As a followup to my post about a new stem cell extraction method, we have this story about that and another new method. At the time I posted, at least one blogger was saying that this method still wouldn’t appease the critics. Well, she seems to be correct.

From Wired:

Headlines this week trumpeted a possible solution to the embryonic stem-cell research conundrum. Scientists obtained the cells without destroying embryos, which is the sticking point for most people who oppose the research.

But that point is still stuck, according to religious leaders and other watchdog groups. They say the two methods described in the Oct. 16 issue of the journal Nature are not a clear solution to the ethical conundrum.

“Seeking alternative ways to obtain pluripotent stem cells without creating or harming embryos is certainly a good idea, but it’s not clear that either of these approaches fills the bill,” said Richard Doerflinger, deputy director of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities.

The other method is called “altered nuclear transfer” and it essentially entails creating a clone of the embryo. Before it divides, the process is stopped so the embryo can’t become a person.

Anybody shocked that bio-ethicists don’t dig this one?

Paul McHugh, chief of psychiatry at The Johns Hopkins Hospital, said, “It’s a kind of pollution of the human genome.” And Michael Sandel, a Harvard University professor of government, called it “morally creepy.”

“I think both alternatives are stupid. It’s the silliest thing I’ve seen in some time,” said Arthur Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania. “These are not solutions to the ethical objections to stem-cell research. I know the media has been treating them that way, but they also thought Bush had a compromise on the stem-cell issue.”

And scientists seem to oppose both methods.

There are other reasons why some watchdog groups oppose both methods. The Center for Genetics and Society in Oakland, California, says the government should put regulations in place to protect human subjects before any of these methods are allowed.

The group says that since altered nuclear transfer is based on therapeutic cloning, at the very least a federal ban on reproductive cloning should be in place.

“We need effective oversight to make sure that cloned embryos aren’t misused in efforts to produce cloned or genetically modified children,” said Marcy Darnovsky, the center’s associate executive director, in a statement. “Straightforward regulatory mechanisms could accomplish this, but so far they haven’t been put in place. And we still don’t have laws against reproductive cloning either nationally or in the majority of U.S. states.”

I guess I’d like to take this time to ask everybody who supports stem cell research to take a step back for a moment and really consider what these alternative therapies are proposing. Taking the stem cells out of an embryo? Creating a duplicate of an embryo? Personally, they do give me pause, and I think the best thing to do is really focus on traditional stem cell research and ignore the Culture of Life crowd.

Trust me, the momentum is headed towards funding stem cell research. Too many on the right have come out in favor of it. Hell, even Bill Frist has said he’d back it.

So let’s not get too bogged down in all of these alternatives to the method that makes the most sense. True, it destroys an embryo, but more and more are starting to agree that that’s a very small price to pay in order to save a walking, breathing human.