Just about one year ago Pres. Bush announced stem cell research would be funded by the NIH - but only a limited number of stem cell lines that were already created before Aug. 9th could be used in the research AS theses quotes from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article below states - now one year later: -- "the research is still in an embryonic stage" -- " Far fewer viable stem cell collections are available than the president and his aides had claimed, and relatively few scientists are ready and able to work with them." -- " Government money has trickled, not flowed." -- Due to the restrictions on the research and "cumbersome bureaucratic procedures... many researchers are afraid or unwilling to invest the time and expense of designing experiments and writing a grant proposal for such iffy funding" --" So far, the National Institutes of Health has awarded five administrative grants and approved only a few direct research grants." The government's pace in funding the research was called "dismal." --The potential of stem cells for PD treatments, according to James Thomson of the Un. of Wisconsin -- "Embryonic stem cells in lab experiments have been shown to form neurons that produce dopamine, and "we're fairly optimistic" the results will hold up in people, Thomson said. This could be one of the fastest treatments developed from stem cells, he predicted." FROM: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel August 4, 2002 Sunday FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 01A HEADLINE: No miracles yet ; No miracles yet, but stem cell research proceeds steadily BYLINE: MARILYNN MARCHIONE of the Journal Sentinel staff Aug. 9, 2001, isn't a date burned into the American psyche like Sept. 11. But scientists around the world know it as the day President Bush made a landmark announcement, allowing limited federal funding for a promising but controversial new field called human embryonic stem cell research. One year later, that research is still in an embryonic stage. No cures or human experiments are under way. Far fewer viable stem cell collections are available than the president and his aides had claimed, and relatively few scientists are ready and able to work with them. Government money has trickled, not flowed. Foreign labs are making key achievements, and stem cell opponents portray each new advance in traditional medicine as proof that research involving embryos is unnecessary. The field's leading scientist -- the University of Wisconsin's James Thomson -- says the pace of progress is ordinary for such an extraordinarily novel science. But he worries about unrealistic expectations of fast cures. "That's been over-hyped so much that there's going to be a tremendous backlash to this about three years from now, when there will not be a lot of clinical trials out there because this takes time," he said in an interview and in a recent speech in Madison. Cells' potential hailed Thomson turned the scientific world upside down in 1998 when he became the first to isolate and grow human embryonic stem cells, primitive cells that differentiate or specialize and form all the tissues of the body. He used leftover embryos donated by couples who had gone through infertility treatment to get the cells, which now are maintained in cell lines, or collections, that live and reproduce indefinitely. Scientists say such cells are an unprecedented tool for studying human health and disease and unraveling mysteries of infertility, birth defects and other aspects of early human development. They also hold potential for a rapidly growing area of medicine -- cell-based therapy -- to treat some of the most common and currently incurable disorders, such as Parkinson's disease, diabetes and spinal cord injuries. But turning discovery into cures is a long process. The next step is translational research -- learning what the cells can and can't do, directing them to form various tissues and testing them in animals. Only after that's been done can products be commercialized and treatments be tried in people. That laboratory spadework is going on now, and those involved don't consider it slow. "That's the normal evolution of science. I think it's to be expected for a novel field," said Jeffrey Rothstein, a neurologist and stem cell researcher at Johns Hopkins University. "This has gone really well and fast over the last year. Everybody expects instant miracles, but what we have is a lot of great work going on," said Andrew Cohn, spokesman for the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, which holds patents on the stem cells Thomson developed. It would go quicker if government grants were being fast-tracked instead of mired in cumbersome bureaucratic procedures and if Bush hadn't restricted the cells that could be used to only those from embryos destroyed by last Aug. 9, some scientists say. That not only cramps scientific creativity but also creates a climate where many researchers are afraid or unwilling to invest the time and expense of designing experiments and writing a grant proposal for such iffy funding. Few grants awarded So far, the National Institutes of Health has awarded five administrative grants and approved only a few direct research grants. UW's Jon Odorico, for instance, said he's been told that he is getting a $250,000 pilot grant for work on diabetes, and Thomson has been awarded a $2.2 million grant for embryonic stem cell work in primates that includes a human research component. "This is a beginning. There is more coming," said Belinda Seto, an NIH funding official. Multiple calls seeking information and comment from U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson were not returned. The little money awarded so far is "a big disappointment," and the restriction to only existing stem cell lines "is really not the right decision," said Rudolf Jaenisch, a prominent researcher at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Advances by foreign labs and some American ones in the last year show "we can use these cells for therapy, that's clear. There's all the reason to believe this has real medical potential," Jaenisch said. Susan Garfinkel, a geneticist at the Stem Cell Research Foundation, a group that funnels private donations to stem cell scientists, said the government's pace was dismal. "It's really very sad that you have the potential to have cures for diseases, and the United States is just not moving forward fast enough to make the decisions to use that potential," she said. Opponents still fighting Meanwhile, stem cell opponents -- mostly abortion foes -- have moved their fight to the state level and are courting public opinion by talking up achievements with adult stem cells, which form specific tissues in the body and may have the ability to morph into other types as well. Richard Doerflinger, a spokesman for the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, said embryonic stem cell research had been eclipsed in the last year. "Science has marched on. The main advances coming out of stem cell research, especially those involving clinical benefit, have been out of adult stem cells," he said. But Thomson, Jaenisch, Rothstein and other scientists say the respective potential and limitations of the cell types are unknown. Virtually every major medical, scientific and academic institution has urged that both fields move forward. "There is no compelling evidence that a pluripotent cell, equivalent to an embryonic stem cell, exists in the adult body. Period," Thomson said. The notion that one cell type is better than another or that scientists are competing on this point "is an argument which is political, it's in the press, but it's not really a scientific argument," he said. "That's absolutely correct," Jaenisch agreed. "I think it's really very ill-conceived to say that because there's potential with adult stem cells we should do away with embryonic stem cells." Thomson also thinks the press has over-emphasized embryonic stem cells' potential for cures rather than what they'll do for biology. "As a basic tool for understanding the body, these cells are unparalleled," and that contribution "will outlast the criticism" if they don't produce cures quickly, he said. "When you think about how embryonic stem cells are going to impact medicine, this is the reason. Because if you think about transplanting cells for Parkinson's disease or whatever, that's a really crude thing to do. It would be much better to understand at a basic level how that disease occurs in the first place and prevent it or slow it down," Thomson said. "However, in the short term, for people that have these diseases today, it really could be the difference between life and death." Cures won't develop quickly Work on cures is progressing. Scientists are trying to control cell differentiation, find better and safer ways to grow stem cells, and keep the immune system from rejecting new cells or tissues. "I'd be very optimistic that within the next decade or so, we could probably make essentially all the therapeutically useful cells in the body from embryonic stem cells. I think the field will go that quickly," Thomson said. "But I also would guess that in the next decade there'd be relatively few successful clinical trials based on these cells. People expect things to happen faster than they're going to." Here's where things stand on specific diseases: Diabetes. Transplanting insulin-producing islet cells from donated pancreases has been shown to work, "however, the source of cells is grossly inadequate" -- about 300 transplants are possible for the 1 million people who have diabetes, Thomson said. Making such cells from stem cells "is going to take a lot of work, but it's one of the transplantation therapies likely to work," based on research Odorico already has done, Thomson said. "We're making small strides, but it's a long way off" from therapies yet, Odorico said. Parkinson's disease. Transplants from fetal tissue of nerves that produce dopamine, the brain substance lost in Parkinson's, "occasionally work, but overall the success rates have not been very good," and the supply of such tissue is "grossly inadequate" to meet the need, Thomson said. Embryonic stem cells in lab experiments have been shown to form neurons that produce dopamine, and "we're fairly optimistic" the results will hold up in people, Thomson said. This could be one of the fastest treatments developed from stem cells, he predicted. Heart disease. Hearts don't have effective or sufficient adult stem cells to repair themselves and grow new cells to replace those killed when a heart attack occurs. Embryonic stem cells have yielded cardiac cells in lab experiments. The challenge will be getting them to function in a heart attack patient and also repairing or replacing the loss of blood to that region of the heart, Thomson said. "The safety issues, reproducibility, the dosage issues, take time," Rothstein said. "My patients clearly expect therapies sooner than they will be available. "We think there's fantastic potential in these cells," he said, "and potential can run on a long timeline." LOAD-DATE: August 4, 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn