 |
 |
Stem cell research under siege Fears of federal funding ban this summer crimp work on embryonic cells By Anthony Shadid, Globe Staff, 5/29/2001 WASHINGTON - This summer, the Bush administration is expected to render judgment on one of the most fiercely contested intersections of politics and medicine: Whether the federal government will provide funding for highly promising research into stem cells taken from human embryos. But researchers at universities, biotech companies, and foundations increasingly fear the months of uncertainty have already set back their efforts. Private funding is hard to find, they say, and scientists, in particular younger researchers, are shying away from a field that may hold the key to diseases such as diabetes, spinal cord injury, Parkinson's, and Alzheimer's. Heard more and more often are complaints of a ''chilling effect'' from the potential for a federal funding ban. ''Who wants to start up something today that may not be there in two or three months?'' asked Dr. Robert Goldstein, chief scientific officer of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International in New York. ''If you want to do this research, it's a mountain to climb.'' Embryonic stem cells are primordial cells - first isolated by a Wisconsin researcher in 1998 - that can develop into any of the body's tissues, potentially reversing the destruction diseases such as Parkinson's cause. That flexibility has led advocates of the research to celebrate their potential. Just last month, a study suggested that stem cells could be turned into insulin-producing cells known as islets, helping to treat diabetics. But opponents of the work, whose ranks loosely mirror those of abortion foes, claim that science is outpacing ethics. They don't believe the destruction of human embryos can be justified, however promising the research. And they're pleased with the prospect of stalling a field of medicine to which they're opposed. ''If it's true that the concern over embryonic stem cell research has effectively turned away a great many more number of applicants for federal funds, then I would call that a success for us,'' said Scott Weinberg, spokesman for American Life League, an antiabortion group. The depth of the dispute over stem cells reflects not only the source of the most promising cells - embryos - but also emerging research that, while disputed, suggests there might be alternatives in adult stem cells. That prospect continues to be debated, however. Adult stem cells are also elastic, but many scientists argue they are not as promising for therapies, particularly to treat diabetes and Parkinson's. They appear to be more difficult to grow in the lab, too. Among scientists, the enthusiasm centers on embryonic stem cell research. ''No scientist I know thinks this research is a sideshow or boring,'' said Douglas Melton, a Harvard University scientist and leading researcher, who likened their use to a fire hydrant spraying out cells to treat diseases. ''It's not an exaggeration to say every family you know has some connection to someone with a disease with a cellular deficiency.'' Congress has banned federally funded embryo research since 1995. But in August, in light of the momentum behind the nascent field, the National Institutes of Health issued rules allowing federally funded research on stem cells removed from the tens of thousands of fertilized eggs left behind at private fertility clinics. The key, though, was that no federal money would be used to extract the cells, a procedure that destroys the embryo, and that donors had given their consent. March was the deadline for applications. Only three were filed, and one of those was later withdrawn. Then, last month, the NIH postponed a meeting of the committee that was supposed to consider those applications, pending a review by its parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services. That effectively shut down the application process. The review will be completed next month, an NIH spokesman said. President Bush is expected to follow that with a final decision before the end of summer. So far, the administration appears divided. While Bush has come out against the research, his secretary of health and human services, Tommy Thompson, has repeatedly stated his support for the work. Scientists say the lack of a clear government policy has hampered their research. ''People like myself and colleagues would not bother to apply,'' said Melton, who is studying the potential for stem cells to treat diabetes. ''After people applied, they just pulled the plug on it. You don't need to read tea leaves to see the signals coming from the NIH.'' A federal ban would not necessarily end the research. But it would make funding far more difficult since the NIH, one of the government's biggest agencies, accounts for the bulk of medical research and typically comes with fewer restrictions than private financing. (Massachusetts received $1.5 billion in NIH funding last year, second only to California.) And private underwriters often steer clear of research that is not government-backed. Some suggested the delays may also prompt a form of brain drain, sending funding and expertise to countries with fewer prohibitions. ''It will eventually drive a promising area of biotechnology research elsewhere and cause some of our leading researchers in research organizations to seek opportunities overseas,'' said Robert Lanza, vice president of medical and scientific deveopment at Worcester- based Advanced Cell Technologies, which has invested in stem cell research. The Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, with a research budget of $120 million this year, is already funding human embryonic stem cell studies in Britain, Spain, and Australia. A fourth study is at Harvard. Melton said he feared damage was already done. `If you're a young person ... this has to have more than a minor effect on the decision of what you work on,'' he said. ''If people are telling you it's uncertain you'll get funding for this research, you might think, `Why don't I study cancer?''' Anthony Shadid can be reached by e-mail at [log in to unmask] This story ran on page E01 of the Boston Globe on 5/29/2001. © Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn