# 398 Friday, December 14, 2007 - THE POLITICS BEHIND THE NEW STEM CELL APPROACH PART ONE
Reprogramming skin cells into a potentially embryonic state is an amazing possibility. Unfortunately, opponents of embryonic stem cell research are attempting to use the advance in a negative way: to block research of equal or greater potential-- and to help elect opponents of research.
Certain politicians, known enemies of stem cell research, are shamelessly claiming credit for the new advance: as if their attempt to impose the darkness of scientific censorship somehow added to the light.
A ban on science is not a contribution.
Those who have systematically attacked the research should not now be rewarded, especially since they are already attempting to use IPS as a roadblock, not an advance.
The coming elections are crucial in determining the direction of science. Not only the future of stem cell research, but also the larger issue of funding for the entire National Institutes of Health (NIH) is at stake.
Here are some interesting quotes to consider.
PLAYING POLITICS WITH STEM CELL RESEARCH?
" Opponents of embryonic stem cell research, including President Bush, are already arguing that the skin cell advance should end the use of stem cells derived from human embryos. That would be shortsighted.
"President Bush `s stem cell strategy is to deny federal funding for research because it destroys human embryos. But his moral objection doesn`t apply to hundreds of thousands of human embryos discarded every year in the name of in vitro fertilization.
"the President and others (have been) playing politics with stem cell research
Mercury News Editorial, 11/27/2007
WAS GEORGE BUSH RIGHT?
(the argument is made that) "George Bush was right, that we have now found a way to create ˜a magical stem cell that can become bone or brain or heart or liver" without using human embryos.
"It is not true. It is not even close to true.
"The greatest loss of all would be if these exciting new discoveries were allowed to create the false belief that research opposed by the Bush administration research involving embryonic stem cells rescued from frozen embryos that would otherwise have been discarded was no longer necessary
"The only voices saying that these new discoveries have made the debate over stem cell research moot are the voices that were opposed to (the) research all along."
--Susan L. Solomon, CEO, the New York Stem Cell Foundation, and Zach W. Hall, former President, California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, in Huffington Post, 11/30/07
REPUBLICAN COMMENT:
"I really don `t think anybody ought to take credit in light of the six-year delay (emphasis added) we`ve had My own view is that science ought to be unfettered and that every possible alternative ought to be explored.
" if we can find something which is certifiably equivalent to embryonic stem cells, fine. But we are not there yet."---Sheryl Gay Stolberg, NY Times, 11/21/07
AND THE SCIENTISTS WHO DID THE EXPERIMENT?
The two principle investigators of the new method, Jamie Thomson of
Yamanaka: " it would be a serious mistake to conclude that recent developments in IPS cell research avert the need for ongoing research on hES (human embryonic stem) cells. Research on IPS cells has barely begun
"tumorigenicity (cancer-causing) and safety are major concerns
"..we hold that research into all avenues of human stem cell research must proceed together. Society deserves to have the full commitment of scientific inquiry at its service.
"...the inspiration for IPS cell research came from an earlier stem cell study... with hES cells.
" the recent advancements in IPS cell research would not be possible if not it were not for years of dedicated hES cell research that preceded them. We cannot support that notion that IPS cell research can advance without hES research."
--"New Advances in IPS cell research do not obviate the need for Human Embryonic Stem Cells "Shinya Yamanaka, et al._________
THOMPSON: "My feeling is that the political controversy set the field back about four or five years,". (Bush `s funding limits) "represented very bad public policy as far as I `m concerned. The field has been much slower taking off than it would have been otherwise."
--
IS THE NEW RESEARCH ALL WE NEED?
"Dr. Yamanaka `s work further emphasizes the critical need we have to continue working with naturally occurring human embryonic stem cells, which remain the gold standard against which all alternative sources of human pluripotent stem cells must be tested."
--Richard Murphy, interim President of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine.
AND FROM
" Choosing to focus on only one avenue of research or type of cell source, would be irresponsible, unreasonable, and premature.
"Promising and successful research exploring human stem cells should be supplemented with not supplanted by new and potentially exciting approaches, with all forms of research moving forward along multiple independent paths
" no one knows what important discoveries would be missed if we were to "place all of our eggs in one new basket," especially if that decision were largely driven by emotional and political expediency."
William Brinkley, dean of Graduate School of Biomedical Science at Baylor College of Medicine:
AND
" Because embryonic stem-cell research requires destruction of embryos, opponents consider it the equivalent of abortion.
"President Bush is one of those opponents. In 2001, he limited the federal government `s role in embryonic stem-cell research, and he has vetoed legislation to expand that role. The White House claimed that the discovery vindicated the President `s policy. "By avoiding techniques that destroy life, while vigorously supporting alternative approaches," a spokesman said, "President Bush is encouraging scientific advancement within ethical boundaries."
"As in so many things scientific, Mr. Bush is wrong on the facts and wrong on the analysis
--"Stem-cell competition, not stem-cell exclusion", Palm Beach Post Editorial, 11.27.07
HOW ABOUT
"Restricting research and pushing researchers toward techniques not fully understood only serves to delay the considerable medical benefits that could lead to cures to some of the most debilitating diseases of our time. With cancer alone killing half a million Americans every year we don `t have time to drag our feet.
"Opponents of embryonic stem cell research see (it) as the destruction of human life. However, the blastocysts from which embryonic stem cells are drawn are from fertility clinics and would be discarded anyway What exactly is immoral about using blastocysts to research ways to save lives...?"
--The
HEAD OF NIH STEM CELL TASK FORCE WEIGHS IN
" the head of the National Institutes of Health stem cell task force said it would be a mistake for scientists to back away from research on embryonic cells. (emphasis added) Dr. Story Andis said the breakthrough with mature cells was possible in part because of earlier work with embryonic cells.
"This does not obviate the need for human embryonic stem cell research", Landis said.
To be able to compare results from the two types of research "is critical", she added.
Part II - Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Don Reed
www.stemcellbattles
Don C. Reed is co-chair (with Karen Miner) of Californians for Cures, and writes for their web blog, www.stemcellbattles
Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
