Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Alive and Well

I have to laugh every time I hear liberals either being ignorant or lying about embryonic stem cell research, saying that the government is ending it. The government hasn't ended embryonic stem cell research, it's just stopped funding it and stopped allowing the creation of cell lines (which involves the destruction of human life).

This may sound like practically ending embryonic stem cell research - sort of like voting for the war but against funding is voting against the war - but it's not. First of all, plenty of cell lines already exist. Not to mention...

Economics lesson: As usual, once the government stepped out, funding to embryonic stem cell research increased. With the government handing out money, the private sector figured Why bother? when it came to investing in the research. Now, with government money gone, investors are trying to get their big pay offs by investing.

Reports the US Department of Health and Human Services:

Number of Lines Available for Federal Funding

• 78 derivations of human embryonic stem cells meet the criteria established by the President and listed on the NIH Registry, although since the August 2001 announcement 16 of these derivations failed to grow into lines that would be usable for research.

• With assistance from NIH, the owners of 19 of the lines agreed to make their lines available for use by researchers in the U.S. and abroad. Four other derivations are being developed into lines today; two of them will be available in the near future for broad distribution, while two others are still under development. Still others are being preserved by their owners until the science develops further. No other country in the world has made as many stem cell lines widely available.

• Because stem cell lines divide continuously in culture, these lines can be used by hundreds of individual researchers. One line alone has already resulted in 136 shipments to researchers.

• These lines are being employed to study many unanswered questions that must be answered before the cells can be used in human therapies. For example, determined cell culture conditions that allowed one line to differentiate into neurons similar to the dopamine-producing neurons that degenerate in Parkinson=s Disease. This advance is the first step towards generating neurons that may be useful in treating this disorder. Other scientists used an eligible line to form 3-dimensional structures with characteristics of developing liver tissue, cartilage, nerve, or blood vessels. This technique may permit scientists to generate tissue for use in skin grafts, wound treatment, or organ transplantation.

Private and State Funding for Embryonic Stem Cell Research is Available

The President's policy places no obstacles in the path of private or state funding for stem cell research – researchers are receiving support from both sources, in addition to support from the Federal Government.

• Based on 2002 data, one study reports that private sector research and development in stem cells was being conducted by approximately 1000 scientists in over 30 firms. Aggregate spending was estimated at $208 million.¹ Geron Corporation alone reported that it spent more than $70 million on stem cell research by September 2003.

• In the Stem Cell Business News Guide to Stem Cell Companies (Feb 2003), 61 U.S. and international companies are listed as pursuing some form of research or therapeutic product development involving stem cells. For example, Geron Corp. has announced plans to seek FDA approval to pursue human trials.

• Some states ban the destruction of human embryonic stem cells for research. Some permit it, but do not fund it (consistent with federal policy). And still other states provide funding.

• As with most medical research, the effort to explore the promise of this science and to develop treatments and cures will require the combined efforts of both the public and private sector.

1. Lysaght, J.J., and Hazlehurst, A.L., Private Sector Development of Stem Technology and Therapeutic Cloning," Tissue Engineering 9(3): 555-561 (2003).

I consider this case closed. As usual, the facts just don't back up liberalism.