By Jack McPherrin

In recent decades, tremendous breakthroughs in stem cell research and application have allowed a myriad of new medical treatments for diseases and conditions once thought uncurable, which is generally a good thing for society. However, some novel stem cell research has clearly breached a serious ethical line, such as the use of embryonic stem cells to create synthetic organoids for biocomputing. Ultimately, unborn children are being harvested as an energy source to power rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), a development that should deeply concern every person on this planet.

AI consumes energy at an unprecedented scale, which has led to equally unprecedented global appetite for more efficient energy sources. For instance, a simple query to ChatGPT requires approximately 10 times more energy than a typical Google search. As a result, those who use AI—which is already most individuals and companies to some degree—are desperately searching for ways to consume less power and cut their rapidly rising costs.

To meet that demand, scientists have begun embracing the concept of biocomputing, something that until very recently has been purely in the realm of science fiction. Biocomputing is essentially a merger between biology and computer technology. And, biocomputers have already been built out of a combination of lab-grown human brain tissue with electronic circuitry.

For example, Swiss tech startup FinalSpark is now selling biocomputers that consist of four miniature lab-grown human brains—called organoids—that are embedded with silicon chips. FinalSpark’s cofounder Fred Jordan has said that because of the energy efficiency of these biocomputers, “computing may ultimately become an activity with no ecological footprint,” thereby becoming a poster child of the green energy movement. FinalSpark claims that its product—the Neuroplatform—is up to one million times more energy efficient than current computing hardware.

FinalSpark’s Neuroplatform has already been adopted for biocomputing research by universities around the world, including the University of Michigan in the United States. Other U.S. universities are dabbling in biocomputing as well; the University of Southern California received a $2 million grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation in 2024 to advance its biocomputing efforts.

Some might find this new scientific advancement exciting and see the potential for its application in fields such as energy and medicine. Unfortunately, the reality is that the construction of biocomputers entails a very ethically dark process.

As mentioned, biocomputers are lab-grown human brains outfitted with electrodes. These brains are grown from extracted human stem cells, and are then “taught” to conduct tasks through electrical stimulation or through the injection of chemicals such as dopamine. When these brains perform a task in the way that researchers want, the organoids are “rewarded” with dopamine; if they do not perform a task in a desirable manner, they are “punished” through electric shocks. Further, organoids only survive this process for approximately 100 days, at which point new organoids are grown to replace them.

Putting aside what is essentially the creation, enslavement, forced experimentation, and death-by-torture of a life form for scientific advancement, the sourcing process for stem cell extraction is even darker.

It is well-established that human embryos have been used in stem cell research for decades, though the proliferation of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) has made it much easier for researchers to obtain them. Embryos that are created through IVF but ultimately not used are often donated to universities or scientific institutions for medical research. Concerningly, there is no way to track the amount of embryos that are donated for research, though studies have estimated that up to 59 percent of IVFpatients are willing to do so.

And, because we are unable to track embryo disposition, we also are unable to track exactly how many donated embryos are being used to create organoids for biocomputing. That said, it is very clear that embryos are being used for this purpose.

For example, a study published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences illustrates the different sources of stem cells that organoids are derived from, including embryonic stem cells, induced pluripotent stem cells, and adult stem cells.

Another study published in Frontiers in Science states,

“The past decade has seen a revolution in brain cell cultures, moving from traditional monolayer cultures to more organ-like, organized 3D cultures—i.e., brain organoids. These can be generated either from embryonic stem cells or from the less ethically problematic iPSC typically derived from skin samples.”

Other sources corroborate the same information. And, scientists seem to have few ethical qualms with using embryos for such research. Harvard Medical School bioethicist Insoo Hyun stated in the journal Cell in 2024: “Since the cognitive bar is set so high for personhood, it seems premature to worry about whether brain organoids, neurological chimeras, or embryo models deserve the same ethical protections normally afforded to persons.”

Ultimately, scientists like Hyun do not consider embryos and unborn life to be truly human, because they are not yet “sentient.” As such, any experimentation with or use of them is justified.

To conclude: we are faced with two problems. One is that we are creating, enslaving, and ultimately killing lab-grown human brains to power artificial intelligence, among other uses. That is disturbing enough on its own. Far more disturbing, especially on an ethical level, is that scientists are using embryos of unborn children to create those brains.

Though there are many ways that policymakers can protect unborn life more generally, there are also ways by which state legislators can stop embryos from being used in this specific manner.

At baseline, a human embryo created through IVF must be clearly defined in state statutes as a fertilized human ovum composed of one or more living human cells and human genetic material that will develop into a child—and therefore have certain rights granted by law. Further, state legislators should expressly prohibit state taxpayer funds from creating, destroying, or risking harm to human embryos in the course of research experiments, including at publicly funded state universities. In concert, state funds should be prohibited from being used to transport fetal tissue across state lines, thereby circumventing the aforementioned prohibitions.

Researchers, scientists, and academics may claim that that such restrictions will halt all their progress on not just organoid creation and a supposed energy-efficient utopia, but also the advancement of other aforementioned “lifesaving” technologies and treatments. First, nothing is truly “lifesaving” if the destruction of unborn life is a prerequisite. Second, the claim is not even true; adult stem cells can easily be used in place of embryonic stem cells and are, in fact, substantially more effective than embryonic stem cells.

Embryos are prenatal human beings. They deserve the same or greater protection as any form of human life, especially from being experimented upon and used as an energy source. It’s up to us to save them from this fate.

Read the op-ed published by The Blaze here.

If you would like assistance with legislation on the topic in your state, please reach out to us at PFLN. We are here to assist you.