Louisa Cockbill
Did you know that it is possible for human cells to
be removed from the body and survive, even multiply in number? Growing cells outside the body is known as ‘cell culture’.
Cells grown in culture are often taken from tumours because tumour cells have
the ability to grow infinitely when supplied with nutrients.These immortal
cells are incredibly important in medical research, as they allow researchers
to study and experiment on cells humanely; that is outside the body.
 |
| HeLa cells
|
But where do these cells originate from? I mentioned
that many cells in culture are originally taken from human tumours, from
biopsies or from a surgically removed tumour. Nowadays ethical permission is
received from the patient to study the tumour; however medical permission forms
didn’t always exist and neither did cell culture, so where did the practice of
growing cells come from?
The first cells ever to be immortalised in culture were
from a biopsy of a cervical mass (a tumour) from an African American woman
called Henrietta Lacks from Baltimore in 1951. They were called
HeLa cells and their immortalisation in culture changed the face of medical
research. HeLa cells were exposed to all forms of bacteria and viruses to study
the method of infection, replication etc. in order to block these processes
with antibiotics, vaccines etc. Indeed Polio vaccine neutralisation tests were
some of the first vaccine trials that used HeLa cells. Today HeLa cells can
still be found cultured in every lab and it is estimated that 50 million tons
of HeLa cells could have been grown.
I’ve always viewed cell culture from a purely
scientific perspective, but since reading ‘The immortal life of Henrietta Lacks’
by Rebecca Skloot I’ve started to look at cell culture from an entirely new
perspective. Henrietta Lacks’ family didn’t find out about her immortal cells
until 1973; 22 years after HeLa cells were first cultured. Why had no one told
the family? Why is it that the Lacks family can’t afford health insurance, when
their mother’s cells have driven forward frontiers in understanding disease?
The truth is that Henrietta’s cells were cultured
without her knowledge or consent at a time before regulations were set in place
to safeguard patient’s rights. Regulations now ensure that informed consent must
be received and the patient informed of any commercial benefit that can be made
from their medical donation.
 |
| Henrietta Lacks
|
I think what particularly struck me on reading ‘The
immortal life of Henrietta Lacks’ is how strange it must have been for
Henrietta Lacks’ children to find that cells from their mother were alive! It
has made me wonder how I would feel if cells had been taken from my
Grandmother’s colorectal tumours and grown; who knows, she died in 1965 before
law ensured patient consent, maybe her cells are out there. It’s a
disconcerting thought.
On the other hand how amazing would it be if the cells
from the cancer that killed my grandmother were used to cure the disease? Especially
handy as the cancer appears to be hereditary. Indeed although the Lacks’ family
are indignant at not being informed about the culture of HeLa cells for two
decades and the lack of explanation given them, they are marvelled by the medical
breakthroughs made possible by the cells cultured from their mother.
The story of Henrietta Lacks may have made me
question certain scientific precepts but has certainly opened my eyes to better
appreciate the invention of cell culture and the lives behind the cells. To read more about Rebecca Skloot’s discovery of the
world of Henrietta Lacks and cell culture I’d advise you to read ‘The Immortal
life of Henrietta Lacks’ which is available for loan from the University of Bristol Medical Library.
More information:
So you thought the avian flu controversy was over? Far from it. A little while ago, two studies on the avian flu H5N1 sparked some controversy. Both studies detailed how the researchers were able to produce a flu strain that, in contrast to the known natural strains, would be highly transmissible between human beings. This research has potentially dangerous consequences. Debate ensued. Should these studies be fully or partially published, or not at all? Both the National Security Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) and the World Health Organization (WHO) issued press releases describing their (different) recommendations. Editors of Nature and Science postponed publishing the respective studies. But this is part of a wider issue: should studies with potentially dangerous results be published or not? Let’s look at some options.
Don’t Publish
