The Specter of Stem Cell Research
About a week ago, I posted on some research being done in the fight against Alzheimer's Disease. In that post, I mentioned that in all probability, stem cell research wouldn't lead to any dramatic breakthroughs in halting that disease.
There are, however, a great number of promising developments in cures for other conditions, such as Parkinson's, cancer, spinal cord injuries and diabetes that could come about in stem cell research. Unfortunately, the current administration yielded to the pressure brought by the Religious Reich and forbade any federal funding for stem cell research using any stem cell lines not in existence at the time of the executive order.
As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist. They were created from embryos that have already been destroyed, and they have the ability to regenerate themselves indefinitely, creating ongoing opportunities for research. I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cell lines, where the life and death decision has already been made.
Scientists told us within a few months that there really weren't "more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines" that were in existence and viable, which meant that a huge crimp in the research ensued. This kind of research is hugely expensive, and without federal funding, not likely to be done.
People struggling with the ravages of conditions that might be helped didn't give up. They convinced states to consider funding this kind of research. A California ballot initiative to fund stem cell research in the state passed, and the state has selected a commission which is currently formulating plans (including selecting a city to host the research institute). Massachusetts passed what appears to be a veto-proof bill, and the Illinois Legislature is considering putting the matter to the voters via referendum in 2006.
While these developments are hopeful, they take time, a commodity that is frequently in short supply for those suffering. The current budgetary problems that most states face with federal Medicaid budgetary slashes are on the front burner, pushing initiatives like this to the back burner. At this point, state initiatives really aren't a replacement for funding at the federal level.
That's why I was so pleased to hear that Arlen Specter (yes, that Arlen Specter) was re-introducing a stem cell research bill to the Senate. Co-sponsors include Orrin Hatch and Dianne Feinstein. Specter, who has lost a lot of hair because of chemo therapy for cancer personalized his interest:
Specter, a co-sponsor of stem cell legislation in the last Congress, said he believes the United States needs to place more emphasis on health care research.
"I do not think that we are spending the right priorities with respect to our health care budget," he said. "I don't choose to unduly personalize it, but I have to find some way to excuse my hairdo."
The bill also attempts to confront some of the concerns voiced about reproductive cloning by outlawing it, but, perhaps wisely, it doesn't deal directly with some of the other ethical dilemmas posed by critics of stem cell research.
Fortunately, some from the scientific community have begun working on that problem. A set of guidelines have been issued.
The new guidelines deal largely with ensuring ethical creation of new stem cell lines, and they establish standards for obtaining donor consent, ban payment for donated embryos and standardize methods for handling and sharing stem cell lines between research labs.
In all cases, the guidelines recommend, donors should give their consent before any material -- eggs or sperm -- can be used to create an embryo that would generate stem cells. The effect of that rule would be to eliminate some stem cell lines already in use because they were obtained from embryos created with sperm from anonymous donors who were not informed about their use.
I have no doubt that the Religious Reich will claim that all of this is nonsense, since it stem cell research deals with "embryos," the code word for baby humans. Still, I think we are beginning to move forward and I believe that most Americans are in favor of that direction.
Hopefully, when the bill comes onto the Senate and House floors, people will let their Senators and Representatives what they expect from them in huge numbers.
I never thought I would ever say this, but "Way to go, Arlen!"
There are, however, a great number of promising developments in cures for other conditions, such as Parkinson's, cancer, spinal cord injuries and diabetes that could come about in stem cell research. Unfortunately, the current administration yielded to the pressure brought by the Religious Reich and forbade any federal funding for stem cell research using any stem cell lines not in existence at the time of the executive order.
As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist. They were created from embryos that have already been destroyed, and they have the ability to regenerate themselves indefinitely, creating ongoing opportunities for research. I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cell lines, where the life and death decision has already been made.
Scientists told us within a few months that there really weren't "more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines" that were in existence and viable, which meant that a huge crimp in the research ensued. This kind of research is hugely expensive, and without federal funding, not likely to be done.
People struggling with the ravages of conditions that might be helped didn't give up. They convinced states to consider funding this kind of research. A California ballot initiative to fund stem cell research in the state passed, and the state has selected a commission which is currently formulating plans (including selecting a city to host the research institute). Massachusetts passed what appears to be a veto-proof bill, and the Illinois Legislature is considering putting the matter to the voters via referendum in 2006.
While these developments are hopeful, they take time, a commodity that is frequently in short supply for those suffering. The current budgetary problems that most states face with federal Medicaid budgetary slashes are on the front burner, pushing initiatives like this to the back burner. At this point, state initiatives really aren't a replacement for funding at the federal level.
That's why I was so pleased to hear that Arlen Specter (yes, that Arlen Specter) was re-introducing a stem cell research bill to the Senate. Co-sponsors include Orrin Hatch and Dianne Feinstein. Specter, who has lost a lot of hair because of chemo therapy for cancer personalized his interest:
Specter, a co-sponsor of stem cell legislation in the last Congress, said he believes the United States needs to place more emphasis on health care research.
"I do not think that we are spending the right priorities with respect to our health care budget," he said. "I don't choose to unduly personalize it, but I have to find some way to excuse my hairdo."
The bill also attempts to confront some of the concerns voiced about reproductive cloning by outlawing it, but, perhaps wisely, it doesn't deal directly with some of the other ethical dilemmas posed by critics of stem cell research.
Fortunately, some from the scientific community have begun working on that problem. A set of guidelines have been issued.
The new guidelines deal largely with ensuring ethical creation of new stem cell lines, and they establish standards for obtaining donor consent, ban payment for donated embryos and standardize methods for handling and sharing stem cell lines between research labs.
In all cases, the guidelines recommend, donors should give their consent before any material -- eggs or sperm -- can be used to create an embryo that would generate stem cells. The effect of that rule would be to eliminate some stem cell lines already in use because they were obtained from embryos created with sperm from anonymous donors who were not informed about their use.
I have no doubt that the Religious Reich will claim that all of this is nonsense, since it stem cell research deals with "embryos," the code word for baby humans. Still, I think we are beginning to move forward and I believe that most Americans are in favor of that direction.
Hopefully, when the bill comes onto the Senate and House floors, people will let their Senators and Representatives what they expect from them in huge numbers.
I never thought I would ever say this, but "Way to go, Arlen!"
posted by Diane at 7:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home