Embryonic Stem Cell

Where lawmakers in two competitive area races, and their opponents, stand on the stem-cell debate: Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Rick Santorum has long opposed embryonic stem-cell research on moral and religious grounds. In Senate testimony June 27, he said he was morally opposed to harvesting stem cells from discarded human embryos. He is the sponsor of a bill to outlaw gestation of human embryos for research purposes. He also has sponsored a bill with Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.)

No funding is behind it. It doesn't break legal ground. But New Jersey's new law promoting embryonic stem-cell research is still a good, smart step. Gov. McGreevey signed the law a week ago, making New Jersey only the second state (after California) to sanction this kind of vital research. New Jersey and California now stand to benefit from an influx of researchers and research money, resulting in research that could benefit the world. Pennsylvania and other states should take notice.

The battle over stem cells has been heating up again. But even as the politicians fight it out, developments in stem-cell science point to the likelihood that what has seemed like an intractable dispute could be resolved in a way that both sides can heartily endorse. This way forward is opened by new scientific techniques to produce embryonic-type (pluripotent) stem cells without requiring the destruction of human embryos. ("Pluripotency" refers to the potential of a cell to become many different types of body tissue.

President Obama's order lifting his predecessor's funding restrictions on human embryonic stem-cell research is expected to bring U.S. scientists rushing into a field they had abandoned or avoided. "This is a real game-changer," said Jonathan Chernoff, a Fox Chase Cancer Center molecular oncologist who plans to switch from mouse to human embryonic stem cells. "Hundreds, if not thousands, of us are in the same boat. " Diehards who remained in the field also cheered the end of what they considered cumbersome, wasteful practices that kept their federally funded embryonic stem-cell work strictly separated from their privately funded embryonic stem-cell work.

Sen. Bob Casey's first moment of truth in the U.S. Senate is approaching. And the issue is stem-cell research. When he ran last year against Rick Santorum, Casey left no doubt where he stood on the sanctity of life. He was following in his father's footsteps. That father, a two-term governor of Pennsylvania, never backed down from his pro-life convictions, despite the scorn it sometimes earned him from his Democratic colleagues - or the speaking slot it cost him at the 1992 Democratic National Convention.

U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R., Pa.) yesterday called for federal funding of research that would involve creating an altered human embryo - one that could yield precious stem cells but not implant in a uterus. Santorum, who has steadfastly opposed embryonic stem-cell research in the past, joined Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.), a vocal proponent of the research, in introducing a compromise bill on the politically popular issue. The bill would require the National Institutes of Health to find and fund new methods for obtaining human embryonic stem cells in the hope of developing therapies.

Last month, the Boston Globe carried a disturbing story from England about embryonic stem-cell researcher Roger Pederson. What was disturbing was that until recently, Mr. Pederson had been a noted researcher at the University of California. He left California because of increasingly restrictive federal embryonic stem-cell research policies here. America's research loss was England's gain. But if new laws proposed in New Jersey, Pennsylvania and other states are enacted, a potential stem-cell research brain drain could be plugged.

While the United Nations wrestled with the ethics of embryonic stem-cell research and human cloning, the College of Physicians of Philadelphia last week presented experts who offered some basic reality checks. The most sobering was this: For all the talk of developing stem-cell cures for Alzheimer's and other dreaded diseases, animal experiments show how easily treatment can go awry. "If one in a billion cells is misprogrammed, it can give rise to a tumor when it is transplanted" into the animal, explained Kenneth S. Zaret, leader of the cell and developmental biology program at Fox Chase Cancer Center.

A California biotech company has developed a way to generate human embryonic stem-cell colonies without intentionally destroying embryos. Lead researcher Robert Lanza of Advanced Cell Technology declared that "this removes the last rational reason for opposing" research aimed at using the cells to understand and treat diseases. Lanza's optimism was not widely shared. His team earned praise for trying to address ethical concerns and for technical prowess. But opponents of embryonic-stem-cell research said the new approach still posed moral dilemmas.

During a guest lecture at the University of Pennsylvania last week, Woo-Suk Hwang emphasized, as he always does, that his pioneering research on embryonic stem cells in South Korea was conducted under strict ethical controls. Five days later, Hwang's main American research partner, Gerald Schatten of the University of Pittsburgh, ended a 20-month collaboration, citing ethical concerns and a "breach of trust. " Schatten's announcement Saturday has renewed calls for unrestricted U.S. funding of embryonic stem-cell research.

President Obama's order lifting his predecessor's funding restrictions on human embryonic stem-cell research is expected to bring U.S. scientists rushing into a field they had abandoned or avoided. "This is a real game-changer," said Jonathan Chernoff, a Fox Chase Cancer Center molecular oncologist who plans to switch from mouse to human embryonic stem cells. "Hundreds, if not thousands, of us are in the same boat. " Diehards who remained in the field also cheered the end of what they considered cumbersome, wasteful practices that kept their federally funded embryonic stem-cell work strictly separated from their privately funded embryonic stem-cell work.

Anyone who knows me knows that I don't shy away from offering my two-cents on the issues of the day, particularly in presidential races. And anyone who has heard me talk about the presidential race over the last few months knows that I've had, shall we say, some serious reservations about John McCain's candidacy. I've disagreed with him on immigration, global warming and federal protection of marriage. I've taken strong exception to his view that the federal government should fund embryonic stem-cell research.

Sen. Bob Casey's first moment of truth in the U.S. Senate is approaching. And the issue is stem-cell research. When he ran last year against Rick Santorum, Casey left no doubt where he stood on the sanctity of life. He was following in his father's footsteps. That father, a two-term governor of Pennsylvania, never backed down from his pro-life convictions, despite the scorn it sometimes earned him from his Democratic colleagues - or the speaking slot it cost him at the 1992 Democratic National Convention.

A California biotech company has developed a way to generate human embryonic stem-cell colonies without intentionally destroying embryos. Lead researcher Robert Lanza of Advanced Cell Technology declared that "this removes the last rational reason for opposing" research aimed at using the cells to understand and treat diseases. Lanza's optimism was not widely shared. His team earned praise for trying to address ethical concerns and for technical prowess. But opponents of embryonic-stem-cell research said the new approach still posed moral dilemmas.

President Bush's embryonic stem-cell policy began with lies and has now ended with one. Bush reserved his first veto as president for one of the only valuable things this do-almost-nothing Congress has managed to get done. With a flourish of a veto pen that has remained dormant no matter how dopey Congress has been, the Senate bill allowing public funding of embryonic stem-cell (ESC) research has been consigned to the legislative trash can. An administration with truth issues is now telling Americans in wheelchairs, those with damaged hearts, babies who are diabetic, and those immobilized by Parkinsonism not to worry.

Where lawmakers in two competitive area races, and their opponents, stand on the stem-cell debate: Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Rick Santorum has long opposed embryonic stem-cell research on moral and religious grounds. In Senate testimony June 27, he said he was morally opposed to harvesting stem cells from discarded human embryos. He is the sponsor of a bill to outlaw gestation of human embryos for research purposes. He also has sponsored a bill with Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.)

Two American research teams, one on each coast, said yesterday they were trying to clone human embryos to harvest stem cells genetically matched to patients. Scientists at the Harvard Stem Cell Institute and the University of California at San Francisco said their goal was to use embryonic stem-cell colonies to model certain diseases. That could lead to developing stem-cell therapies, although probably not for a decade or more. "We are convinced that working with embryonic stem cells holds tremendous promise for the treatment of a host of currently intractable and incurable diseases," Harvard University provost Steven Hyman said yesterday.

For nearly four decades, our nation has been bitterly divided over the question of abortion. In recent years, a closely related issue has arisen to further divide us: the use of human embryos in research involving their destruction. Often the competing sides in these debates have been unwilling or, as a strict matter of conscience, unable to cooperate with each other in the search for solutions that both sides can accept. On the issue of embryonic stem-cell research, however, it seems increasingly clear that there are such solutions.

U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R., Pa.) yesterday called for federal funding of research that would involve creating an altered human embryo - one that could yield precious stem cells but not implant in a uterus. Santorum, who has steadfastly opposed embryonic stem-cell research in the past, joined Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.), a vocal proponent of the research, in introducing a compromise bill on the politically popular issue. The bill would require the National Institutes of Health to find and fund new methods for obtaining human embryonic stem cells in the hope of developing therapies.