Adult stem cells: They're the good kind, right? They come from tissue contributed by an adult donor, right?

Well, not exactly. This week, pro-lifers criticized the treatments administered to two prominent sports heroes, hockey great Gordie Howe and retired pro quarterback John Brodie, utilizing “adult stem cells” which were, contrary to earlier reports, drawn from an aborted fetus. 

Why the confusion? Well, back in February Dave McGuigan, vice president of Stemedica Cell Technologies, the San Diego biopharmaceutical company which developed and manufactured the biological compounds used to treat Howe and Brodie, assured the media that “only adult stem cells were used” in the injections. Stemedica president Maynard Howe (who is not related to Gordie) said the same thing.

Stemedica's deception might have gone unchallenged, but for the careful research of USA Today sports reporter Brent Schrotenboer. Schrotenboer questioned the company after obtaining a certificate of origin documenting the company's use of fetal cells. Company president Maynard Howe admitted to USA Today that one of the two types of cells used to treat Gordie Howe and John Brodie was derived from the brain tissue of an aborted 14- to 16-week-old fetus. "We just don't want to get people confused about what it is," Howe said. "They're really considered legally adult stem cells even if they're fetal-derived."

The controversy stems from the definition of “adult” stem cells. 

If you're in Australia, “adult stem cells” are just what you think they are: stem cells from consenting adults. Under professional guidelines in force in that nation, the words "adult stem cell" can be used only to describe cells that come from an adult donor. 

But here in the United States, what seems obvious is instead cloaked in ambiguity. Here, the cells that we call “adult stem cells” or “somatic cells” can be taken from the tissue of an adult, a child, or even a fetus. And informed consent guidelines included in a patient handbook from the International Society for Stem Cell Research fail to address the issue.

According to current U.S. guidelines, what characterizes “adult” stem cells is not the status of the donor, but rather, the ability of the cell to develop into many different cell types—although that differentiation is usually limited to cell types found in the organ of origin.

Stemedica claims that calling their product “adult” stem cells is scientifically accurate. They explain that their cells are mature stem cells with a specialized function, as opposed to embryonic stem cells, which are more akin to “blank slate” cells that are considered riskier and more likely to cause tumors.

For opponents of abortion, use of stem cells which are called “adult” but which are derived from the tissue of unborn fetuses is morally objectionable. Pro-life groups oppose the inclusion of fetal cells in medical treatments because their use may encourage the killing of nascent human beings. 

However, the current terminology obscures the origin of stem cells, making it difficult to determine whether or not fetal cells are present in a particular pharmaceutical product. 

In 2000, the Pontifical Academy for Life clarified Catholic Church teaching opposing the use of embryonic stem cells in its Declaration on the Production and the Scientific and Therapeutic Use of Human Embryonic Stem Cells.

Father Tad Pacholczyk, director of education for the National Catholic Bioethics Center, suggests that for clarity, stem cells which are derived from fetuses should be called “fetal stem cells.” 
“Using fetal stem cells from a direct abortion is morally unacceptable,” Father Tad explained in an interview, “because consent cannot be validly obtained. Even if the parents 'sign the dotted line,' that consent is invalid, because if you give informed consent on behalf of someone else, the assumption is that you have the best interests of that person in mind. The parents have categorically demonstrated they do not have the best interests of their child in mind, because they have arranged for the taking of that child's life, so they are unable to give informed consent, and the tissues of their aborted child should not be utilized for research or therapeutics.”

Father Tad also offered helpful guidelines regarding circumstances under which the use of fetal stem cells would be acceptable. “Using fetal stem cells can be morally permissible,” he explained, “when those cells are obtained from a natural miscarriage, and the parents give consent. This would be like an organ donation from their recently deceased child.”

Use of fetal stem cells has gone unchecked under the Obama Administration. In 2001, President George W. Bush struck a controversial compromise, limiting federal funding for embryonic stem cell research to the 19 stem cell lines which were already in existence on August 9 of that year. But in 2009, President Barack Obama issued an executive order which opened new lines of embryonic stem cells to researchers. 

A 1993 federal law permits the use of human fetal tissue in research if the parents consent, regardless of whether the tissue is obtained through miscarriage, induced abortion, or stillbirth. However, bans on creating embryos for the purpose of conducting research remain in place.

State laws vary with regard to embryo donation. In Michigan, voters approved a 2008 ballot measure which permitted people to donate embryos left over from fertility treatments for use in research.