The Niche

Stem-cell advocates ask Obama for oversight

When Obama was elected, advocates for embryonic stem cell research rejoiced merely at the prospect of fewer funding restrictions. Now they are developing policy recommendations.

Here’s a round-up of what three groups are advocating, all recommend lifting the federal funding restrictions. Everyone expects that to happen, though there is some speculation, that he’ll work with Congress to lift the ban rather than using an executive order. (See story in Newsmax.)

Also, here’s a subscription-only piece in Nature Medicine, Challenges anticipated in removal of embryonic stem cell restrictions, which concludes that just lifting the ban will not open floodgates of new research.

The most specific requests are contained in 40-pages from the American Progress group, whose leader, John Podesta, is on leave to advise the Obama transition. A Life Sciences Crucible: Stem cell research and innovation done responsibly and ethically offers specific guidelines to the President, Congress, and NIH, and for establishing the best national stem cell registry and stem cell bank. In particular, the report suggests provisions for stem-cell research coded into federal legislation and suggests that the role of the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee (RAC ), which reviews human gene-therapy protocols, be expanded to review cell therapies as well. In a position that many scientists will disagree with, the report commends WARF for striking a good balance in protecting investments and allowing research to proceed. In a position most scientists will support, states funding stem-cell research are urged not to drop their efforts.

The Coalition for the Advancement for Medical Research has its 11-page A Catalyst for Cures: Embryonic Stem Cell Research, aimed more at the public than informed policymakers. This report says that ES cell research has come a long, long way, with cells that can now be coaxed into neurons, heart muscle and more. However, ES cell research has even further to go before the cells can be used for practical applications. These include drug testing and modeling disease in a dish. From page 9 on, the report summarizes progress on specific diseases and research investments in companies. It also points out that research takes a long time: it took 45 years after poliovirus was isolated before the Salk vaccine was produced.

The Center for Genetics and Society has a nine page report, three pages of which focus on stem cells. CGS supports human ES cell research, but has spoken out against therapeutic cloning because the experiments require eggs to be collected from women, and the group worries that the technology could be applied to reproductive cloning. Its recommendations call for legislation to prohibit human reproductive cloning (but not therapeutic cloning) and make Stem Cell Research Oversight committees accountable to the NIH. It also calls for greater study and public discussion of issues raised by human biotechnology, as well as federal oversight of assisted reproductive technology.

Finally, Harvard professor and former president of the International Society for Stem Cell Research puts forth his recommendations in a collection of advice from experts ranging from climate change, FDA, and infrastructure. (It’s the final essay in this collection. Your inbox, Mr. President)

If I’ve missed your group, send an email to the Niche at nature dot com.

Comments

Comments are closed.