The Case of John Moore and the Unethical Use of his Spleen Cells

        A court case that brings up the question of morality and ownership is the case of John Moore, where he decided to sue for the right to his cells. John Moore’s doctor, David Golde, was a cancer researcher at U.C.L.A and was using the part of Moore’s spleen that was removed during surgery for research.  It turned out that Moore’s spleen contained a very useful antibody that helped make breakthroughs in medical research. Golde had received consent to “dispose of any severed tissue or member by cremation” (Skloot, 2010), but no consent was given for research.  Moore did not know at this time that Doctor Golde was using the cells from his spleen to create a cell line called “Mo” in which research could be performed.  An article in Science magazine that was published around the time of Moore’s court case stated, “simple consent to surgery does not imply a consent to medical research on a patient’s tissues unrelated to treatment, nor to commercial exploitation of the patient’s tissues” (Crawford, 1988).  Just because a patient gives you consent to remove a body part, it does not imply that the removed body part can than be used for other purposes, such as research.

            John Moore grew more suspicious with each visit to Doctor Golde because Moore did not see the need to continuously fly from Seattle to Los Angeles just for blood tests.  When Moore asked Doctor Golde if a doctor closer to home could do these follow-up exams, Golde offered to pay for the plane expenses.  During one of his visits Moore received a consent form in which he had to agree to grant the University of California rights to the cells obtained from his blood and/or bone marrow.  The first time he circled “do”, allowing consent, but on his next visit he circled “do not”.  Soon after his return home, Golde began calling Moore asking him to come back and circle “do” on the consent form.  Moore did not return to sign the form and when he found the consent form in his mailbox with a note saying “circle I do”, he decided to hire a lawyer.  Moore decided to sue Doctor Golde for using his spleen cells without his consent but it turned out that David Golde had already put a patent on the cell line, and gave it the name “Mo”, making the cells his property.  Because Golde had patented the cells before Moore attempted to sue him and U.C.L.A, the Supreme Court of California ruled against Moore.  The Supreme Court of California ruled “a patient does not own tissues removed from his body or have rights to profits from products researchers derive from those tissues” (Barinaga, 1990).  Moore received no compensation for his cells, while Doctor Golde and U.C.L.A were profiting greatly from the cell line Mo.

            The example of John Moore raises not only question of morality, but also the question of ownership.  Although Doctor Golde patented the cell line before Moore decided to sue, are the cells still considered John Moore’s property?  This question is very controversial, even to this day.  The Supreme Court of California ruled that anything that comes out of a person’s body is no longer considered their property and can be used by scientists for research.  However, many people feel attached to them and believe that even after it has been removed from their body, they still maintain ownership.  The fact that each person has his or her own unique sequence of DNA makes the removed organ or tissue still a part of that individual.  The removed body part can always be traced back to the “owner”, or person from whom it was taken from, making people believe that they still have ownership even after removal.  This issue of ownership will always be controversial because researchers will always say that the patients no longer have ownership after removal and many patients believe that they maintain ownership even after removal because it still contains their specific DNA.

          Personally, I think that even after a body part or any other substance comes out of your body, it is still considered yours.  I think ownership continues to be the patients because the cells, organs, etc. contain only one person's DNA, forever connecting the two together.

Immoral Use of HeLa cells

           Everyone has been to the doctor’s office, had some type of surgery, or has gotten blood drawn for a test.  It is rare to question these things because they are normal, reoccurring things in today’s society but when you have something removed from your body, whether it is during a surgery or when blood is drawn, do you ever wonder where your excess body parts go?  Have you ever wondered if hospitals or doctors’ offices have closets full of removed body parts and tissues stored in little jars?  It is rather scary to think about but sometimes your body parts, tissues, or cells are used in research without your knowledge.  This happens all of the time and has created great controversy in the medical field, raising the question of morality.  Is it ethical for research to be performed on someone’s cells, organs, or anything that came from their body without their full knowledge and consent?  Although consent forms are needed in today’s society, most people do not fully read the document they sign, giving consent for researchers to use their cells, blood, or organs.  Whether a consent form is given or not, the questions of ownership and morality arise.

            The story of Henrietta Lacks was just one of several where the use of her cells were used for research without her consent.  Henrietta Lacks was a poor black woman

Dr. George Gey

residing in Virginia, in a town called Turner Station when she noticed that something was irregular with her body.  She was sent to Johns Hopkins Hospital because it was one of the only hospitals at that time to accept colored people.  She was diagnosed with cervical cancer and preceded to receive radium treatments at the hospital.  This was an old method of treatment where a tube of radium was placed inside of her to kill the cancer cells.  When she was receiving her treatment, a biopsy of her tumor was taken without her knowledge.  The biopsy was then sent to George Gey’s lab, where it was discovered that Henrietta’s cells continued to divide at a rapid pace (Skloot, 2010).  “Gey named the cells “HeLa cells”, in honor of their source’s name, but claimed them as his own discovery, and spent the rest of his life profiteering from them.  This is when the first ethical dilemma arises; Henrietta Lacks had no idea that a sample of her tumor had been taken and sent to George Gey, and that her own cells would be used as a basis for medical research for decades to come. Her husband David knew that a sample had been taken, but was told that it was to see if the cancer was hereditary, and that it might help his children if the cancer struck again. Despite being told this, David Lacks never heard from the research team again. There is a question then, of whether appropriate consent was given” (Kirkham, 2009).  Although in this time, no legal consent was needed to take specimens and perform research, this practice could still be considered unethical.  In this particular case, it is unethical even though consent was not legally needed, simply because Henrietta’s family had a right to know what was going on but were kept in the dark for several years. 

           I personally believe that what happened to Henrietta and her cells was unethical, despite the fact that consent was not legally needed at this time.  If the scientists tried to conceal the identity behind HeLa, they obviously felt that they had something to hide.  Also, the fact that they made billions of dollars off of someone else's cells doesn't seem right to me.

Continued Use of HeLa Cells in Research

     Whether the continued use of the HeLa cell line is ethical or unethical, the advancements yielded from their use are undeniably remarkable.  A very large portion of the progress made in the medical field can be credited to HeLa.  For example, HeLa cells were used in creating the first polio vaccine, aided in cloning and gene mapping, and they were even sent into outer space.  “In the early fifties, scientists were beginning to understand viruses, so as Henrietta’s cells arrived in labs around the country, researchers began exposing them to viruses of all kinds – herpes, measles, mumps, fowl pox, equine encephalitis – to study how each one entered cells, reproduced, and spread” (Skloot 2010).  Without the discovery of these “immortal” cells, advancements in virology and other science fields would not have progressed as much and the world we live in now could be completely different. 

     Research for an alternative form of treatment for tumors has been performed using HeLa cells.  “It is based on a photochemical reaction of a photosensitizer, irradiation, and O2 which converts to cytotoxic 102 and other forms of reactive oxygen species (ROS). In our study we investigated the phototoxicity of the two-porphyrin photosensitizers, TPPS4 and MgTPPS4, on HeLa cells” (Binder, Kolarova, Tomankova, et al., 2010).  This type of therapy causes either apoptosis; naturally occurring death, or necrosis; caused by external factors, which leads to DNA damage in the tumor.  The researchers used varying concentrations of the photosensitizer, which is a light-absorbing substance that initiates a photochemical reaction to another substance, and different doses of radiation on the HeLa cells to determine which one caused the most DNA damage.  It was concluded that the photosensitizers with a concentration higher than five micro-molar created a lot of DNA fragmentation.  This study demonstrates how HeLa cells are used for cancer research and how they can help create new treatment options for cancer patients.  It also shows that HeLa cells are still a widely used cell line in medical research.

"The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks"

     Researchers have been making great advancements within the medical field ever since a magical cell line was discovered, called HeLa cells.  HeLa is the name of one of the first human cancer cell lines that researchers used to perform experiments on because it was the first to continue growing out of the host’s body.  In fact, these cells grow so rapidly that they were given the nickname “immortal cells”.  When you mention the HeLa cell line to scientists and other people, they often associate HeLa with the research the cells were used in or the progress that was made as a result of the use of HeLa.  Does anybody ever stop to think where these miraculous cells came from?  It was not until somewhat recently, that it became public knowledge as to where HeLa cells were obtained.  For many years the identity of the woman the cells were extracted from was concealed, but now her identity has been publically announced as Henrietta Lacks.  Neither her, nor her family had any knowledge of the use of her cells for research, but

back when it occurred, consent was not needed to use human specimens.  If it was not considered illegal to use Henrietta Lacks’ cells without consent, then why was her identity kept secret for such a long period of time?  This question then raises the idea that maybe the researchers knew that what they were doing was unethical.  

     The book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, written by Rebecca Skloot, gives the reader insight about the woman with the “immortal” cell line, explains the events that took place in order to obtain the cells and how they were then used in the scientific field.  The book does this in a way that can be somewhat confusing at first, because it jumps around between several years, but there is a helpful timeline at the beginning of each chapter to guide the reader.  Skloot first provides the reader with great detail of Henrietta’s life and progresses into the use and importance of her cells, and then continues with her personal interactions with the Lacks family and how this situation has affected them.  It was surprising to see how little the family knew about Henrietta’s cells and how mistreated they were by doctors when they went searching for answers. Although it is quite evident the stance that Skloot takes, she does not pressure her opinions on the reader and allows them to interpret Henrietta’s story in their own way. 

     Henrietta Lacks was a poor black woman living in a town called Turner Station who noticed something was terribly wrong with her body and was sent to Johns Hopkins Hospital.  At this time, Johns Hopkins was one of the only hospitals that allowed colored people to be cared for, since nearly no doctor wanted to work with people of color.  Henrietta was diagnosed with cervical cancer and while receiving radium treatments, a procedure where a tube of radium was placed inside the body in attempt to kill the cancer cells; a biopsy was taken of her tumor without her knowledge.  That biopsy was sent to a lab, George Gey’s lab, where it was discovered that the now termed HeLa cells were able to continuously grow.  They were the first cells to grow successfully in culture, allowing millions of research to be performed on them.  These cells were then sold all across the world, allowing scientists to make a fortune, while Henrietta’s family was clueless; raising the question of morality.

HeLa Cells: Are They Important?

           Cancer is a growing disease throughout the world, causing more than one million deaths per year in the United States alone.  In order to decrease the number of deaths, and possibly prevent them altogether, research needs to take place.  For many years, researchers have been using cells called “HeLa cells” to perform their research on cancer.  These HeLa cells are a very important contribution to researchers, not only for advancements in cancer, but also for advancements in other fields.  They helped create the first polio vaccination, were tested in outer space, used for understanding cancer cells, and are continued to be used in most research. 

These cells were not concocted in a laboratory; they were extracted from a woman suffering from cancer named Henrietta Lacks.  Henrietta Lacks was a poor African-American woman infected with cervical cancer at the age of thirty.  While she was receiving treatment at the Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, the doctors took some of her tumor cells without her knowledge.  The researchers soon found out that the tumor cells of Henrietta Lacks could be kept alive and grown.  The fact that they could grow and replicate was extremely shocking and they were deemed “immortal”.  “They can grow indefinitely, be frozen for decades, divided into different batches and shared among scientists” (Zielinski, 2010).  In fact, the now called “HeLa cells” were being sold to other researchers across the world for millions of dollars.  Since these cells were being sold all over the world, most researchers used the “immortal” cells in their studies, allowing for great advancements to occur.  Even though the selling of Henrietta Lacks’ cells for profit could be considered unethical by many, without the spread of her cells to other scientists, some of the advancements in science might not have occurred.

The first great advancement in the sciences that involved the cells of Henrietta Lacks was the creation of the polio vaccine.  “Jonas Salk used HeLa cells to grow the polio virus and he tested the vaccine on HeLa cells before its use on human in 1955” (Cantwell, 2010).  It was not until he had used HeLa cells that his vaccine began to work, therefore, if these immortal cells had never been harvested, it would have taken several more years to create a polio vaccine.  It is also possible that without HeLa cells; there would still be no polio vaccine.  Henrietta’s cells were also used in “…helping to develop medicines to fight cancer, the flu and Parkinson’s disease, and in the research that led to gene mapping and cloning.  They were used to test the effects of atomic radiation and sent into outer space” (Claiborne, 2010).  Without the existence of HeLa cells, all of these advancements would have occurred at a much later date or not at all.  The cells of Henrietta Lacks’ are definitely the most influential in the science world because they have been used to acquire enormous amounts of knowledge, allowing the world to become much more advanced.

Interview of David Axelrod on Cancer Research

           The disease of cancer has been becoming more common within the past years. With no absolute cure, “cancer” is a word that no one wants to hear come out of his or her doctor’s mouth. Scientists all over the world have been studying cancer cells to attempt at finding a cure. One scientist, David Axelrod, does that here at Rutgers University. Professor Axelrod studies the way that cancer cells interact with normal cells and tries to determine when they transform into cancer cells. He has worked with breast cancer cells in the past, but most recently he is focusing his work on colon cancer. The research that David Axelrod and other scientists perform, help us understand the mutations of normal cells into cancer cells and could possibly lead to better treatment methods.

            
         Many people enter into the field of cancer research because they want to find a cure, or because they know someone who had cancer. Surprisingly, David Axelrod did not enter the genetics/cancer field for either of those reasons. 
“There were a lot of opportunities available with microorganisms, and I found them to be interesting. It wasn’t that I thought I could help people”, David Axelrod said. The fact that he is performing this research simply because he finds it interesting and enjoyable is somewhat inspiring to the youth. Yes, it would be great to have a job that helps people, but the best career a person can hope for is one where they find their work both interesting and stimulating. A person like David Axelrod, performing research simply because he finds in interesting brings the world closer to understanding the way in which cancer cells operate.  If someone researches cancer just because they want to help people, that doesn’t mean they also find their work stimulating.  In order for results to appear, we need scientists who research because they have a passion for it.  We need researchers who find their everyday work to be both enjoyable and interesting with no alternative motive.  One such researcher is David Axelrod at Rutgers University.
 

"Your Brain on Childhood" novel

The novel Your Brain on Childhood: The Unexpected Side Effects of Classrooms, Ballparks, Family Rooms, and the Minivan was written by Gabrielle Principle. She is a professor at Urisnus College and the story explores the downside of a so-called normal childhood in today’s society. It confronts the way that parents in today’s society raise their children. Parents seem to try and teach their children with television programs, in the hopes that their child will become more mature and possibly more intelligent at a faster rate. In their later stages, parents push them into doing things such as, piano lessons or baseball practices simply because they believe that the brain will develop faster. Today’s society views the development of the brain as a race, when it is not. The brain must develop in its own way in its own time. It does not need all of the excess things to try and accelerate the development. This novel seems interesting because the author, Gabrielle Principle, tries to demonstrate how the childhood process could be naturalized, allowing brain development to occur at its own pace. I think that this would be an interesting story to read because it could open your eyes to something you don’t necessarily notice normally. We see the progression of society and technology as good advancements, but this novel could suggest that those advancements could be having a negative affect on the development of the brain in children. Maybe the author’s message is that children should not be forced to develop faster than their body wants to. We should just let the process of brain development occur as naturally as possible.