Mouse embryonic stem cells stained with a fluorescent
green marker. Photo Credit: Niels Geijsen, Massachusetts
General Hospital/National Science Foundation.
COMMENTARY: In March 2009 when President Obama signed the executive order reversing limits on federal support of embryonic stem cell research, he followed through on a pledge to separate science and politics. However, given the long and controversial history of conflict between science and personal moral beliefs is this at all possible?
It is difficult the separate the technology created by science from its impact on individuals and society. At its core, science is based on facts, tangible units of knowledge that are neither inherently good nor evil.
Throughout history the application of science and technology has raised conflict and concern in society. Galileo Galilei in the early 1600s was branded a heretic for espousing the views of Copernicus, that the earth orbited around the sun rather than supporting the church’s tenet that man was placed at the center of the universe by divine action. Galileo was sentenced to a life in seclusion, but others such as Giordano Bruno were burned at the stake for scientifically challenging the beliefs of society. More recently Albert Einstein wrote to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt urging the development of atomic weapons before Germany could develop the bomb. He later regretted this action and spent the remainder of his life arguing that nuclear weapons should be under the control of the United Nations for the purpose of deterrence.
The polarized views regarding the research and application of embryonic stem cells is no less controversial, with strong perspectives and arguments for supporting and for banning the work.
The mission of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is to “uncover new knowledge that will lead to better health for everyone.” The NIH administers federal funds to conduct research in its won laboratories and support the work of “non-Federal scientists in universities, medical schools, hospitals, and research institutions.” In essence the Federal government invests funds into scientific research, not for the sole purpose of gaining new knowledge, but to apply the scientific findings in the service to mankind.
As technology developed in the 1990s, the Clinton administration signaled that is would support research on human embryos and in December 1994, the National Institutes of Health announced plans for funding the research.
In response, pro-life congressmen Jay Dickey (R- Arkansas) and Roger Wicker (R – Mississippi) introduced an amendment in the annual health appropriations bill that prohibited the creation of embryos for the sole purpose of research. The Dickey-Wicker law originally enacted in 1996 has been included in spending bills each fiscal year since1996 and was renewed in the omnibus spending bill signed by Obama days after his stem cell declaration.
In August 2001, President George W. Bush (signed an executive order) stating that federal research be limited to a small number of clones from cells already in existence. President Obama’s 2009 order continues to comply with the Dickey-Wicker amendment but expands federal funding to support research on hundreds of other stem cell lines in existence.
Further complicating this issue are the actions of individual states that have passed their own laws on stem cells. Some states have created outright bans on human embryonic stem cell research, while others provide state funds to support the work. California Proposition 71 provides for $3 billion in embryonic research funds over 10 years and New Jersey established the first state-sponsored stem cell research facility.
On Friday, the National Institutes of Health released a draft of Guidelines for Human Stem Cell Research. Without changing this law, Obama’s 2009 order complies with the Dickey-Wicker amendment. Ultimately this law may be overturned in legislative efforts led by U.S. Representatives Diana DeGette (D- Colorado) and Mike Castle (D- Delaware).
Monday: Part 1. The collision of science and politics
Tuesday: Part 2. Basic concepts of stem cell science
Wednesday: Part 3. Cell replacement therapy
Thursday: Part 4. Future applications of stem cell treatment
Friday: Part 5. The ethics of stem cell use.
Saturday: Part 6: Medical Tourism: seeking cures around the world.
You can email me at phillyscienceguy@gmail.com or visit my website Science in my life. This series is adapted from a book manuscript in progress on The History, Science, and Politics of Stem Cells.
Comments