State stem cell research poised to fall behind

By David Steinkraus

Friday, October 8, 2004 12:04 AM CDT

Kevin Granger sees a challenge not only from the Lou Gehrig's disease that is slowly eroding his muscular control, but also from his government.

Like some of the people at a recent benefit for him, he questions why the United States government is not solidly behind embryonic stem cell research because of the hope it offers to people like himself.

The hope is that someday scientists will be able to coax these cells - which make every tissue in the body - to replace damaged cells, such as the muscle-controlling motor neurons that die in people with Lou Gehrig's disease.

Instead Granger is seeking therapy in China, the only place where a physician is using cells from an aborted fetus in an attempt to retard or halt the progression of his ALS, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, the other name for Lou Gehrig's

disease.

Stem cell research has returned to the news in recent days as Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry emphasized his support of the research and accused President Bush of limiting research.

What Bush did in 2001 was restrict the number of embryonic stem cell lines that scientists could use for research. At the time, Bush said his decision would allow research to continue but wouldn't require the destruction of embryos to produce new cell lines. Some anti-abortion advocates equate the destruction of embryos with murder, and stem cells are taken from embryos after they've divided to form between 16 and 32 cells. While the administration counted some 60 cell lines at the time of Bush's decision, fewer than 20 proved useable.

There are also adult stem cells, found in various tissues, and apparently able to repair damage. But scientists don't know how adult or embryonic stem cells work, or their limits, and say they need to study both types in order to understand whether therapies are possible.

Changing opinion The public is starting to agree.

In August the Pew Research Center and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life queried 1,510 American adults and found that 52 percent said it is more important to conduct stem cell research than to protect embryos. In a 2002 poll, 43 percent of respondents said the same thing. The level of support varied, but increased in all groups whether considered by age, education, income, race, religion, or political outlook.

Poll after poll has shown widespread support for the use of embryonic stem cells in research, said R. Alta Charo. She is a professor of law and bioethics at the University of Wisconsin law and medical schools, and she served on the presidential bioethics commission in the Clinton

administration.

People distinguish between an embryo consisting of a few cells and a well-developed fetus, and most abortions are done in the first eight weeks, she said. People also understand that embryos used for research will never be brought to term, she said.

"They see it as much closer to organ transplantation where, if you have a car-jacking victim who was shot in the head, you might deplore the crime, but you are still completely supportive of using the organs for transplantation in order to bring benefit to somebody else," Charo said.

Economic tool By limiting stem cell research, she said, the federal government gave up the most powerful tool it has to regulate how embryonic stem cells are acquired and used. And if research isn't funded, doctoral students and researchers won't enter the field, robbing the United States of that future expertise, she said.

UW-Madison has strong adult and embryonic stem cell programs for now because all the federally allowed embryonic cell lines are at the university, Charo said. But some embryonic work requires cell lines that are more genetically diverse, she said, so eventually that advantage will disappear.

"We should be, by far, the single state everybody in the world looks to for the first, best discoveries on both embryonic and adult stem cells. And we're not."

Legislatures in New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California endorsed stem cell research. Wisconsin's Legislature has debated but didn't pass bills criminalizing embryonic cell research, which does not encourage researchers to come here or stay here, Charo said. These other states will pass Wisconsin in science and economics because stem cell research is poised to be the big technology of the new century, she said.

On Nov. 2, California voters will vote on a ballot initiative funding $3 billion in research on embryonic stem cells. In fiscal year 2003, Wisconsin received $3 million in stem cell research grants from the National Institutes of Health.

The lack of stem cell therapy shouldn't be blamed solely on Bush, Granger said, because any potential therapy would still face years of regulatory hurdles at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Yet Bush has had four years, he said during an interview at his home in early September.

"I won't vote for him," Granger said. "I'll vote for Kerry because Kerry will allow this. And I think if President Bush cared about the people in the United States he would allow stem cells to be federally funded, and he would open it up the way it should be."

"I wouldn't say we're Democrats," said Kevin's wife, Mary. "We're for the guy who does the right thing."

Special Offer: Get 5 Weeks of the Journal Times for $7!