The Texas Observer

Even as Congress debates Bush’s 2001 ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research yesterday and today, the Texas House State Affairs committee will consider legislation related to stem cell research in a hearing tomorrow.

The science
Biomedical researchers believe that stem cell therapy has the potential to treat myriad degenerative or incurable diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease and spinal cord injuries, to name a few. Stem cells are useful in regenerative medicine because they have the capability of dividing and self-renewing over a long period of time, and they are undifferentiated, meaning they can be coaxed into becoming any of the 220 cell types in the body. Stem cells could be used to replace cells that are deficient in patients with certain diseases.

Adult stem cells are cells found in the body that can self-renew, but are not totally undifferentiated. They already have a pathway to becoming a type of cell for their own organ system, like a heart cell or a liver cell, says Judith Haley, president of Texans for the Advancement of Medical Research.

Embryonic stem cells are truly undifferentiated, and are derived from the inner cells of a 4- to 5-day-old human embryo. One source of embryonic stem cells are frozen embryos from in vitro fertilization clinics that will otherwise be thrown away. When a couple is using in vitro fertilization, usually several eggs are fertilized, and the healthiest few are implanted. The leftovers are either frozen or tossed. There are more than 400,000 frozen embryos in clinics throughout the country, 11,000 of which have been donated by the parents for medical research, Haley says.

Another source of embryonic stem cells is somatic cell nuclear transfer, which is when DNA from a particular patient is inserted into a donated unfertilized egg to create stem cells that could be used to replace damaged cells in the patient’s body. SCNT research could eliminate the issue of immune system rejection, because the stem cells would contain the patient’s own DNA, Haley says.

The politics
Because the creation of an embryonic stem cell line requires the destruction of a human embryo, some pro-lifers, who believe life begins at conception, oppose embryonic stem cell research. Supporters argue that the embryos would otherwise be thrown away and could be used to save or improve many lives. “What is the moral high ground of throwing them away, when they could be used to cure terrible diseases?,” Haley asks. Opponents say the use of discarded embryos is a slippery slope to creating human embryos only to destroy them for research. Supporters say that guidelines can be set to prevent that from happening.

All types of stem cell research are legal. Currently, federal funding is banned for embryonic stem cell research other than that which uses stem cells from lines created before Aug. 9, 2001, when President Bush established the policy. Haley says there are only a little more than 20 stem cell lines left that can be used in federally funded research. New stem cell lines can be derived and used for research, but only if it’s privately funded. “The problem with that is that you are closing off the biggest source of basic research funding,” Haley says. “Private companies pick it up at a point that you’ve come far enough along to develop a product.”

Another problem, she says, is that research facilities that receive both government and private funding have to make sure that none of the federal money goes toward embryonic stem cell research beyond the stem cell lines created before 2001. “If federal dollars have paid for it, you can’t use that microscope or even a test tube,” she says, which sometimes means building a “whole separate laboratory and wasting millions of dollars.”

Adult stem cell research is not controversial, but the separation of embryonic versus adult stem cell research is predominately political rather than scientific, says Paul Simmons, director of the Institute for Molecular Medicine Center for Stem Cell Biology at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, which performs adult stem cell research.

“For all scientists, it’s really a question of both,” he says. “There are opportunities for amazingly good synergy between the two fields. It’s greater than the sum of the two. You get observations made when you’re allowed to work on both that you would not make if you just worked on either alone.”

The legislation
Six bills and one resolution will be heard tomorrow at 8 a.m. in a House State Affairs committee hearing. Of note is House Bill 225 by McKinney Republican Rep. Ken Paxton, which would imitate Bush’s federal funding guidelines for stem cell research in state funding.

“So many people in Texas have a problem with it that we shouldn’t use tax money to fund it,” Paxton says. The state doesn’t really fund any embryonic stem cell research currently, he says, but the bill would prevent it from happening in the future.

Opponents of the bill say it would complicate embryonic stem cell research in institutions that receive both state and private funding. It also would deprive the state of a source of economic growth.

House Bill 2704 by Houston Republican Rep. Beverly Woolley would ban human cloning, while protecting important embryonic stem cell research. Supporters say that protective legislation is important to keep Texas among the leading states in field of bio-medicine. If researchers fear an eventual embryonic stem cell research ban in Texas, they’ll establish themselves in friendlier states, Haley says. HB 2704 enjoys bipartisan support.

Will stem cells be another area like immigration where Republican elected officials break with their base?

by Megan Headley

This entry was posted on Wednesday, April 11th, 2007 at 5:01 pm and is filed under 80th Texas Lege. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Bookmark:

• del.icio.us
• digg
• FURL
• reddit
• Newsvine