Stem cell ban on research lifted

Katherine - posted on 05/02/2011 ( 4 moms have responded )

65,405

232

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/04/29/stem.ce...

A federal court has given the Obama administration the go-ahead to continue funding embryonic stem-cell research.

The controversial 2-1 decision Friday is a victory for supporters of federally funded testing for a range of diseases and illnesses.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia lifted an injunction imposed last year by a federal judge, who said all embryonic stem-cell research at the National Institutes of Health amounted to destruction of embryos, in violation of congressional spending laws.

Legislation passed in 1996 law prohibits the use of taxpayer dollars in the creation or destruction of human embryos "for research purposes." Private money had been used to gather batches of the developing cells at U.S.-run labs. The current administration had broken with the Bush White House and issued rules in 2009 permitting those cells to be reproduced in controlled conditions and for work on them to move forward.

Obama officials have been at odds with many members of Congress over whether the the NIH research actually causes an embryo's destruction, as prohibited by the Dickey-Wicker Act.

Two scientists had brought a lawsuit to block further research. But the three-judge panel concluded in its 21-page ruling, "the plaintiffs are unlikely to prevail because Dickey-Wicker is ambiguous and the NIH seems reasonably to have concluded" the law does not ban research using embryonic stem cells.

The ruling does not deal with separate research on adult stem cells, which remains permissible under federal law. The plaintiffs have the option of now taking their appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court for review. The issue at this stage deals only with the lifting of the injunction allowing funding to continue for embryonic stem-cell research. The larger constitutional issues are still being debated at the district court level.

The government had argued that an extensive list of research projects outlined by the National Institutes of Health would have to be shelved if the court had not acted and granted a stay.

The field of embryonic stem-cell research has been highly controversial, because in most cases the research process involves destroying the embryo, typically four or five days old, after removing stem cells. These cells are then blank and can become any cell in the body.

Embryonic stem-cell research differs from other kinds of stem-cell research, which don't require embryos.

Some scientists believe embryonic stem cells could help treat many diseases and disabilities because of their potential to develop into many different cell types in the body.

The case began with a lawsuit against the NIH by scientists opposed to use of embryonic stem cells, a group that seeks adoptive parents for human embryos created through in vitro fertilization, the nonprofit Christian Medical Association and others.

When the injunction was first issued by Judge Royce Lamberth in August, Ron Stoddart, executive director of Nightlight Christian Adoptions -- one of the groups that filed the lawsuit -- said he supported adult stem-cell research that doesn't require destroying embryos.

"Frequently people will say, 'Why are you opposed to stem-cell research?' and of course our answer is, 'We're not,' " Stoddart said. "We're opposed to the destruction of the embryos to get embryo stem cells."

When President George Bush first approved federal funding of human embryonic stem-cell research in 2001, 60 existing stem-cell lines -- which were created before August 9, 2001-- qualified for federal funding. Of those, only 21 actually were usable for scientists. Bush later rescinded the funding.

Since the Obama administration's rules went into effect, at least total of 75 stem cell lines qualify for federal funding, according to the NIH.

NIH has invested more than $500 million in human embryonic stem-cell research.

Because such embryos are destroyed when stem cells are removed for research, most opponents believe this is moral issue.

Scientists conducting such research said continued federal funding is necessary, saying they would have greater flexibility to work collaboratively within labs, across labs and around the world on the latest treatments and breakthroughs. Supporters of embryonic stem-cell research say their studies have shown promise to treat a range of debilitating conditions including diabetes, Parkinson's disease, cancers, and spinal cord injuries.

The case is Sherley v. Sebelius (10-5287).

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms

4 Comments

View replies by

Stephen Daniel - posted on 08/08/2012

4

0

The USA FDA now control every part of stem cell research etc as they have had the USA courts decide that your own stem cells are a drug ? But if you want/need stem cell treatment that is 100% safe (yes proven) and uses your own stem cells and is thousands of dollars cheaper than in the USA but in a safe, English speaking country and overseen by the national hospital and the govt, try New Zealand, to find out about this and or ask direct questions of an actual adult stem cell transplant recipient go here and ask my mum lol she has no ads and no fees for anything at all. http://stemcellpatient.blogspot.co.nz/

Katherine - posted on 07/19/2011

65,405

232

Breast cancer runs in my family so I would hope that isn't the case. They definitely need this funding.

Tammy - posted on 07/19/2011

602

25

There was never a ban on stem cell research. It was a word game in the media. They just stopped allowing the use of taxpayer money to fund Embryonic stem cell research. They were still allowed to do the research they just had to use private funding. Oh, and taxpayer money was actually STILL funding the first lines. The fact that even the hollywood types were reluctant to put their money where their mouth is on something that has never produced anything but tumors should clue everyone in. I mean, if all the hollywood millionaires each gave just one million to the cause they would still have money in the bank to use today. Over 80 different diseases and injuries are successfully being treated with Adult stem cells with more advancements all the time. Including the injury that killed Christopher Reeve. In fact a woman over in one of the Asian countries (Can't remember which one off the top of my head) with a very similar injury who had been a parapalegic for 15 years was treated and began to lose her paralysis just 6 months after he died. I wonder how much sooner that treatment would have been available if the money for embryonic stem cell research had been used for adult stem cells instead? All the studies on embryonic stem cell research never actaully produce anything except statements about "possibilites" in order to keep the money flowing. So be aware when people lump both in the phrase "stem cells" without telling you the difference. Embryonic stem cells have not even treated one disease successfully, in fact I believe it was only recently that they started talking about using them on a person for the first time, to treat something that adult stem cells already treat successfully. So far Embryonic stem cells have only produced tumors in lab animals.

On a side note, if Obamacare is no longer going to allow the use of a last ditch cancer drug for breast cancer patients because of the expense, what do you think the odds are that the even more expensive stem cell treatments will be covered?

Katherine - posted on 05/08/2011

65,405

232

They are embryos and there are moral issues.

Karli - posted on 05/02/2011

218

0

I have had a grandparent who suffered with parkinson's and another with Alzheimer's so I am for any research that would put an end to those horrible diseases. I am unclear as to whether or not they create embryos for this research and in that case I would be very disturbed, but I have heard that many abortion clinics get consent from woman who get abortions will donate that to research but I didn't think that would be possible due to the procedure itself.

I am not naive to think that some of this stuff has been happening behind closed doors for years and very hush hush stuff. There is a lot of money to be made for whatever country and science team that discovers any breakthroughs about these diseases.