| OCR Text |
Show The Science, Ethics, and Politics of Stem Cell Research Bradley Curtis embryos?" 56% of those polled said that the federal government should fund stem cell research, while 40% said the government should not. Only 4% responded that they were unsure (CNN, 2005). Another related poll taken from May 20-22, 2005, asked how closely the participants followed the debate about government funding of stem cell research. 12% responded "very closely," 46% responded "somewhat closely," 27% responded, "not too closely," and 15% responded, "not at all" (CNN, 2005). Thus the majority of Americans are concerned with stem cell research, and few are unsure of their position (4%). The Aftermath After President Bush set the tone, scientists set out to research the 64 existing lines. Unfortunately, these 64 stem cell lines did not prove to be as durable as expected. At least one third of the lines were so young and fragile that scientists found little value in researching them. Days after the announcement scientists around the world expressed disappointment and confusion about the existing lines. The National Institute of Health (NIH) identified Goteborg University in Sweden, as holder of the largest collection of stem cell lines, claiming the University had 19 lines. Neurobiologist Peter Eriksson, a member of the six-person team assigned to develop stem cells refuted this claim: "I was a little surprised to see the NIH calling them 19 lines, maybe they misinterpreted a little bit" (Connolly & Weiss, 2001). Eriksson said that only three of the 19 lines could be classified as stem cells. Furthermore, small companies controlled many of the stem cell lines identified in President Bush's policy. It was only weeks before the announcement that companies were informed that their lines would be expected to furnish stem cell lines for the United States (Connolly & Weiss, 2001). Others criticized the amount of funding that was set aside for research. The $25 million that President Bush allocated is on par with the amount of federal grant money that a large department of medicine at a single medical school might receive in one or two years (Caplan, 2004). It should also be noted that all of the stem cell lines included in President Bush's policy were developed with mouse cells. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has stated that they will not approve of trials that involve the use of animal cells. Thus, although these lines may prove to be of some benefit for research purposes, the FDA will never allow use of these cells in human trials (Kelley, 2005). In the years after the policy announcement, private institutions have conducted research on alternative stem cell lines. President Bush's policy only dictated federal involvement in stem cell research funding; it left the door open for states to establish their own funding policy. On November 2, 2004, Californians passed Proposition 71, which dedicated three billion dollars over ten years to stem cell research. California was the first state to fund such research. The proposition was supported by 59% of the state's voters (Timeline of Stem Cell Debate, 2005). Three months later, on January 11, 2005, New Jersey's governor announced that the state would fund a $150 million dollar stem cell research center and promised to back a ballot initiative to provide another $230 million. Political and Religious Divisions The stem cell debate brought about some interesting developments in Congress. There was no clear-cut way to determine what stance each legislator would take. Some senators that were notoriously pro-life and vehemently opposed to abortion became strong advocates of embryonic stem cell research. One example is Orrin Hatch (R), the senior senator from Utah. In an article written for the Salt Lake Tribune, Hatch described his perspective: "I have come to my position on this matter after many months of study, consultation, reflection and prayer. I analyze&this issue from a pro-life, pro-family perspective, with the conviction that being pro-life demands helping the living" (Hatch, 2002). Hatch elaborated stating his opposition to nuclear transplantation, but that he supports therapeutic cloning, which does not require the embryo to be implanted in the mother's womb: "I support regenerative medicine research because I believe that human life requires and begins in a mother's nurturing womb, not a petri dish" (2002). The issue of stem cell research forces political leaders, as well as their constituents to clarify their definition of "pro-life" and "pro-choice". Both President Bush and Senator Hatch identify themselves as pro-life, yet they are directly opposed on the issue of using stem cells derived from embryos to conduct research. President Bush opposes any destruction of life, and is thus categorized as pro-life. But Senator Hatch's definition of pro-life includes a charge to seek to improve life. The therapies that could result from stem cell research would definitely improve the lives of millions, and thus Senator Hatch categorizes himself as pro-life. This unique feature of stem cell research has led to unpredictable divisions among politicians. Similarly, religions organizations provide no clear consensus on whether embryonic stem cell research is morally acceptable. The U.S. Roman Catholic Bishops oppose embryonic stem cell research as "immoral, illegal, and unnecessary." They view life as sacred from the moment of conception. The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and the Southern Baptist Convention also oppose the research for the same reasons. Alternatively, the Presbyterian Church USA is : in favor of the research when its goals are "compelling and unreachable by other means." The Union of Orthodox ' Jewish Congregations supports this view saying, "An isolated ' fertilized egg does not enjoy the full status of personhood". ! The Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism also ( approves of the research, saying that it would be "immoral and unethical" to cut off funding for promising medical research (Abernethy, 2001). Under most interpretations of Islamic Law, an embryo is not considered a person, and stem cell ' research on embryos is not seen as morally wrong (Weckerly, 20 |
