufficient to direct the development of anything personal, and is not sufficient to constitute a genetically stable subject as a human being.

Josef Seifert treats the human body and the soul as two incomplete substances (dualism) that are each completed in human beings as a compositum.¹² This position seems to require that the immortal soul only is infused into material committed to being a human individual, and indeed into a fetus with sufficient cortical development to allow cognitive functions. This view is consistent with our suggestion that the soul is added to the already-existing physical body when the newly formed body parts and systems begin to function as a whole. If the soul takes effect when the biological processes have produced a new human life, neither earlier nor later, then it would follow that ensoulment must occur at the end of the embryonic stage when, with the newly-formed brain acting as the central information-exchange point, the commencement of the functioning of the whole produces a new level of life and enables the processes that lead to personhood to begin. This alternative is compatible not only with the facts of modern medicine but also with the traditional understanding of ensoulment as defended by many Roman Catholic moral theologians, which has its roots in Aristotle. These moral theologians argue that the peculiarly human soul is not incarnated until there is an appropriately organized matter.¹³ However, some Christians believe that Jesus was a human being from the moment of conception and therefore that every human being must come into existence at the moment of conception.⁹ But some others believe that the conception of Jesus is an exception. It is believed that the events which occurred during the conception and development of Jesus will be explained by Jesus himself when he returns.

That the embryo cannot be considered an individual human being has implications for debates concerning the morality of the various uses to which embryos can be put; such as morning-after pills, intrauterine devices which are abortifacient by stopping implantation, the disposal of excess embryos formed in the process of invitro fertilization, and embryo research.¹⁴ Both in the religious context and without it, abortion is difficult to justify at any stage after conception.⁸ But where the question of the possible use of surplus laboratory embryos is concerned, the time of ensoulment does matter, and if this does not occur until late in the embryonic stage of development, there seems no reason why the opportunity of using the embryos may not be taken, provided-as also seems to be the ethical conclusion even before the religious aspect is considered⁸-it is for no purpose less than the relief of human suffering which can not be relieved in any other way.¹⁵ If “ensoulment” does not occur, as we have suggested, until the new organism functions as a whole, then a decision not to make use of laboratory embryos for medical purposes would be a grave responsibility.

The Soul May Have an Etheric Body

Science postulates that all matter is composed of atoms; atoms, however, are composed of protons, neutrons, and electrons, and those in turn are composed of still finer components, until we attain ether.¹⁶ This ether is a universal connecting medium, filling all space to the furthest limits, penetrating the interstices of the atoms without a break in its continuity. So completely does it fill space that it is sometimes identified with space itself, and the universe is built up in this fluid and moves through a sea of ether.¹⁶ The atom, the electrons, and the protons of which it is composed all move in a sea of ether, the very air we breathe, the very bodies we inhabit, all things likewise are moving in this sea of ether, the parent element from which all manifestation has been derived. By a kind of instinct, one feels it to be the home of spiritual existence, and to be the vehicle of both matter and spirit.¹⁶ No experimental data can be sufficient to bring us to the recognition of a soul, but there must be a substance that is the basis of personal identity, for without space-occupying substance, there would be no way to account for the soul’s ability to move the body,¹⁷ and the idea of personality or a soul after bodily death would be inconceivable.¹⁸ It seems possible that the substance of the soul could be ether. The modern concept of science is that ether is the primary form of all substance and that all other forms of matter are merely differentiations of ether; it then seems that the substance of the soul which in this life is linked organically with the body is identical with ether. The etheric (astral) body seems to be a supersensible element in humanity that primarily lives and acts in time, but also works into the dynamics of the life processes in the physical body.¹⁶ The soul is likely to work into the physical body of the human directly via only that etheric body.16

The Limbic System Seems to Be Primarily Related to the Soul in the Brain

Humans have always contemplated the question of the anatomical location of the soul. The early concept that the cerebral ventricles harbor the soul began to break down only in the Renaissance.19 During the Renaissance, the controversy crystallized into those individuals who supported the heart (cardiocentric soul) and others who supported the brain (cephalocentric soul) as the abode for this elusive entity.²⁰ The brain seems to be the organ that harbors the soul, since the function of the brain is fundamentally linked to being human. The brain controls almost all the functions of the body and determines its psychological makeup, such as intellect and, in a theological sense, the soul.²¹ Without the brain, such functioning is not possible, since brain death means the end of human life. Children born with anencephaly can never experience a human life. Human identity, personality, and worth are associated with the functioning of the brain.²¹ Considering the role of the brain in the maintenance of the dynamic equilibrium of the organism, there are compelling reasons for defining the brain as the organ which harbors the soul.

The limbic system is intimately concerned with emotional expression and with the genesis of emotions. The term “limbic system” is applied to the part of the brain that consists of a rim of cortical tissue around the hilus of the cerebral hemisphere and a group of associated deep structures-the amygdala, the hippocampus, and the septal nuclei.²² One characteristic of the limbic system is the paucity of the connections between it and the neocortex (the cortical tissue of the remaining nonlimbic portions of the hemisphere). It is stated that “the neocortex sits astride the limbic system like a rider on a horse without reins.”²² In fact, one of the characteristics of emotions is that they cannot be turned on and off at will. Since the limbic system is intimately concerned with the genesis of emotions and is critically involved in neuropsychiatric disorders,²³ we can attribute the role to the limbic system of being a seat from which the soul can work in the physical body.

The Vomeronasal Organ Seems to Be the Point of Entry for the Soul and the Etheric Body

We thought that while the soul has an etheric component (substance), there must be an open window to the brain for the entrance of the soul with the etheric body. In this respect, the vomeronasal organ (VNO), which is found in the nasal cavity and which has connections with the brain only between the 6th and 13th weeks of human development-a period including the suggested time of ensoulment at the 9th week-seems to be the most appropriate window through which the soul and the etheric body can enter the brain. This suggestion is consistent with statements in the Old Testament (Torah) (Genesis-Bereishith 2:7, 7:22), which state that the life (soul) is infused into the human being through the nose. Actually, the VNO is said to be the place in the body where the nervous system is closest to the external world.²² Axons of VNO cells pass through the tiny foramina in the cribriform plates of the ethmoid bone to enter the brain,²⁴ and to make close connections with the amygdala and limbic system,²⁵,²⁷ the seat of emotional, hormonal, and autonomic control; in short, the seat of the soul.

The vomeronasal organ is a fluid-filled, tubular structure located at the base of the nasal septum that opens into the nasal cavity via a duct at its anterior end.²⁸ It is a chemoreceptive structure with direct axonal connections to the accessory olfactory bulbs in many terrestrial vertebrates.²⁹ Pheromones presumably bind to the vomeronasal organ and exert behavioral or physiologic responses, thereby allowing chemical communication between animals of the same species.²⁹,³⁰ The effects of pheromones are thought to be mediated by signals from the main and accessory olfactory bulbs to the amygdala and hypothalamus.²⁸ The vomeronasal system, which is well developed and functional in adult animals, begins to function before or after birth in these animals.³¹ The human VNO however, seems to be different from that of animals in that it becomes rudimental before birth.³² The VNO in the human embryo contains bipolar cells similar to the developing vomeronasal sensory neurons of other species, but the structure becomes more simplified later in development,³³,³⁹ having no obvious way of communication with the brain. The first appearance of the tubular VNO is in the 6th week of human development.⁴⁰,⁴¹ This is when the human VNO resembles that of primates with functional VNOs.⁴² An examination of the VNO and adjacent tissues suggested that the VNO may lose receptor cells and corresponding vomeronasal nerves and become a ciliated, pseudostratified epithelium at approximately the 13th week.⁴²,⁴³ These observations indicate that¹) all embryonic humans develop a functional vomeronasal organ which is homologous with the VNOs of other mammals between the 6th and 13th weeks of age (a period including the time of ensoulment which occurs at around the 9th week of development),²) the human vomeronasal organ does not degenerate prenatally, but very likely loses the functional components of the vomeronasal complex of other mammals; and³) the remnant of the human VNO persists until birth and beyond.³⁶,⁴²,⁴⁴ These observations strongly support our hypothesis in that the VNO seems to have its main function only during the intrauterine period in humans, especially during the period of ensoulment. The VNO becomes rudimental before birth in humans while it begins to function before or after birth in animals. This difference seems to be very significant, since animals do not harbor any soul, unlike humans, and their VNO is important only after birth, when it allows them to communicate chemically with other animals of the same species. Although no anatomical connection has been demonstrated in humans, Monti-Bloch et al. deduce a physiological connection with the brain, because stimulus delivery to the VNO pit elicited several systemic responses⁴⁵,⁴⁷ such as changes in blood pressure and heart rate, small but significant changes in hormonal levels⁴⁷ and some changes in mood.⁴⁸ Functional brain imaging studies also revealed consistent activation of the hypothalamus, amygdala, and cingulate gyrus-related structures during adult human VNO stimulation.⁴⁵ These findings also support our view in that the VNO is strongly related with the emotional centers that harbor the soul, even in the absence of anatomical connections.

Conclusion

The above considerations make it seem likely that human life (personhood) may begin at around the 9th week of development with a delayed ensoulment, and that the soul has an etheric component. The limbic system seems to be a primary center for the soul, while the soul may enter the brain with an etheric body, possibly through the window of vomeronasal organ, which is functional and has connections with the brain only during the suggested time of ensoulment. Therefore lawmakers, philosophers, scientists and any-one in a related field may consider the beginning of human life in their decisions and procedures as being from the 9th week (after the 57th day) of human development. Before this period, the embryo must be regarded as a cell cluster which is to be respected, but not accorded absolute protection. Our second conclusion is that embryonic stem cells have an enormous promise to benefit mankind-to save lives and cure or treat diseases which generate a very strong moral imperative to explore their potential. Almost all spare embryos in fertility clinics will eventually die, due to operator error or equipment malfunction. Spare embryos are routinely destroyed, by flushing them down a drain, by incinerating them, or by thawing them out and allowing them to die. They might as well have their stem cells extracted so that they can be of some use to humanity. If the above thesis is true, then there is no loss of human persons. What is destroyed in this process is human biological material that has not been infused with a soul. We can therefore explore the potential use of embryos and help people who are now burdened by debilitating diseases. So let us enter into the processes of nature and apply the knowledge so derived to help others, to alleviate pain, and to enhance human well-being.

Footnotes

Aksoy, S., “Personhood: A matter of moral decisions.” Eubios J Asian Int Bioethics, 1997, 7:3-4.
Kurjak, A., “The beginning of human life and its modern scientific assessment.” Clin Perinatol, 2003, 30:27-44.
Mason, J.K., McCall Smith, R.A., Law and Medical Ethics, London: Butterworths; 1984.
Glannon, W., “Tracing the soul: medical decisions at the margins of life.” Christ Bioeth, 2000, 6:49-69.
Waite, L., Nindl, G., “Human embryonic stem cell research: an ethical controversy in the US & Germany.” Biomed Sci Instrum, 2003, 9:567-572.
Smith, A., Embryonic Stem Cells in Stem Cell Biology, Marshak DR. et al. (Eds.) New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 2001: 2-19.
Heinemann, T., Honnefelder, L., “Principles of ethical decision making regarding embryonic stem cell research in Germany.” Bioethics, 2002, 16:530-543.
Shea, M.C., “Embryonic life and human life.” J Med Ethics, 1985,11:205-209.
Folscheid, D., “The status of the embryo from a Christian point of view.” Ethics Med, 1994, 10:57-59.
Moore, K.L., “A scientist’s interpretation of references to embryology in the Qur’an.” JIMA, 1986, 18:15-16.
Eberl, J.T., “The beginning of personhood: a Thomistic biological analysis.” Bioethics, 2000,14:134-157.
Seifert, J., Leib und Seele, Salzburg: Universitatsverlag Anton Pustet; 1973.
Bedate, C.A., Cefalo, R., C., “The zygote: To be or not to be a person.” J Med Philos, 1989, 14:641-645.
Bole, T.J. 3rd , “Metaphysical accounts of the zygote as a person and the veto power of facts.” J Med Philos, 1989, 14:647-653.
Shea, M.,C., “Ensoulment and IVF embryos.” J Med Ethics, 1987, 13:95-97.
Gonzalez de Posada, F., “Reflections on the ether.” An R Acad Nac Med (Madr) 2001, 118:43-72.
Murphy, N., “Whatever happened to the soul? Theological perspectives on neuroscience and the self.” Ann N Y Acad Sci, 2003, 1001:51-64.
MacDougall, D., “Hypothesis concerning soul substance, together with experimental evidence of the existence of such substance.” American Medicine April, 1907.
Schiller, F., “The cerebral ventricles. From soul to sink.” Arch Neurol, 1997, 54:1158-1162.
Del Maestro, R., F., “Leonardo da Vinci: the search for the soul.” J Neurosurg, 1998, 89:874-887.
Werning, C., “Is abortion murder?” Med Monatsschr Pharm, 1995, 8:251.
Ganong, W.,F., Review of Medical Physiology, Lebanon: Typopress; 1989.
Heimer, L., “A new anatomical framework for neuropsyciatric disorders and drug abuse.” Am J Psychiatry, 2003, 160:1726-1739.
Moore, K., L., Clinically Oriented Anatomy, 2nd Ed. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins; 1985.
Gottfried, J., A., Deichmann, R., Winston, J.S., Dolan, R.J., “Functional heterogeneity in human olfactory cortex: an event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study.” J Neurosci, 2002, 22:10819-10828.
Halpern, M., “The organization and function of the vomeronasal system.” Annu Rev Neurosci 1987, 10:325-362.
Meredith, M., “Sensory processing in the main and accessory olfactory system: Comparisons and contrasts.” J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol, 1991, 39:601-614.
Kandel, E.R., Schwartz, J.H., Jessel, T.M., (Eds) Principles of Neural Science, 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2000.
Zbar, R.I., Zbar, L.I., Dudley, C., Trott, S.A., Rohrich, R.J., Moss, R.L., “A classification schema for the vomeronasal organ in humans.” Plast Reconstr Surg, 2000, 105:1284-1288.
Meredith, M., “Human vomeronasal organ function: A critical review of best and worst cases.” Chem Senses, 2001, 26:433-445.
Salazar, I., Lombardero, M., Aleman, N., Sanchez Quinteiro, P., “Development of the vomeronasal receptor epithelium and the accessory olfactory bulb in sheep.” Microsc Res Tech, 2003, 61:438-447.
Knecht, M., Witt, M., Abolmaali, N., Huttenbrink, K.B., Hummel, T., “The human vomeronasal organ.” Nervenarzt, 2003, 74:858-862.
Boehm, N., Gasser, B., “Sensory receptor-like cells in the human fetal vomeronasal organ.” Neuroreport, 1993, 4:867–870.
Takami, S., “Recent progress in the neurobiology of the vomeronasal organ.” Microsc Res Tech, 2002,58:228-250.
Trotier, D., Eloit, C., Wassef, M., Talmain, G., Bensimon, J.,L., Doving, K.B., Ferrand, J., “The vomeronasal cavity in adult humans.” Chem Senses, 2000, 25:369-380.
Moran, D.T., Jafek, B.W., Rowley, J.C., “The vomeronasal (Jacobson’s) organ in man: ultrastructure and frequency of occurrence.” J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol, 1991, 39:545-552.
Stensaas, L.J., Lavker, R.M., Monti-Bloch, L., Grosser, B.I., Berliner, D.L., “Ultrastructure of the human vomeronasal organ.” J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol, 1991, 39:553-560.
Meisami, E., Bhatnagar, K.P., “Structure and diversity in mammalian accessory olfactory bulb.” Microsc Res Tech, 1998, 43:476-499.
Chuah, M.I., Zeng, D.R., “Olfactory marker protein is present in olfactory receptor cells of human fetuses.” Neuroscience, 1987, 23:363-370.
Bhatnagar, K.P., Smith, T.D., “The human vomeronasal organ. III. Postnatal development from infancy to the ninth decade.” J Anat, 2001, 199:289-302.
Sherwood, R.J., McLachlan, J.C., Aiton, J.F., Scarborough, J., “The vomeronasal organ in the human embryo, studied by means of three-dimensional computer reconstruction.” J Anat, 1999, 195:413-418.
Smith, T.D., Bhatnagar, K.P., “The human vomeronasal organ. Part II: prenatal development.” J Anat, 2000, 197:421-436.
Witt, M., Georgiewa, B., Knecht, M., Hummel, T., “On the chemosensory nature of the vomeronasal epithelium in adult humans.” Histochem Cell Biol, 2002, 117:493-509.
Johnson, E.W., Eller, P.M., Jafek, B.W., “Calbindin-like immunoreactivity in epithelial cells of the newborn and adult human vomeronasal organ.” Brain Res, 1994, 638:329-333.
Monti-Bloch, L., Jennings-White, C., Berliner, D.L., “The human vomeronasal system.” A review. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 1998, 855:373-389.
Monti-Bloch, L., Grosser, B.I., “Effect of putative pheromones on the electrical activity of the human vomeronasal organ and olfactory epithelium.” J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol, 1991, 39:573-582.
Monti-Bloch, L., Diaz-Sanchez, V., Jennings-White, C., Berliner, D.L., “Modulation of serum testosterone and autonomic function through stimulation of the male human vomeronasal organ (VNO) with pregna-4,20-diene-3,6-dione.” J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol, 1998, 65:237-242.
Grosser, B., I, Monti-Bloch, L., Jennings-White, C., Berliner, D.L., “Behavioral and electrophysiological effects of androstadienone, a human pheromone. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 2000, 25:289-299.