More

Obama To Overturn Ban On Federal Funding For Stem Cell Research

BEN FELLER and LAURAN NEERGAARD   03/ 6/09 09:39 PM ET   AP

Barack Obama

WASHINGTON — Reversing an eight-year-old limit on potentially life-saving science, President Barack Obama plans to lift restrictions Monday on taxpayer-funded research using embryonic stem cells.

The long-promised move will allow a rush of research aimed at one day better treating, if not curing, ailments from diabetes to paralysis _ research that crosses partisan lines, backed by such notables as Nancy Reagan and the late Christopher Reeve. But it stirs intense controversy over whether government crosses a moral line with such research.

Obama will hold an event at the White House to announce the move, a senior administration official said Friday. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the policy had not yet been publicly announced.

Embryonic stem cells are master cells that can morph into any cell of the body. Scientists hope to harness them so they can create replacement tissues to treat a variety of diseases _ such as new insulin-producing cells for diabetics, cells that could help those with Parkinson's disease or maybe even Alzheimer's, or new nerve connections to restore movement after spinal injury.

"I feel vindicated after eight years of struggle, and I know it's going to energize my research team," said Dr. George Daley of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute and Children's Hospital of Boston, a leading stem cell researcher.

But the research is controversial because days-old embryos must be destroyed to obtain the cells. They typically are culled from fertility-clinic leftovers otherwise destined to be thrown away.

Under President George W. Bush, taxpayer money for that research was limited to a small number of stem cell lines that were created before Aug. 9, 2001, lines that in many cases had some drawbacks that limited their potential usability.

But hundreds more of such lines _ groups of cells that can continue to propagate in lab dishes _ have been created since then, ones that scientists say are healthier, better suited to creating treatments for people rather than doing basic laboratory science.

Work didn't stop. Indeed, it advanced enough that this summer, the private Geron Corp. will begin the world's first study of a treatment using human embryonic stem cells, in people who recently suffered a spinal cord injury.

Nor does Obama's change fund creation of new lines. But it means that scientists who until now have had to rely on private donations to work with these newer stem cell lines can apply for government money for the research, just like they do for studies of gene therapy or other treatment approaches.

The aim of the policy is to restore "scientific integrity" to the process, the administration official said.

"America's biomedical research enterprise experienced steady decline over the past eight years, with shrinking budgets and policies that elevated ideology over science. This slowed the pace of discovery and the search for cures," said Sean Morrison, director of the University of Michigan's Center for Stem Cell Biology.

Critics immediately denounced the move.

"Taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for experiments that require the destruction of human life," said Tony Perkins of the conservative Family Research Council. "President Obama's policy change is especially troubling given the significant adult stem cell advances that are being used to treat patients now without harming or destroying human embryos."

Indeed, there are different types of stem cells: So-called adult stem cells that produce a specific type of tissue; younger stem cells found floating in amniotic fluid or the placenta. Scientists even have learned to reprogram certain cells to behave like stem cells.

But even researchers who work with varying types consider embryonic stem cells the most flexible and thus most promising form _ and say that science, not politics, should ultimately judge.

"Science works best and patients are served best by having all the tools at our disposal," Daley said.

Obama made it clear during the campaign he would overturn Bush's directive.

During the campaign, Obama said, "I strongly support expanding research on stem cells. I believe that the restrictions that President Bush has placed on funding of human embryonic stem cell research have handcuffed our scientists and hindered our ability to compete with other nations."

He said he would lift Bush's ban and "ensure that all research on stem cells is conducted ethically and with rigorous oversight."

"Patients and people who've been patient advocates are going to be really happy," said Amy Comstock Rick of the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research.

The ruling will bring one immediate change: As of Monday, scientists who've had to meticulously keep separate their federally funded research and their privately funded stem cell work _ from buying separate microscopes to even setting up labs in different buildings _ won't have that expensive hurdle anymore.

Next, scientists can start applying for research grants from the National Institutes of Health. The NIH already has begun writing guidelines that, among other things, are expected to demand that the cells being used were derived with proper informed consent from the woman or couple who donated the original embryo.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

WASHINGTON — Reversing an eight-year-old limit on potentially life-saving science, President Barack Obama plans to lift restrictions Monday on taxpayer-funded research using embryonic stem cells...
WASHINGTON — Reversing an eight-year-old limit on potentially life-saving science, President Barack Obama plans to lift restrictions Monday on taxpayer-funded research using embryonic stem cells...
Filed by Nicholas Sabloff  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 690
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (16 total)
08:12 PM on 03/09/2009
what about the next administration when funding is in place? What assurance is in place
that 'science' will serve the 'right' master then?

?and what is wrong with 'ideology' tempering science , politics or any other
crucial development area? since when does any discipline exist in a void?
Are you saying that Obama doesn't serve an ideology, philophy or even theology?

I think what you are saying is that ideology is wrong if it happens to be one that you don't agree with.
09:57 AM on 03/09/2009
I am tired of the media and the public in general saying that there is a ban on stem cell research. There is currently no ban on stem cell research. The federal government has been funding embryonic stem cell research since 2001. George W. Bush was the first president to permit federal funding of embryonic stem cell research with an executive order he issued in 2001. However the executive order limited funding to stem cell lines that were already existing, where the life and death decision had already been made.

To say that George W. Bush placed a ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research is either misleading or an expression of one's ignorance. George W. Bush was the first president to permit federal funding of embryonic stem cell research in any way, form, or fashion. He however limited it to lines already existing. Let's get facts straight rather than lambasting the right.
01:46 PM on 03/08/2009
It is about time we took off the blinders to science and medicine.The large underlying mantra of many big corporate pharma industries of "treat the symptoms and not the cause" will now be reduced to the incoherent dribble that it is. If you think there is nothing to stem cell research, you are ill (pun intended) informed.

Its time we take that quantum leap out of the dark ages.

For those with moral objections against this science, feel comforted that there is free choice and that the earth is still flat.

Cures, yes... they are on the horizon of all this research (gene therapy). Right now there are 1392 approved stem cell patents out there and many pending.

The more profound implications of stem cell research is with regenerative medicine like spinal cord injuries and MS. Much of this data has been proved in labs, many labs are struggling to get approval for human clinical trials. Advancements in history take time.

As you sit in front of your computers reading this, the first computer was unveiled in 1946 at a cost of 1/2 million dollars. It's measurements were roughly 8.5 feet by 3 feet by 80 feet and took up 680 square feet. And that is science!
02:49 PM on 03/07/2009
Whatever you want, we repulicans can just decide not to pay our taxes as the Dems have apparently done for years then we will not have bl oo d on our hands. BUT, NO MORE WHINNING from those that believe in abortion and stem cell research when they miscarry a baby..... it is only a mass of useless, meaningless cells anyway !!! Oh, wait, now that mass of cells has a price on it's head .....
04:09 PM on 03/07/2009
"blood on our hands"? These embryos have been thrown out in garbage bags under Bush--I am sure it bothered you then, too, and you were so up in arms you were writing protest letters to Bush & co.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Sepulchre
A neutron walks into a bar...
04:43 PM on 03/07/2009
Of course not, it only bothers them now because it might benift someone other than themselves.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
zeezan
Life-long Liberal
05:33 PM on 03/07/2009
Do you "repulicans" not understand that only frozen embryos destined for the trash heap are used for embryonic stem cell research?
01:45 PM on 03/07/2009
I ABSOLUTELY LOVE IT EVERY TIME OBAMA OVERTUNES KING GEORGE'S POLICIES...I LOVE IT. IT'S A BIG IN-YOUR-FACE-GEORGE...IN YOUR FACE. And DON'T forget, GEORGE IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN OUR COUNTRY'S HISTORY...WORST. Our country is LEFT with George's track record...
07:59 AM on 03/09/2009
Wow. I think OVERTUNE is pretty appropriate for that AOLer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MaryanneAZ
Raven enjoys the Halloween candy!
01:40 PM on 03/07/2009
It wasn't that long ago when the idea of having another baby just to harvest cord blood or even bone marrow or organs was considered morally reprehensible. Today it is common and few decry these practices. In a few years, when embryonic stem cells result in treatments and cures for major ills, few will be out there condemning the practice. As is common with many "objectionable" practices, they are not rejected by those who object when it comes to their life or the life of their child. Abortions are also sought and done on those who stand up in church and condemn the practice. I know a church couple who went secretly to a clinic to "take care of" their 13 year old daughter's problem before anyone found out about it at church. This couple is hardly alone in their deception. It is easy to be against something when it is theoretical, but much harder to be against something when it is your own life that is impacted.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
1088
01:37 PM on 03/07/2009
Let the curing begins! I know the Republicants will be twisting up in their panties, you know, love the fetus and hate the child mentality.
11:37 AM on 03/07/2009
Dear G_d, people. Clinton signed the original 'Dickey Amendment' - George Bush merely renewed it. At least get that part of the story right.
07:56 AM on 03/09/2009
http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/stemcell/appendix_d.html

(This contains the Clinton admin's policy on NIH funding of ESC research)

"NIH funds may be used to derive human pluripotent stem cells from fetal tissue. NIH funds may not be used to derive human pluripotent stem cells from human embryos. These Guidelines also designate certain areas of human pluripotent stem cell research as ineligible for NIH funding."

I suppose it's utterly naive to wait for the badmouthing of President Clinton by the people who ignorantly assume this was a President Bush originated policy...
10:35 AM on 03/07/2009
This is some of the best news I have heard in a long time and one of the reasons I voted democrat.

This news should be on top of the page and stay there all weekend.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AZ AF VET
Old lefty.
11:04 AM on 03/07/2009
Mr Vincent
You voted Democratic not democrat!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
zeezan
Life-long Liberal
05:30 PM on 03/07/2009
Agree. Since the other party insists on calling us the "Democrat Party" why not start a drive to always refer to them as the "Republic Party?" Or maybe just the "Repub Party."
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
AwShucks
Obama-Biden 2012 Let's Do it Again
12:29 PM on 03/07/2009
I so agree with you MrVincent. Democrat or Democractic or whatever. You are right. Let the cures begin.
09:59 AM on 03/07/2009
I've got the solution to this so-called problem. We save all human zygotes produced either naturally or on a petri dish. Put 'em in this humongous freezer and toss them out whenever a couple who can't conceive wants a few of these little critters. Then and only then can we be confident that we are carrying out the Biblical creed of being fruitful and multiplying. And damn other religions that are either indifferent to or not particularly interested in the magic of human reproduction.
Of course, this is liable to create an increase in the human population that we may not be prepared for. I mean, having twenty trillion of us on a planet that is currently straining under the weight of six trillion of god's creatures may prove impossible, environmentally.
But, what the hell. It would be kind of cool to live like the Japanese, you know, bumping into one another as they walk down crowded streets, talking on cell phones, taking pictures of each other. Sounds like the perfect life to me!
Let's go for it! Let's produce as many of us as is humanly possible, by whatever means. Oh. And don't give a second thought to using zygotes to cure now incurable diseases. That wouldn't be god's way.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Binea
Only a fool denies she is a fool, I am no fool
09:31 AM on 03/07/2009
Some are always yelling about "choice" and their rights and I agree with most of the complaints.With Abortion and embryonic stem cell research,you of course realize you are making irreversible choices for Other lives.When I read the arguements for Embryonic stem cell research, those old paintings with demons eating babies alive keep coming to mind.
We hear of ancient cultures who thought it perfectly normal and good and righteous to cut the heart out of a living human sacrifice.We hear of cultures who would sacrifice their children to their Gods,for a better crop and the tribes wellbeing.We shake our heads in sadness and disgust ,we think them barbaric when we hear of the beliefs that led so many to commit and even think it holy to do these things (they would call us insane to object, after all it was supposed to save lives).yet those who call for this kind of research are no less barbaric ( even if it really does save or cure Michale J.Fox) what makes HIs life more valuable than someone else.He is nothing but a mass of cells ,a blob of tissue himself.
10:02 AM on 03/07/2009
As the garbage man tosses the waste from a fertility clinic in the back of his truck, I wonder if he is thinking about irreversibility? And why aren't you and other anti-choice zealots out there, stationed at every clinic, wearing sandwich boards, protesting this destruction of human life?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Binea
Only a fool denies she is a fool, I am no fool
10:23 AM on 03/07/2009
who gets to define WHO is human waste ? These fertility clinics need to be banned from making excess life that they and their patients know they will never implant.Or they should be forced to give those human beings now in suspended animation to mosque,churches,synogoges,even gay rights groups,so that they can save them for people in the future to adopt. as for human waste..I consider those who promote abortion and embryonic stem cell research to be Human waste,but I would never cross the line of taking THEIR Lives just because I consider them a waste of space.
11:13 AM on 03/07/2009
We're not doing stem-cell research for the benefit of just Michael J. Fox. To imply that is to be extremely ignorant. There are millions of people out there with debilitating diseases or physical trauma that could benefit from this research. This research aims to reduce human suffering. You're so caught up in your ideology that you would prevent that.
09:06 AM on 03/07/2009
Finally, the guy I voted for does something I can actually get behind 100%
09:05 AM on 03/07/2009
Me likey science. The geek shall inherit the earth.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Cambridge9
07:34 AM on 03/07/2009
To all those Right to Lifers:- if you are going to use this as a 'reason' to not allow stem cell research - or rather the rescinding of the Bush Doctrine - then you have to support all life:- ie: no death penalty and no sending our military to fight fight wars. You can't have it both ways.

I say "Welcome Back America!"

YES WE CAN!
09:26 AM on 03/07/2009
That's such a good point. The same people that claim to be "pro-life," fight social programs tooth & nail, and mercilessly push for the death penalty and war every chance they get. Such hypocrites. So full of s*@t
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Binea
Only a fool denies she is a fool, I am no fool
09:55 AM on 03/07/2009
actually..no they don't.They are adopting,they are giving to charities, and some even figured out that Bush lied us into war.why do you think Obama won ? Manyof "those"people took a leap for Obama.Now obama not only wants to keep embryonic stem cell research legal ...he wants to FORCE them to pay for it via federal funding..what about OUR choice ? I always hear people on the left say "if you don't like abortion don't have one,if you don't like embryonic stem cell reasearch don't pay for it"
Stop Forcing those who know the evil of these things to help YOU commit the attrocities
by using OUR tax dollars to FUND them.
11:22 PM on 03/07/2009
While I personally am against both abortion and the death penalty, I find your argument disingenuous. It is a much smaller logical leap to be able to argue for society's right to kill a convicted criminal who made the choice to commit a crime than it is to argue for the right to kill an unborn child because it is more convenient for the mother.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JakeHanson
Flying Spaghetti Monster Bless America!
01:29 PM on 03/07/2009
Very refreshing to read...common sense! Thank you for posting this.
07:21 AM on 03/07/2009
those who are against this research, should simply deny treatment if/when a cure is found. It's that simple.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mocha59
08:25 AM on 03/07/2009
yep.