Obama: Yes to stem cells, funding

Declan was told by a scientist on Tuesday that he hadn't received any email with the subject "NAC: Petition to the UN on Therapeutic Cloning", not even in his spam box – Declan usually makes three or four random calls, although normally all he gets are voice mails. So it seems that a spam box is too good for Declan's email: scientists and academics can spot it among the junk and decide to sign the petition. It might explain why there were no signatures yesterday despite me emailing 105 scientists; the day before I emailed 139.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama

If elected President of the United States in November, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says he will lift the Bush administration's ban on federal funding of research on embryonic stem cell lines created after 9 August 2001, and ensure that all research on stem cells is conducted ethically and with rigorous oversight. Obama recently answered a fourteen-part questionnaire posed to him and Republican presidential candidate John McCain by the grassroots group Science Debate 2008, which says it hopes to make key science issues a larger part of the election. McCain has said he will also answer the questions.

The questionnaire was a joint effort of Science Debate 2008, Scientists and Engineers for America, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Academies (the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine and National Research Council), the Council on Competitiveness and others, together representing more than 125 million voters. The questions dealt with a range of topics including genetics, stem cell research, scientific integrity, and research. "Most of America's major unsolved challenges revolve around these 14 questions," Shawn Otto, chief executive officer of Science Debate 2008, said in a statement. "To move America forward, the next president needs a substantive plan for tackling [the issues] going in, and voters deserve to know what that plan is."

Obama's answer to the question on embryonic stem cell research (Q: "Stem cell research advocates say it may successfully lead to treatments for many chronic diseases and injuries, saving lives, but opponents argue that using embryos as a source for stem cells destroys human life. What is your position on government regulation and funding of stem cell research?") is reproduced here:

Stem cell research holds the promise of improving our lives in at least three ways – by substituting normal cells for damaged cells to treat diabetes, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, heart failure and other disorders; by providing scientists with safe and convenient models of disease for drug development; and by helping to understand fundamental aspects of normal development and cell dysfunction.

For these reasons, I strongly support expanding research on stem cells. I believe that the restrictions that President Bush has placed on funding of human embryonic stem cell research have handcuffed our scientists and hindered our ability to compete with other nations. As president, I will lift the current administration's ban on federal funding of research on embryonic stem cell lines created after August 9, 2001 through executive order, and I will ensure that all research on stem cells is conducted ethically and with rigorous oversight.

I recognize that some people object to government support of research that requires cells to be harvested from human embryos. However, hundreds of thousands of embryos stored in the U.S. in in-vitro fertilization clinics will not be used for reproductive purposes, and will eventually be destroyed. I believe that it is ethical to use these extra embryos for research that could save lives when they are freely donated for that express purpose.

I am also aware that there have been suggestions that human stem cells of various types, derived from sources other than embryos, make the use of embryonic stem cells unnecessary. I don't agree. While adult stem cells, such as those harvested from blood or bone marrow, are already used for treatment of some diseases, they do not have the versatility of embryonic stem cells and cannot replace them. Recent discoveries indicate that adult skin cells can be reprogrammed to behave like stem cells; these are exciting findings that might in the future lead to an alternate source of highly versatile stem cells. However, embryonic stem cells remain the "gold standard," and studies of all types of stem cells should continue in parallel for the foreseeable future.

Rather than restrict the funding of such research, I favor responsible oversight of it, in accord with recent reports from the National Research Council. Recommendations from the NRC reports are already being followed by institutions that conduct human embryonic stem cell research with funds from a variety of sources. An expanded, federally-supported stem cell research program will encourage talented U.S. scientists to engage in this important new field, will allow more effective oversight, and will signal to other countries our commitment to compete in this exciting area of medical research.

A recent article in the News-Journal, titled "East Texans find success in stem cell treatments", quoted Kevin Wilson, director of public policy for The American Society for Cell Biology, as saying that US Food and Drug Administration officials are cautious about allocating research money toward embryonic stem cell research, and that the government is losing billions of dollars in research time and money by stalling on embryonic stem cell research. "The president's policy puts stem cell research in a time warp," Wilson said. "In Singapore, stem cell research accounts for about $5 billion of its economy, and the country has invested billions into the research as well. We must have the US policy overturned."

Besides the hotly contested presidential election, Michigan voters will vote in November on a ballot proposal that would loosen restrictions on embryonic stem cell research. Medical News Today reports that the official wording of the ballot measure says that it will expand use of human embryos for any research permitted under federal law subject to the following limits: the embryos are created for fertility treatment purposes; are not suitable for implantation or are in excess of clinical needs; would be discarded unless used for research; were donated by the person seeking fertility treatment; provide that stem cells cannot be taken from human embryos more than 14 days after cell division begins; prohibit any person from selling or purchasing human embryos for stem cell research; and prohibit state and local laws that prevent, restrict or discourage stem cell research, future therapies and cures. It also quotes Joe Schwarz, a physician and former Republican member of Congress who heads the Cure Michigan campaign, as saying: "What we are talking about here is providing cures for people, providing therapies for people. In this century, a majority of therapies and cures will be from genetic therapy and cellular therapy and not from popping chemical compounds, which is what we've done all our lives. So this is a movement forward."

Right now Michigan is one of only five states to ban the use of discarded embryos for medical research (the others: South Dakota, North Dakota, Louisiana and Arkansas), but not everyone wants to see things change. The Michigan Catholic Conference, which has joined the ballot question committee Michigan Citizens Against Unrestricted Science and Experimentation (MiCAUSE), states on their homepage that the proposal "would amend the state constitution to allow for unregulated, unrestricted embryo destruction in Michigan. The proposal also opens the door for human cloning to become legal in this state." In contrast, a letter of support for the ballot initiative to support embryonic stem cell research was issued only yesterday by the International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR), an independent, nonprofit organisation which represents over 2,600 leading stem cell researchers from around the world, stating: "The ethical safeguards proposed under Michigan's ballot initiative would provide an ethical framework within which important medical research could go forward."

Melvin Lester, Adjunct Professor of Medicine and President of Michigan Citizens for Stem Cell Research and Cures spoke at the House Judiciary Committee hearing in November 2007: "Do as you please. Don’t participate in embryonic stem cell research if it is against your better judgment, but please don’t tell us that the citizens of forty-five of our states that permit, endorse and support embryonic stem cell research are unethical, immoral and murderers. The majority of the citizens of Michigan like the majority of the citizens of the United States want this law rescinded."

2008 GOP platform calls for total ban on embryonic stem cell research

Although I spend most of my time trying to keep Declan's petition to the UN on research cloning of embryos and stem cells going, the fact is that I believe that most of the emails I am sending to scientists and academics inviting them to sign the petition are still ending up in spam – it would explain the low number of out-of-office autoreplies I continue to receive. (Our local council's Idea Store Whitechapel library has imposed on both our membership cards a maximum of 3 hours of PC access per day since 29 January, despite that for several months previous we were given "additional time" subject to computer availability in accordance with "Idea Stores PC Usage Policy".) On Wednesday I emailed 105 scientists from the Department of Molecular & Cell Biology at the University of California, Berkeley and got six autoreplies (from 2nd, 15th, 22nd, 42nd, 70th and 83rd emails); on Thursday it was 95 emails to the American Association of Anatomists which yielded five autoreplies (from 21st, 22nd, 30th, 47th and 74th emails). On Friday I sent 175 emails for five autoreplies: 14 to the Paterson Institute for Cancer Research in the UK, one autoreply (1st email); and 161 to the Association of Medical School Microbiology and Immunology Chairs, four autoreplies (none before the 78th email). It doesn't surprise me then that on Wednesday night I woke up to a London corporation worker hosing me as well as the pavement (I sleep on the outside; Declan on the inside with our well-tied bags) – a first since we started sleeping in the two-step porch back in November 2006. He looked at me impassively when I sat up – I was quite visible in light which shone through the glass porch door – and continued his hosing. He won't have an excuse next time though: since Friday night, down-light from two overhead bulbs makes the porch feel like an operating theatre – another first.

St Paul, host to the Republican National Convention

The 2008 Republican (GOP) Platform Committee has voted to ban embryonic stem-cell research, including privately funded research using frozen embryos from in-vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics, reports the National Review on Wednesday under the title "Going Out With a Bang". The GOP platform, which states "We call for a ban on human cloning and a ban on the creation of or experimentation on human embryos for research purposes", was passed by state delegates on Wednesday and will be adopted at this week's Republican National Convention in St Paul, Minneapolis.

Ken Blackwell, a former Ohio secretary of state who served as a vice chairman of the committee, said he took particular interest in the subcommittee working on values, which addressed the issue of embryonic stem-cell research. "I think science and history have bridged the different perspectives on that," The Blade reported him as saying. "It's clear to me that breakthroughs in adult stem-cell research make the issue over embryonic stem cells less controversial. This was a discussion driven by the exploration of facts." He said presidential nominee Sen John McCain's advisers and staff were represented throughout the platform-drafting process and that the differences between his beliefs and those of the committee are not indicative of a party divided.

As a senator, McCain has voted in favour of allowing research on human embryos left over from fertility treatments. Nonetheless, advocates of greater federal funding of embryonic stem cell research are worried he will do "an about-face" on the issue if he wins the presidency, says The Hill in an article dated 12 August titled "Stem cell backers doubt McCain's support". McCain's presidential campaign has sought to win over religious conservatives and other factions, including activists who oppose stem cell research. Rep Mike Castle (Del), the chief Republican sponsor of the 2006 and 2007 stem cell bills vetoed by President Bush, told The Hill he wasn't sure whether a President McCain would sign stem cell research legislation. "The question becomes: Will the pro-life movement be able to persuade him otherwise between now and the election?" said Castle.

National Right to Life Committee Executive Director David O’Steen said anti-abortion rights activists think they can turn McCain to their way of thinking on stem cells. "We’d be hopeful that he’d leave [President George W Bush’s] policy in place," O’Steen said. What McCain might actually do, he cautioned, is "an open question". McCain’s campaign did not respond to The Hill’s questions or numerous attempts to obtain a comment for their article. In February, the campaign issued a statement to the Wisconsin State Journal standing behind his record but containing the language O’Steen quoted as evidence of McCain’s flexibility on the issue. "John McCain does support federal funding for embryonic stem cell research," the February statement says in part. "[H]e believes that recent scientific breakthroughs may render this debate academic," according to the statement. "I don’t think he’s ideologically committed to embryonic stem cell research," O’Steen said of McCain. "While Barack Obama is ideologically committed to it, John McCain has indicated that [embryonic] stem cell research is, in his words, 'academic'," he said.

Scientists at Japan’s National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, which is funded by the government, announced on 22 August that they had successfully made stem cells from wisdom teeth that had been frozen for three years after being removed from a 10 year old girl. The Baptist Press commented on 26 August: "The developments seem to provide further evidence that advances in such therapies can be accomplished without the unethical step of extracting stem cells from a five- or six-day-old embryo, an action that results in the destruction of the tiny human being." (The BP was formed in 1946 by the Southern Baptist Convention, which is America's largest evangelical denomination with about 16 million members in America, making it the second largest Christian denomination in the United States after the Catholic Church.)

Meanwhile, research published on 27 August in Nature by a team lead by Doug Melton at Harvard Stem Cell Institute that showed it is possible to take a type of adult pancreas cell that doesn't normally produce insulin and reprogram them to produce insulin, prompted Richard Dorflinger, deputy director of the Secretariat of the pro-life activities of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, to argue that the discovery was the latest evidence that research involving human embryos is no longer necessary. "This adds to the large and growing list of studies helping to make embryonic stem cells irrelevant to medical progress," Doerflinger told the Washington Post. The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), the state stem cell agency, stated the following regarding the research (the full statement, titled "CIRM Applauds the Reprogramming of Pancreas Cells to Produce Insulin Saying It Points to the Value in Pursuing All Research Paths in Regenerative Medicine", can be read here):

CIRM applauds the creativity and value in the research reported and shares the excitement in the promise it might hold. However, it emphatically refutes assertions by opponents of embryonic stem cell research that this new study proves embryonic stem cell research is not necessary. In fact, the Harvard study poignantly points out the value of embryonic stem cell research. Asked if his new findings eliminate the need for work with hESC and iPS cells, the lead Harvard researcher, Doug Melton, said: 'This is a point I want to stress: We are continuing to do research using human embryonic stem cells and iPS cells. We would not be where we are today without having worked with human embryonic stem cells. These unique cells provide a window into human development, and disease development, that is needed if we are to make further progress in understanding and treating chronic diseases. They remain the key to long-term progress in regenerative medicine.' The research reported in Nature is a major advance but it has significant limitations.

Embryonic stem cell research should not be held hostage to politics or religion, argues Nancy Falchuk, the national president of Hadassah, the Women's Zionist Organization of America, in a piece that appeared in The Jewish Daily Forward on Thursday titled "Support Stem-Cell Research". She writes: "Droves of members of both major political parties support the research, evidenced by the congressional passage in 2006 and 2007 of bipartisan bills that, had they not been vetoed by President Bush, would have lifted the federal restrictions. Similarly, support for stem-cell research is not defined by religion. Millions of Americans with strongly held religious beliefs support stem-cell research, a position backed by all major streams of Judaism."

Steven Pinker, world-renowned thinker and Johnstone Family Professor in the Department of Psychology at Harvard University - and an honorary associate of NAC and early signatory of Declan’s petition – wrote in an article for The New Republic, titled "The Stupidity of Dignity", that "the [Catholic] Church's franchise to guide people in the most profound events of their lives - birth, death, and reproduction - is in danger of being undermined when biomedicine scrambles the rules". Well, it’s no wonder that for the Christian right "breakthroughs in adult stem-cell research make the issue over embryonic stem cells less controversial". This is a discussion hardly "driven by the exploration of facts". ("The Stupidity of Dignity" article can be read here; alternatively, see blog of 23 May "The Stupidity of Dignity".)