 |
 |
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