A Distortion and a “Disservice”?: Stem Cell Research and the Words of President Bush
President Bush’s view on the use of embryos for stem cell research is well known including his limiting of federal funding for research using stem cells other than those already created at the time of his 2001 decision. At that time, it was accepted in the scientific community that the lines available were limiting for research and may have been unacceptably contaminated. It appeared that Bush’s decision represented the imposition on the American public of a moral and an obviously political decision rather than one based on science. However, Bush’s order stuck and attempts were started by states to fund their own stem cell research beyond those initial lines. A successful attempt occurred in California when the state’s voters approved a 3 billion dollar funding program for stem cell research. The funding organization known as The California Institute of Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) provides the following history: “CIRM was established in 2004 with the passage of Proposition 71, the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Act. The statewide ballot measure, which provided $3 billion in funding for stem cell research at California universities and research institutions, was overwhelmingly approved by voters, and called for the establishment of an entity to make grants and provide loans for stem cell research, research facilities, and other vital research opportunities. To date, the CIRM governing board has approved 156 research grants totaling almost $260 million, making CIRM the largest source of funding for human embryonic stem cell research in the world. For more information, please visit www.cirm.ca.gov.”
However CIRM is unhappy with President Bush’s State of the Union Speech last night when he said:
“On matters of life and science, we must trust in the innovative spirit of medical researchers and empower them to discover new treatments while respecting moral boundaries. In November, we witnessed a landmark achievement when scientists discovered a way to reprogram adult skin cells to act like embryonic stem cells. This breakthrough has the potential to move us beyond the divisive debates of the past by extending the frontiers of medicine without the destruction of human life. So we are expanding funding for this type of ethical medical research. And as we explore promising avenues of research, we must also ensure that all life is treated with the dignity it deserves. So I call on the Congress to pass legislation that bans unethical practices such as the buying, selling, patenting, or cloning of human life.”
In response to the speech, CIRM promptly published the following statement:
CIRM DISAGREES WITH PRESIDENT BUSH’S MISLEADING POSITION
ON STEM CELL RESEARCH
SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., January 28, 2008 –
The California Institute of Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) issued the following statement in response to President Bush’s State of the Union address:
Tonight, in his State of the Union address, President Bush distorted the scientific facts on stem cell research and did a disservice to the millions of patients suffering from chronic disease and injury for whom stem cell research holds great promise for future therapies and cures.
The stem cell research community is united in the position that human embryonic stem cells clearly remain the gold standard for research into pluripotent cells – cells that have the capacity to form all tissues of the body. Human embryonic stem cells are also the model against which all other potentially pluripotent cells need to be compared. The President’s proposals to further limit medical research in this area fail to take into account the intricate realities of the state of stem cell research. Indeed, the recent advances in which skin cells were induced to become pluripotent would not have been possible without research involving human embryonic stem cells. Furthermore, induced pluripotency is a technology still in its infancy. Though this technology offers great hope and promise, it will not, for the foreseeable future, be suitable for clinical studies in humans because of safety concerns.
Therefore it is critical that all avenues of stem cell research be aggressively advanced. To do otherwise would increase the already devastating restrictions that have burdened Federal support of stem cell research and patients who are depending upon it. This Administration’s position on stem cell research has already cost years in lost research productivity. Further restrictions would result in more lost time in developing stem cell based therapies and cures that hold great promise to alleviate suffering for the most destructive and costly diseases such as spinal injury, loss of sight, heart muscle injury, Parkinson’s Disease, ALS and diabetes.
CIRM supports and applauds any programs the White House advances that accelerate NIH funding for research on induced pluripotency. There is much work to be done on all cell types, including this highly promising but early stage technology. CIRM looks forward to engaging with NIH and other state and federal organizations in accelerating the progress of stem cell therapies to the clinic.
CIRM also strongly opposes reproductive cloning.
California Institute for Regenerative Medicine
210 King Street
San Francisco, CA 94107
I wonder how my visitors look at the embryonic stem cell controversy and whether, for example, President Bush is still not telling the American people the realistic scientific facts, either in 2001 or 2008. Or what do you think about CIRM’s argument regarding distortion and “disservice” as a fair judgment of President Bush’s communication to his fellow citizens? ..Maurice.
Graphic: Photograph of 8 cell human embryo (from Wikipedia).
ADDENDUM (2-2-2008): To get a better understanding of the technology and biology behind embryonic cloned cell and the reprogrammed skin cell (also called iPS "induced pluripotent stem" cell) so that one can intellectually tackle the differing expressed moral views on these two approaches toward therapeutic goals, please read the following contrasting articles published in the Bioethics Forum: Embryonic Ethics and Getting Clear on the Ethics of iPS Cells. Our President has failed to explain to us why he finds, based on the scientific differences and similarities, iPS as morally acceptable compared with the use of embryonic stem cells.
Both articles come to the conclusion that further research and development using embryonic stem cells is necessary in spite of current skin cell reprogramming effort.