Stem-cell Research roils the ranks in Congress
Sunday, July 15, 2001
By SARAH KELLOGG
Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- When science and ethics collide in Congress,
there are bound to be political and moral sparks.

Such is the case with stem-cell research, a field of biomedical study
that holds so much promise for curing diseases that it's turned on its
head what it means to be "pro-life" in Washington.

Within the Michigan congressional delegation, some remain
undecided about whether federal money should be used for
stem-cell research, which involves taking cells from human
embryos. Others have staked out their traditional territory on
the life question, while still others have redefined their pro-life
positions for this one special case.

"This, as with so many issues we deal with in Congress, is not
a black-and-white ethical issue," said Rep. Vern Ehlers, R-Grand
Rapids, who is among the undecideds.  "What we're often asked
to do is balance the rights of the fetus against the potential
benefits to another human being. It's not simple or clear-cut."

It certainly hasn't been clear-cut for some Republican members
who have long championed anti-abortion positions and who
have parted ways with National Right to Life, the anti-abortion
group that also opposes stem-cell research, on this question.

Rep. Nick Smith, R-Addison, who opposes abortion, says
stem-cell research holds the key to curing many diseases,
such as Parkinson's, juvenile diabetes and some forms of cancer.
He doesn't fear the research, only the potential profit motive
behind it.

"Currently, with the frozen embryos, I'm not too concerned,"
said Smith,  who chairs the science subcommittee in the House.
"I would be concerned if it turns into a system that can be
commercialized to include the sales of  embryonic stem cells."

Michigan's members are wrestling with the issue as President
Bush contemplates whether to allow federally funded research
on stem cells from human embryos. He is expected to make his
decision in the next few weeks, well aware that he will be living
with his decision into the next election.

So will Congress, whose members might come back to reverse
Bush if he decides to allow some limited federally funded research.
GOP leaders in the House are active opponents and would have a
chance to write their own ban into federal budget bills allocating
funds for scientific research.

Congress in 1995 approved a ban on the research, but the Clinton
administration found a loophole to allow federally funded research
to continue as long as the embryonic stem cells  were not extracted
using federal money, but obtained from a private company.

Stem cells are the master cells that hold the key to replicating
human  tissue. Many scientists believe the cells from embryos
are more versatile  than those from adults, making them prime
candidates for developing organ replacements.

In the late 1990s, scientists from the University of Wisconsin
and Johns Hopkins University discovered that stem cells from
embryos discarded from fertility clinics could be developed into
liver cells, brain cells and other kinds of tissue.

To extract the stem cells from embryos, opponents of the research
say  that scientists must, in effect, "kill" the embryo, because those
stem cells could potentially become a human being.

Researchers on the other side believe that stem cells, while
scientifically special, are another form of tissue, not a form of life,
and they should be treated as such.

For Rep. Lynn Rivers, D-Ann Arbor, an important consideration
is the word "discarded."

"I'm particularly supportive of the research when it's been made
very clear that the embryos at issue here are those that are going
to be destroyed anyway," said Rivers. "If we're really talking
about the destruction of  them, then the fact they would be used
for some good purpose is a really reasonable position."

But not for everyone. Two Democratic members of Congress --
Bart Stupak of Menominee and Jim Barcia of Bay City -- make the
 Pandora's box argument,  noting that stem-cell research could
lead to even more morally questionable types of research.

"How do you stop them from manipulating human life?"
asked Stupak.  "You may be doing it for Parkinson's today.
But maybe tomorrow you'll be doing it for blond hair or blue eyes.
There will always seem like a perfectly  legitimate reason to do
this."

For still other members, the whole debate may be moot. Recent
scientific discoveries show that some adult stem cells, those
taken from fat cells, may be equally effective in the search for
cures.

"The science isn't clear here," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Midland.
"There have been some breakthroughs that other sources of
human stem cells are available, adult fat cells or placentas.
If there's another source other than  human embryos, we ought
to go there. Embryos should be the last resort."

Contact Sarah Kellogg at (202) 383-7810 or e-mail her at
[log in to unmask]

Where selected Michigan members of Congress come down on
stem-cell research:

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Detroit supports
Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Lansing supports
Rep. James Barcia, D-Bay City opposes
Rep. Dave Camp, R-Midland opposes
Rep. Vern Ehlers, R-Grand Rapids undecided
Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Holland opposes
Rep. Dale Kildee, D-Flint opposes
Rep. Lynn Rivers, D-Ann Arbor supports
Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Brighton opposes
Rep. Nick Smith,  R-Addison supports, as long as it's not
commercialized
Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Menominee opposes
Rep. Fred Upton, R-St. Joseph supports

SOURCE: Michigan Live
http://aa.mlive.com/news/index.ssf?/news/stories/20010712l715stemcell.frm

* * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn