August 27, 2004

League of Women Voters hosts forum

Stanford experts lay out issues surrounding stem cell research

Pat Frischmann
Special to the Times

Stanford experts in biochemistry and legal ethics recently laid out scientific, moral, legal, ethical and political issues surrounding stem cell research for a standing-room-only crowd in Los Altos.

Stem cell research is a high-profile subject. In November, Californians will vote on whether to fund a stem cell research institute. Senator John Kerry wants more federal funding for stem cell research, as does the family of former President Ronald Reagan, who suffered from Alzheimer’s disease. President George W. Bush continues to favor funding restrictions.

Stem cells—single cells that morph into other types of cells—have been used in medicine for years, explained Dr. Paul Berg, a Nobel Laureate in biochemistry, at the forum. Bone marrow is used to replace blood cells, red cells or T-cells, for example. “However, no stem cells have ever been isolated in other tissues,” he said.

Other sources of stem cells are human fetal tissue and human embryos. “Fetal stem cell research is legal and federally fundable,” explained Henry T. (Hank) Greely, professor of law, “but it has proven not as useful as its early promise.”

First isolated in 1998, human embryonic stem cells can grow indefinitely in Petri dishes. The cell cultures are drawn from embryos that in-vitro fertilization clinics discard.

About 70 cell “lines” existed in the United States on Aug. 10, 2001, when President Bush issued an executive order banning federal research funds for growing new lines. Dr. Berg said currently only 20 lines that meet federal funding criteria are available for research. The rest did not prove viable or were subject to licensing restrictions. Any new lines must be created with private funding.

What excites scientists and physicians about embryonic stem cells is their ability to differentiate themselves into many kinds of human tissue.

“In experiments with mice, stem cells have generated insulin, which is a potential benefit in juvenile diabetes,” Dr. Berg said. Stem cells also have produced dopamine, which reduces the effects of Parkinson’s disease. The cells have repaired spinal cord damage in mice.

While the federal government has banned all funding for research that destroys human embryos, the government funds research that uses embryonic stem cell lines, Greely said.

This is a debate with an ethical tinge. People who believe life begins at conception consider embryonic stem cell research to be murder. Others oppose “non-reproductive cloning,” a method of generating new stem cell lines by replacing genetic material from a human egg with genetic material from another embryo or person.

Nine states ban cloning. All oppose reproductive cloning—the process that created Dolly the sheep in Great Britain. Five states also ban non-reproductive cloning. California, the first to ban reproductive cloning, also was the first to permit non-reproductive cloning.

“California is one of two states, along with New Jersey, that encourages stem cell research,” Greely noted.
Besides the moral and ethical considerations, Californians are questioning whether a state in fiscal trouble should fund the research, and whether a proposition is the approach for deciding the issue.

Even if stem cell research receives funding, Greely and Dr. Berg cautioned, any treatments are likely five to ten years away.

Pat Frischmann is a volunteer for the League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan political organization that encourages the informed and active participation of citizens in government. The Los Altos/Mountain View chapter of the League collaborated with Foothills Congregational Church to sponsor this forum. For an objective overview of issues pertaining to California in this election, go to the Web at http://ca.lwv.org/.