 |
 |
Frist Backs Stem Cell Funding Senate's Only Doctor Supports Research By Rick Weiss and Amy Goldstein Washington Post Staff Writers Thursday, July 19, 2001; Page A01 The campaign for federal funding of human embryo cell research gained new political momentum yesterday with an announcement by Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) that he would back the use of taxpayer dollars in the controversial but promising field. As the Senate's only physician, Frist has been a trusted and influential adviser on medical issues to President Bush, who is struggling to decide whether to fund research on embryonic stem cells. Suspense had been building in recent days as rumors spread that the heart surgeon was close to taking a position on the research, which scientists say could lead to treatments for many chronic diseases but which depends on the destruction of human embryos. After grappling with the issue scientifically, ethically and morally, I conclude that both embryonic and adult stem cell research should be federally funded within a carefully regulated, fully transparent framework," Frist told a Senate subcommittee yesterday. Frist joins a growing list of conservative senators, most notably Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), who have recently come out in favor of funding the research -- an issue that has become an unanticipated test for Bush as he seeks to define "compassionate conservatism." Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee on labor, health and human services, said yesterday he believes there may now be as many as 75 votes in that chamber in support of such funding, enough to overcome a Bush veto. Other observers said the number may be closer to 65. They said a majority of House members may now favor the work as well. But the battle for Bush's heart and mind is by no means over, opponents of the research said. Saying the research is too morally treacherous to justify federal support, several witnesses yesterday told the subcommittee that federal funding should be limited to alternative approaches -- including research limited to adult stem cells. Some scientists say adult stem cells are less promising. "The central question to this debate remains: Is the young human a life or mere property to be discarded as a master chooses?" said Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.). "Destructive embryo research -- research which requires the destruction of living embryos -- is deeply immoral, illegal and unnecessary." Even Frist warned that his support was contingent on the implementation of adequate ethics principles, 10 of which he presented yesterday morning. At least two of those principles go beyond anything found in the detailed set of stem cell research guidelines developed last year by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), raising questions as to whether funding might be delayed under a Frist regime until the NIH revises its guidelines. One of Frist's principles calls for restrictions on the number of embryo cell colonies, or lines, to be created with federal money, and suggests a preliminary limit of five years of funding. Another calls for the creation of an independent presidential advisory committee to keep tabs of the research -- a suggestion that some observers decried as redundant given the large amount of planning and oversight already provided by NIH and the presidentially appointed National Bioethics Advisory Commission. In an interview yesterday, Frist said he believed those differences could be worked out. "My object is not to slow things down," he said. He and several other supporters of embryonic stem cell research said they did not support a bill co-sponsored by Harkin and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), which would allow federal funds to be used not only for research on embryo cells but also for the direct destruction of embryos to get those cells -- activities not allowed under the current NIH guidelines. Frist and other supporters of the research also spoke out yesterday against the creation of human embryos solely for the purpose of harvesting their stem cells. That practice was endorsed at yesterday's hearings by representatives of the Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine in Norfolk, which last week reported it was doing just that, and by Michael West, president of Advanced Cell Technology in Worcester, Mass., who has said his company hopes to clone human embryos as a source of stem cells. Frist's announcement came on the same day that the NIH officially released a 200-page report that concludes that more research is needed on both embryonic and adult stem cells to determine their relative promise. Frist has spoken to the White House in the past about the question of stem cell research. But he and other sources yesterday said that he did not develop his position in consultation with the administration. In contrast with legislation to protect patients in HMOs, which Frist and two other senators drafted this year deliberately to be in sync with Bush's stance on that issue, "this was something he did on his own," one administration official said. The White House said that Frist's views would not necessarily carry more influence with the president than those of other members of Congress. "The president will make his own decision after looking at all the scientific, ethical and legal issues involved," said deputy White House press secretary Scott McClellan. But other Congress watchers said they suspected Frist's views would indeed have disproportionate impact, and could be especially crucial if Bush decides against funding and Congress takes up the issue on its own. "If we end up in Congress, the support of such an influential senator could be crucial," said Michael Werner, bioethics counsel for the Biotechnology Industry Organization. Separately yesterday, Vice President Cheney suggested that Bush will announce his decision by the end of August. "He recognizes the enormous significance of the decision and so he's really dug into it in great depth and talked to a great many people about it," Cheney said on "The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer." Asked by Lehrer whether there was room for compromise on the issue, Cheney said it was not that simple. "It's not like highway money. There's no way you can split the difference -- 'you get your highway and I get my highway.' These are deeply, deeply significant ethical questions about the future of the race, about medical research, about our ability to deal with horrendous diseases, and at the same time give due regard to the sanctity of human life. It's appropriate that he should take plenty of time to make sure he understands all of the ramifications of it, that he's comfortable with the final course he decides upon." SOURCE: The Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/nation/A16219-2001Jul18.html * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn