Stem Cells to Solve Ethical Dilemmas

New ways of creating embryonic stem cells without killing viable embryos are being reported, and this could potentially solve the biggest bioethical debate of the Bush administration.

On one hand, embryonic stem cells were made from a genetically abnormal embryo designed to be incapable of developing, and on the other hand, there was the attempt to fashion stem cells from an embryo without damaging it. The new methods offer laboratory answers to the moral questions raised by the destruction of human embryos and could result in the availability of more federal grants for one of the most promising fields of biomedical research.

William Hurlbut of Stanford University, a member of a White House bioethics advisory council, called it "a starting point for an important new dialogue" on possible "technological solutions for the moral problems surrounding human embryonic stem cell research."

Now the new question raising is about what sorts of laboratory creations deserve human status. Biochemist Fazale Rana at Reasons to Believe, a Christian group in Southern California opposed to human embryonic stem cell research says that the research is "right there on that boundary between what I would consider ethically permissible and potentially ethically troubling."

The debate is centered on the definition of "embryo," considered by some people to have the same moral status as a human being. In the new experiments, researchers crafted stem cell lines from lab creations characterized as "nonviable" entities.

Jaydee Hanson, director of human genetics at the International Center for Technology Assessment, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit organization that opposes some kinds of cloning and stem cell research on moral grounds states that "This is an attempt to solve an ethical issue through a scientific redefinition that really doesn't solve the issue."

President Bush made the production of any new stem cell lines ineligible for federal grants because such work involves the destruction of human embryos in 2001, and opposed cloning embryos, which scientists advocate as a way of creating specialized stem cell lines carrying disease genes or the DNA of an individual patient. This inspired California's $3 billion Proposition 71 initiative, which voters approved in the 2004 general election, as to pursue research banned from receiving federal support.

Stem cell researchers Rudolf Jaenisch and Alexander Meissner of the Whitehead Institute at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology showed how embryonic stem cells can be produced from a type of research cloning known as "alternate nuclear transfer": they devised a way to block the activity of a gene from an adult cell that would have allowed the cell to develop into an embryo once in the uterus. This way, the cell is nonviable because it lacks the ability to "establish the fetal-maternal connection" in the uterus; the abnormal DNA was then inserted into the nucleus of an egg whose own DNA had been removed.

Researchers showed though that they could still generate a specialized stem cell line, which would have the same DNA as that of the adult cell used to produce the cloned embryo and aimed to make "patient-specific" embryonic stem cells without destroying any potential life.

Another team of researchers led by Robert Lanza and Young Ching of Advanced Cell Technology, a Massachusetts biotech company, used another method: they used a single cell, known as a "blastomere," snipped from a developing embryo at the eight-cell stage. Known as "pre-implantation genetic diagnosis," the goal is to screen out disease-carrying embryos.

But the new approaches have only been tested on laboratory mice, and there's no guarantee similar results can be obtained in humans. Researchers insisted that an entity such as that produced in the MIT experiments has "no inherent principle of unity, no coherent drive in the direction of the mature human form."

"The tinkering doesn't change the essential nature of the cloned entity," said Hanson, of the International Center for Technology Assessment. "The only reason it's not an embryo is definitional."

Douglas Melton, a stem cell scientist at Harvard University, doubts critics of stem cell research will be stopped by the alteration of a single gene, because an altered embryo may still be considered an embryo.

Single cells transplanted into the uterus of the respective species are capable of propagating viable offspring and therefore, even if removing a single cell doesn't interfere with the developmental potential of the embryo, the isolated cell itself could be considered capable of embryo status.

Rudolf Jaenisch says that, despite all the arguments, it's still conceivable that special cloning or other techniques might be an acceptable compromise to allow expanding the federal role in stem cell research: "If one used this argument to protect cells developed through nuclear transfer because with further manipulation they might become a living clone, then every cell of our body would deserve the chance to become a human being. In not cloning them, each of us would be barring millions of individuals from getting a chance to live."

James Battey, head of a stem cell task force at the National Institutes of Health says that it is not clear yet if stem cells created by either of the new methods would qualify for federal grants.

Bernard Lo, a prominent bioethics expert at UCSF who also advises the California Prop. 71 program, called on those who object to stem cell research to consider the alternative derivation methods: "This work is really driven by a desire on the part of scientists to address the moral concerns some people have. So those people should say now if it doesn't settle the problem."

Stem cell strides may help resolve ethical dilemmas

Alliance for Stem Cell Research Supports Motion to Dismiss Prop 71 Lawsuits

The Alliance for Stem Cell Research, a nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing the field of stem cell research through education and patient advocacy, announced its support for a "motion for judgment on the pleadings" being filed today by the State of California, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, and other state defendants in response to two lawsuits that challenge Proposition 71, California's $3 billion stem cell research initiative.

The suits, which have been consolidated into a single action, were filed by three organizations, People's Advocate, National Tax Limitation Foundation, and California Family Bioethics Council, who contend that the new California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), established by Proposition 71, is rife with conflicts of interest and illegally established outside the purview of state government.

In support of the motion for judgment, some of the most notable institutions and patient advocacy organizations from throughout the state and the country, including the Alliance for Stem Cell Research, have signed an amicus brief, also to be submitted today. An amicus brief -- also known as a friend of the court brief -- is introduced when a party or parties not directly involved in the litigation wish to offer input in a case.

The signers, all stem cell research supporters, argue that the lawsuits lack merit and should be dismissed.

"We fully support the CIRM and the motion that was filed today," said Susan DeLaurentis, CEO of the Alliance for Stem Cell Research. "It is important for CIRM to be accountable to state government, but removed from the shifting national political climate and local bureaucratic pitfalls.

Only then will we be able to move swiftly in establishing California as a world leader in stem cell research, and, most importantly, in finding new treatments for diseases and saving lives."

DeLaurentis says that the amicus brief provides an explanation of the comprehensive management and oversight controls in place for the CIRM, which were built into the initiative, and emphasizes the need for its protection from political intervention.

"These lawsuits are merely obstruction tactics," concluded DeLaurentis.

"Groups which are ideologically opposed to embryonic stem cell research, and who lost overwhelmingly at the polls, are funding this complaint using disingenuous 'good government' claims for their suit. We should not tolerate bad faith lawsuits while millions who could benefit from new therapies or cures are forced to wait."

If the motion (to dismiss) is granted, the plaintiffs suing Prop 71 have 30 days to appeal the ruling.

The mission of the Alliance for Stem Cell Research (AFSCR) is to advance the field of stem cell research and regenerative medicine and to educate the public about its potential and progress.

Susan DeLaurentis is president and CEO of the Alliance for Stem Cell Research. Her start in patient advocacy came in 1988, when her friend Elizabeth Glaser was diagnosed, along with her children, with AIDS.

In response, Susan, Elizabeth, and their friend Susan Zeegen founded the Pediatric AIDS Foundation to help reduce the impact and incidence of HIV/AIDS in children. Today, the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation is a world-renowned patient advocacy group and the leading national non-profit dedicated to identifying, preventing and conducting critical pediatric AIDS research. Having seen the suffering from HIV/AIDS, Susan is dedicating her experience and passion to support stem cell research and its potential to treat and cure so many diseases.

Alliance for Stem Cell Research Supports Motion

Coalition To Protect Stem Cell Research

A coalition of researchers and patient groups wants to protect stem cell research and treatment in Missouri, where anti-abortion activists have tried to outlaw a particular form of the research.

The proposal for November 2006 would permit stem cell research, therapies and cures allowed under federal law in Missouri and would ensure that debate at the Capitol would continue to rage through next year's elections.

Republican Gov. Matt Blunt is supporting the initative but the state's largest anti-abortion groups denounced it. The debate is on a stem cell research known as somatic cell nuclear transfer, in which the nucleus of an unfertilized egg is replaced with the nucleus of a cell from another body part and the altered egg is stimulated to grow, and then the resulting stem cells are harvested.

Stem cells can develop into any type of human tissue and researchers hope they can lead to cures for ailments such as diabetes, Parkinson's disease, cancer and spinal cord injuries. Opponents contend the procedure destroys human life.

The Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures is fighting legislative efforts wich ban somatic cell nuclear transfer, also known as "therapeutic cloning." The bill didn't reach any vote in the Senate but its sponsor has pledged to make another attempt next year and that made the coalition mount its own offensive.

Coalition chairman Donn Rubin said that "opponents want to criminalize some of the most promising types of stem cell research. We believe that a constitutional amendment is necessary to protect Missouri's patients." The initiative, which would require from 139,181 to 151,619 signatures before it goes to the ballot, is believed to be the first of its kind nationwide and it could help fuel a national movement to protect stem cell research through state constitutional amendments.

Connecticut, Illinois and New Jersey have taken steps to provide public funding for the research without going to the ballot and Californians approved a constitutional amendment last year that will provide $3 billion for embryonic stem cell research. Now the Missouri proposal prohibits state and local governments from denying money to those who do the research.

The coalition includes the founders of the Stowers Institute for Medical Research in Kansas City, medical professionals from the University of Missouri and Washington University, and former U.S. Sens. John Danforth and Thomas Eagleton and associations that fight specific diseases, such as the American Diabetes Association and the Parkinson's Action Network.

One of the biggest opponents of therapeutic cloning is Missouri Right to Life, which vowed Tuesday to continue pushing for a ban in the Legislature and predicted voters would defeat the amendment. Missouri Right to Life Lobbyist Susan Klein stated that "The biotech industry is seeking to minimize human life for economic purposes and they're trying to redefine when life begins."

The Missouri Catholic Conference said adult stem cell research - supported by the anti-abortion lobby - has led to 65 treatments for such things as Parkinson's disease, heart damage and sickle cell anemia and Larry Weber, executive director of the Missouri Catholic Conference notes that "Missouri voters are being sold a pig in a poke by folks who can't get their money elsewhere."

Both groups oppose human cloning though; the amendment includes a 15-year prison sentence and $250,000 fine for anyone who attempts to clone a human being, which it defines as implanting an embryo not created by sperm and an egg into a woman's uterus. The amendment also prevents stem cells from being harvested more than 14 days after cell division.

The issue has divided Missouri's self-described "pro-life" politicians even: Blunt supports cell nuclear transfer - believing it doesn't create human life - although he generally aligns with Missouri Right to Life on abortion issues and Danforth also trumpeted his "pro-life" credentials while backing the amendment. "During my entire career, I voted pro-life," Danforth said in a statement. "I strongly support the Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative because it will save lives and because it respects the sanctity of life."

"The governor is supportive of this petition. He believes this is a step forward in banning human cloning and protecting responsible research," Blunt spokesman Spence Jackson stated.

Initiative proposed to protect stem cell research

Cloning pioneer facing Catholic critics

Hwang Woo-suk, the world’s leading stem cell researcher, said said he’d continue his research while respecting for human dignity, after confronting Catholic critics who have condemned his work as unethical.

“All science has two sides,” Hwang said, adding that the religious groups serve to help provide ethical constraints to his work.

Hwang said he would meet religious and civic groups to listen to their views, to make sure his research is done transparently and in an ethical manner, but as long as it doesn’t compromise the security of his work.

In June, The Roman Catholic Church issued a statement presenting opposition to Hwang’s research and stressing that embryos are living beings. The statement signed by the Episcopal Commission for Doctrine and the Episcopal Commission for Social Affairs, which handle Catholic Church matters in Korea noted that "Embryos are life. We were all embryos once. Professor Hwang Woo-suk’s work entails anti-life activities of cloning an embryo, a human life, and destroying of a life. A cloned embryo is clearly human life. Thus, experimenting or controlling of an embryo defies the dignity of man."

"This infringes on life and will bring numerous disasters to mankind," the statement said, warning that his recent research in therapeutic cloning heightened the possibility that a human being could be created. The statement also highlighted the fact that the research could relegate women to the status of a “biological tool” for producing and donating eggs.

"I will take lessons from the great teachings and guidance,” Hwang told reporters after a meeting in early June with Seoul Archbishop Nicholas Cheong Jin-suk. “I will not fail to meet the Archbishop’s expectations.”

The debate was re-engaged after the Hwang’s team created the first therapeutic embryonic stem cells that genetically match injured or sick patients — a major step in the quest to grow replacement tissue to treat diseases. The team at at Seoul National University collected eggs donated by 18 unpaid volunteers and removed the gene-containing nucleus from each of them, implanting those eggs with DNA from the skin cells of patients with spinal cord injuries, diabetes or genetic immune diseases, and chemically jump-started cellular division.

The result was 31 blastocysts — early stage embryos with about 100 cells each. From those, the scientists harvested 11 stem cell lines. Last year, Hwang’s team created the world’s first cloned human embryos.

Seoul Archbishop Nicholas Cheong has previously asked for interdiction of Hwang’s research, which involves creating and destroying human embryos to extract stem cells and he has related manipulating cloned embryos to “murder,” condemning the research as a “serious violation of human dignity.”

He was relieved to find out Hwang’s research would be “complementary” to research into adult stem cells but researchers say adult stem cells are less versatile and are sometimes damaged by the health problems of the adult.

Ahn Curie, a doctor on Hwang’s team, stressed that research into embryonic stem cells goes hand in hand with that into adult stem cells: "We can stop, at any time, embryonic stem cell research into areas where adult stem cells have proven to provide cures," she explained.

The archbishop fears though that Hwang and his researchers may have heightened the possibility of cloning humans, although Hwang has said several times that human cloning is neither the aim of his research nor a possible venture.

“Human cloning is unethical and technically impossible,” Hwang concluded, adding that the world wouldn’t see cloned humans within this century.

South Korean cloning pioneer faces Catholic critics

Pro-Life Congressman and Dr. J Team up For Adult Stem Cell Research Bill

A leading pro-life congressman and former Philadelphia 76ers basketball star Julius "Dr. J" Erving teamed up at a press conference Thursday to ask the Senate to pass a House-approved bill that would promote adult stem cell research using umbilical cord blood.

Stem cells from umbilical cord blood have proven to be the most effective and the House approved the HR 2520 434-1 in May. The bill has been put on hold because of the debate over using taxpayer funds for embryonic stem cell research. Smith is now asking for no further delay on voting the bill.

"Delay is denial, especially for the sick who will not benefit from cord blood transplantation because the Senate inexplicably delayed," he stated. "Make no mistake, for these sick children and adults, this is a matter of life or death."

Dr. J, the Vice President of the Orlando Magic, stated that African American patients need this bill, mainly because of the lower chance to obtain a match within the current bone marrow and umbilical cord blood stem cell inventories. Minorities have less than a 50% chance of obtaining a potentially life saving transplant.

"Each year, thousands of Americans die who could be saved if larger and more diverse inventories of umbilical cord stem cells were in existence," Erving noted. "I came today to join Congressman Smith in asking the Senate to finish the job and pass this legislation and provide doctors the resources they need to treat the thousands of courageous patients in desperate need of help."

Umbilical cords are a rich, non-controversial source of stem cells and hospitals are throwing millions of them away each year because the infrastructure required to properly collect and store them is not available.

Many people have been successfuly treated with cord blood stem cells for more than 67 diseases including Leukemia and Sickle Cell Anemia. With this bill aproved, this medical miracle will be available to thousands more and will ensure that research continues so that this source of stem cells can treat many other diseases.

Doctors and patients who have been treated with umbilical cord stem cells also attended the press conference supporting the bill that would promote adult stem cell research using umbilical cord blood.

Adult Stem Cell Research Bill

Catholic Church Funds Adult Stem Cell Research

The Catholic Church in Korea has decided to donate money for adult stem cell research as a response to Vatican opposition to embryonic stem cell research.

In Korea, a country leading that field of science, the Catholic Church is donating millions of dollars to aid research involving adult stem cells hoping to reduce the increasing reliance on embryonic stem cells to treat hard-to-cure diseases. But the Church has been among the most vocal opponents of embryonic stem cell research based on the belief that embryos are human beings.

"The research harms the integrity of life, and that's why we cannot accept the use of embryos," the church said.

Nevertheless, the church wants to fund research on adult stem cells derived from bone marrow or umbilical cords that would otherwise be discarded after a baby is born, beleiving that this practice does not cause ethical controversy.

The Seoul Diocese set up a committee to donate W10 billion (US$10 million).

The church will not support the research of Korea's Dr. Hwang Woo-suk who grabbed the world's attention last year by announcing the successful cloning of a human embryo. His work has been criticized by catholics, since it involves human eggs and destroys embryos to harvest stem cell batches.

Embryonic stem cells have the potential to become any cell or tissue of a human body like bone, skin or blood, but adult stem cells can only be used to create specific cell types like muscle tissue from muscle stem cells.

The decision by the Seoul Diocese may still fuel an ongoing debate between religious and academic groups over the desired type of stem cell research.

Catholic Church Funds Adult Stem Cell Research

Stem Cells Used To Repair Congenital Defects Before Birth

Researchers have announced the use of stem cells collected from the amniotic fluid surrounding fetal lambs to grow windpipes, and then implanted the tissue back into the fetuses while they were still in the womb, a breakthrough that could lead to ways to repair congenital defects before birth.

Although rare, defects in the windpipe or trachea can be life-threatening and are difficult to repair. The procedure, involving surgery soon after birth, can have complications, including brain damage.

Experts at Children's Hospital in Boston and Dr. Dario Fauza hope their technique can offer a way around such problems by repairing the defect before the baby is born.

"The fetus doesn't need the trachea, so the repair would have time to heal in utero and fetal healing is very good -- it's better than adult healing," said Dr. Dario Fauza.

The technique involves extracting amniotic fluid, which surrounds the fetus in the womb, to obtain a type of stem cells known as mesenchymal stem cells. These cells arise directly from embryonic stem cells and they can give rise to various cell types, so they could be used to regenerate damaged or diseased tissues.

Dr. Robert Lanza, vice president of medical and scientific development at Advanced Cell Technology in Worcester, Mass., praised the results of the study. Lanza was involved in similar research in cows conducted at his company three years ago that generated a miniature kidney and heart muscle tissues.

"This study heralds a new phase of stem cell research," Lanza told United Press International. "To realize the full potential of any stem cells -- embryonic or adult-- we need to be able to use them to generate complex structures."

The technique could be used to generate a bladder and similar structures, Lanza said.

"We're many years off before we can create a functioning human kidney or heart, but this field is moving at such an enormous pace," he said. "We're very, very, likely to see this in our lifetime."

Fauza's team already is pushing ahead with the technique. They have shown it can be used in lambs to repair a condition known as congenital diaphragmatic hernia, or CDH, in which there is a hole in the diaphragm muscle in the abdominal cavity.

They have applied to the Food and Drug Administration for permission to conduct a study using the technique on human infants with CDH, and are awaiting word from the agency. They also are examining whether similar techniques could be used to correct spinal bifida and heart defects.

In the study, which Fauza plans to present Saturday at the American Academy of Pediatrics meeting in Washington, the researchers obtained amniotic fluid from fetal lambs and isolated the mesenchymal stem cells.

They multiplied the cells in lab dishes and then transferred them to a scaffolding to help direct their growth. The researchers also exposed the cells to growth factors to spur them to become cartilage cells, and the resulting cartilage cells were used to repair defective tracheas in seven lambs in utero. Two lambs were born prematurely and died, but the remaining five survived and were able to breathe on their own at birth.

One advantage of using mesenchymal stem cells is they can be obtained without harming the fetus and thus would avoid the ethical debate that currently surrounds embryonic stem cells. In addition, Lanza said, there are some indications mesenchymal stem cells equal embryonic stem cells in their ability to give rise to many of the cell types of the body.

Another advantage is that since mesenchymal cells originate from the fetus' own cells, they would not be rejected by the immune system as can happen when tissues are transplanted from one person into another.

Fauza said the amniotic fluid is readily available -- it is commonly extracted to run tests prior to birth -- and less than two tablespoons would provide enough mesenchymal stem cells to repair a congenital defect. The fluid could even be banked for future use.

"Fetal cells are the best cells you can have for tissue engineering," he said. "They grow very well, and they're very plastic -- you can coach them to do what you want."

Stem cells used to repair fetal defect

Cloning, still a sensitive issue for California

In November 2004 California decided to spend around $6 billion (including interest charges) on cloning and embryonic stem-cell research. The campaign was strangely sustained by Gov. Schwarzenegger, and driven by some of the worst hype in the history of American politics.

Popeple were given hopes and promised cures and also cash returns on their investment—within five years. Investors aren't committing billions of dollars in cloning and embryonic-stem-cell research because society hasn't clearly decided whether the research is moral, the field is too risky and researchers don't know how to do it cheaply, conveniently, or consistently enough to make it a viable business.

Some stem cell researchers say cloning human embryos in petri dishes will help them better understand diseases. Cloning also may offer a way to avoid immune-system rejection after transplanting replacement tissue in sick people. The scientists universally oppose cloning to create babies.

Supporters of the proposition, including Deborah Ortiz, have drawn attention on some huge problems raising, such as the fact that profits from any "cures" that result will not go to the state and that poor women may be used as egg farms by researchers.

Now there are two new key issues debated, the first being the fact that the governor has terminated a modest effort led by Ortiz and others to tackle some of the most scandalous aspects of the project. The aim is to protect women from having their eggs harvested, an issue that has brought pro-choice and pro-life advocates together. It also sought to tighten audit requirements.

"Much of the California electorate was sold last year on the idea that human embryonic stem-cells might be turned into amazing cures for incurable diseases, propelling Prop. 71 to easy victory in the Nov. 2004 election. Now, it's increasingly clear that stem-cell transplants for diabetes or Parkinson's or Alzheimer's are nowhere close, maybe decades away," says Carl Hall, science writer, citing embryologist Rudi Jaenisch of MIT who believes that the focus now is on using cloned embryos as disease models—in other words, for basic research.

Dr. Hwang, the Korean scientist who has grabbed the world's attention by cloning human embryos for research and cloning a dog for birth, came with the idea of letting scientists write their own ethics code and he is working on a 10-point ethics "charter."

Adult stem-cell research is advancing at a breathtaking pace, and indeed, is already in early human trials. The CSCRCA pushes adult stem-cell research to the back of the line by giving "priority" to funding "research opportunities that cannot or are unlikely to receive timely or sufficient federal funding unencumbered by limitations that would impede the research."

There are no federal funding or significant regulatory impediments to pursuing adult stem-cell research. And the federal government does not fund research into human SCNT at all.

Cloning Still Haunts California

Stem Cell Debate Needs Positive Proof

Barry Marshall and Robin Warren have joined the ranks of the Nobel laureates for their work on fighting stomach ulcers, being recognised for more than 20 years' work trying to track down the cause of common and crippling ulcers.

The scientists have saved the federal health budget an estimated $200 million a year and the research was done without fundings. This is a sobering experience as federal Parliament prepares to embark on a new debate about scientific research, medical cures, political lobbying and taxpayer-funded grants.

In 2002 there's been lot of debating on allowing embryonic stem cell research and cloning. The debate became bitter, personalised and ultimately did a disservice to parliament, science, taxpayers and, most regrettably, to those suffering debilitating and terminal conditions. The results were that limited embryonic stem cell research was allowed and cloning was unanimously opposed.

Australia bans creating human embryos to harvest stem cells but scientists may use embryos left over from IVF (in-vitro fertility) treatment. Stems cells harvested through other means, such as from the nose, is legal.

Now there is a review by former Federal Court judge John Lockhart under way into embryonic stem cell research, and cloning is likely to trigger a legislative debate. Prime Minister John Howard, who supported the use of excess embryos from IVF programs for embryonic stem cell research, said: "It is also my very strong belief that human embryos should not be created for any purpose other than IVF treatment."

Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane and the Victorian and ACT governments are opsing the arguments for cloning. Macfarlane explained: "I hope there will be a cooling of heads on both sides of the debate, with more people listening to the alternative argument. It would be naive to think Australia's opposition to this new science could stop or slow its global development. We're just dealing ourselves out of the chance to scrutinise the field and snuffing out the light of a happier, healthier life for generations to come."

Macfarlane's Liberal colleague, Christopher Pyne, who opposed embryonic stem cell research in favour of adult stem cell research, is not surprised parliament is reconsidering the arguments though. He beleives that once we crossed the ethical line on the treatment of human beings we were betraying our credentials as a civilised society and would soon face demands for cloning.

The Nationals' Senate leader Ron Boswell also responded to Macfarlane's arguments with a simple question: "Where are the promised cures?", pointing that "we are not even close to the promised cures from embryo research." He is not against stem cell research, but supports research using adult stem cells, which do not require the destruction of embryos.

It is known from the previous debate on embryonic stem cell research that emotional blackmail, false hopes, lies to MPs about science and the lack of disclosure about shareholdings occurred on the unemotional, scientific side last time.

The president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Robert Winston, warned last month that it is "unlikely that embryonic stem cells are likely to be useful in healthcare for a long time".

Further he explained: "I was concerned that parliamentarians ... have been convinced that it was just a ... few years before we would be able to transplant stem cells and cure a lot of neurological disorders, like Alzheimer's disease, which I think is going to be a hugely difficult problem and probably completely insoluble by stem cells."

Stem cell debate calls for cool heads

Minister warns on stem cells

Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane said Australia was "fast becoming an outsider in this field, which was actually pioneered by some of our finest researchers". Senior cabinet minister warns that, if conservative forces succeed in banning groundbreaking embryonic stem-cell research, Australia's reputation as a global player in biotechnology could be undermined.

"We are close to forfeiting our opportunity to oversee the responsible development of this science and leaving it to others who may not be as ethical in their approach," Mr Macfarlane said, explaining that the rest of the world would continue to develop the potential of the science, offering hope to patients suffering a range of debilitating medical conditions.

"It would be naive to think Australia's opposition to this new science could stop or slow its global development. We're just dealing ourselves out of the chance to scrutinise the field and snuffing out the light of a happier, healthier life for generations to come," he continued.

Queensland Nationals senator Ron Boswell - one of the most vocal opponents of the industry and any moves towards legalising so-called therapeutic cloning will probably give his opposition to relaxing the current laws during Senate debate this week.

He beleives that the Government should be putting all its energies into promoting research using adult stem cells rather than having "a divisive debate on cloning" and researchers at the Griffith University had even demonstrated that adult stem cells could develop into new brain, liver, kidney and heart cells.

"Australian researchers are leading in this field and we should be encouraging them as much as possible so that there is a viable alternative to the ethically problematic embryonic stem-cells," he said. "There is no need to even be having this ethical argument over the use of embryonic material when adult stem cells are already being used to study diseases."

Human cloning and therapeutic cloning is banned in Australia but in 2002, scientists have been given access to unwanted human embryos for research purposes. The Victorian Government would allow therapeutic cloning, also known as somatic stem-cell transfer, but the practice is strongly opposed by churches and right-to-life associations.

"This is obviously an issue packed with emotion," said Mr Macfarlane who has organised a forum for federal parliamentarians next week to consider the issues surrounding stem-cell technologies. "I hope there will be a cooling of heads on both sides of the debate, with more people actually listening to the alternative argument," he also said.

The ACT Government yesterday backed a recent call by Victoria for governments to consider relaxing the laws and ACT Chief Minister Jon Stanhope said that "The current reviews of relevant commonwealth legislation are a chance to revisit (our) initial caution, to test the public and scholarly mood and see whether some relaxation might be warranted."

Minister warns on stem cells

US sets up national stem-cell bank

The University of Wisconsin will host the first federally funded bank of the valuable cells, according to the U.S. government. The National Institutes of Health announced the presence of many of the officially sanctioned batches of human embryonic stem cells.

The National Institutes of Health stated that "The National Stem Cell Bank, awarded to the WiCell Research Institute in Wisconsin, will consolidate many of the federally funded eligible human embryonic stem (ES) cell lines in one location, reduce the costs that researchers have to pay for the cells, and maintain quality control over the cells."

Two centers for embryonic stem-cell research will also be found, at the University of California, Davis and Northwestern University in Chicago. Stem cells offer the potential for tailored tissue and organ transplants and new understandings of disease and could transform both medicine and basic biological research. It is beleived that there are several sources, including those cells taken from days-old human embryos but people still disagree with the use of embryonic stem cells, saying a human life must be destroyed to grow the cells.

President George W. Bush announced in August 2001 that federal funds could be used to study only those batches, or lines, of human embryonic stem cells that already existed at the time.

Members of Congress supporting the expanding of federal funding of embryonic stem cells said the move to establish the research centers was not enough though. Colorado Democratic Rep. Diana DeGette, who supports expanded federal funding of stem-cell research explained that "the reality is that the best way to jump start embryonic stem cell research in this country ... is to expand the federal policy so scientists have access to the most technologically advanced, cleanest, genetically diverse and disease specific lines possible."

Dr. James Thomson of WiCell, who first found human embryonic stem cells in 1998, will help head the stem-cell bank. He agreeded that "although the creation of this center is very important, I hope that NIH will ultimately decide to fund additional similar centers across the United States to support this rapidly expanding field."

The NIH earmarked $16.1 million over four years for the stem cell bank and $9.6 million for the research centers.

NIH Director Dr. Elias Zerhouni concluded: "This resource will enable us to fully analyze, characterize and control the quality of approved cell lines."

US national stem-cell bank