 |
 |
EDITORIAL: OREGON: Rethink Restrictions: Stem Cell Research Funding Needs To Be Expanded A Register-Guard Editorial May 26, 2004 Anti-abortion absolutists don't mince words in their characterization of embryonic stem cell research: They call it murder. They believe human life begins at conception, and embryonic stem cell research destroys human embryos that are three to five days past conception. But outside that closed-minded camp, a growing group of abortion opponents is willing to acknowledge that the potential life-saving benefits of stem cell research should not be dismissed out of hand. Despite his essential agreement with the strict anti-abortion position, President Bush deserves credit for trying to strike a compromise three years ago on federal funding of stem cell research. Bush acknowledged the promise of stem cell research to yield groundbreaking treatments for devastating ailments such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease, diabetes, muscular dystrophy and cystic fibrosis. He agreed to let federally funded researchers study 64 embryonic stem cell lines created before his August 2001 cutoff date. The policy drew criticism from scientists who feared its constraints would hamper U.S. efforts, but there was ample support from experts who believed the lines would be enough to get started on basic research. Embryonic stem cells can be cultured to create any type of tissue in the human body. By studying how these master cells differentiate into muscle, brain and other tissues, researchers hope to learn how to grow cells that will treat diseases. Unfortunately, Bush's initial projections of stem cell availability didn't materialize. Today, there are only 19 usable lines created before the 2001 cutoff date, and that number is never likely to rise above 23, according to the National Institutes of Health. But the number of cell lines available to researchers worldwide who don't receive U.S. government funds is up to at least 51 and could rise to more than 100 over the coming year. Non-American scientists have seized the momentum in stem cell research, with laboratories in Singapore, Israel, Sweden and Finland announcing recent breakthroughs. Reports of U.S. stem cell researchers leaving to work in more supportive environments overseas prompted Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to say it's time for Bush to review the policy. No less a GOP luminary than former first lady Nancy Reagan has publicly joined 206 members of Congress, including some longtime abortion opponents, who are pressing the president to revisit his 2001 decision. The moral line drawn by Bush was originally meant to prevent the government from creating new embryos that would be destroyed in subsequent research. But that line is blurred by the fact that fertility clinics simply discard or freeze far more human embryos in the normal course of treating patients than researchers ever would. In-vitro fertilization creates multiple embryos in a laboratory in the hope of successfully implanting just one. Most of those surplus embryos will die. So government restrictions are actually having no impact whatsoever on the largest source of discarded embryos. Faced with the choice of throwing unwanted embryos in the garbage or using them to advance research that could alleviate untold human suffering, even staunch anti-abortion advocates are lobbying for looser federal funding rules. The federal government plays a vital role in this delicate scientific arena. The strings attached to federal funding include rules and monitoring that minimize the self-interested motives of private sector research. Proposals to use embryos from fertility clinics include requiring informed consent from donors and prohibiting donors from being paid. President Bush found the courage to craft an appropriate compromise in 2001. It's time for him to summon that courage again and provide U.S. researchers with federal funds to study embryonic stem cells discarded by fertility clinics. SOURCE: The Register-Guard, Oregon http://tinyurl.com/2fo64 * * * STUDY: OREGON: Parkinson's Caregivers At Risk For Deteriorating Health Public release date: 26-May-2004 Contact: Jonathan Modie [log in to unmask] 503 494-8231 Oregon Health & Science University Parkinson's caregivers at risk for deteriorating health OHSU study also finds increased strain among spouses of people with disease PORTLAND, Ore. - An Oregon Health & Science University study shows the health of family caregivers should be as top of mind as that of Parkinson's disease patients. The study by researchers at the OHSU Parkinson Center of Oregon found that people caring for spouses with Parkinson's disease, either at home or in a care facility, are at heightened risk for deteriorating health and well-being, as well significantly increased strain. The investigators studied spouse-caregivers from early in the diagnosis of their spouses' Parkinson's disease and again 10 years later. The goal of the study was to identify early warning signs in families that would predict who is at greatest risk of caregiver strain, and the negative effect on health and depression. The study of more than 150 spouse-caregivers of early-stage Parkinson's patients found that physical and mental health declined and strain increased dramatically over 10 years. The investigators also found that there were predictors early in the course of caregiving that might identify who was at greatest risk. "As an example, caregivers who had bad health and depression to start with were more likely to have worse health and depression at the end of care giving," said study investigator Julie H. Carter, R.N., M.S., A.N.P., associate professor of neurology in the OHSU School of Medicine and associate director of the Parkinson Center of Oregon. The findings suggest the health of family caregivers is paramount to the well-being of Parkinson's disease patients. And they may help researchers identify potential areas of early interventions to improve the health of both patients and caregivers. "Families are an invisible part of health care. They provide tremendous support in delivering care and if something happens to that vital link, it makes the person with Parkinson's disease more vulnerable," Carter said. "So being concerned about the health of families ends up having incredible social and economic implications." The study, "Family Caregiving in Parkinson's Disease (PD): A Ten-Year Follow-Up," was presented recently at the annual meetings of the Parkinson Study Group and the American Academy of Neurology. The study is an eight-year follow-up to an assessment of more than 300 Parkinson's disease caregivers between 1992 and 1994 in what was called "The Parkinson's Spouse's Project." Using the project's data, the recent study aimed to predict changes in caregiver strain, depression and physical health from 1992 to 2002, and describe changes in caregiving and their connections to strain, depression, physical health, the quality of the relationship, and optimism and pessimism. The recent study surveyed 156 of the original project participants: 105, or 67 percent, continued to care for spouses with Parkinson's disease at home; 11, or 7 percent, had spouses in a care facility, such as a nursing home; and 40, or 26 percent, were bereaved. The study found that the health, strain, optimism and pessimism, and quality of the relationship - mutuality - deteriorated "significantly" over 10 years among the 105 caregivers with spouses at home. "How depressed you are in 1992 explains a lot about what happens to your mental health long term, as does optimism and pessimism," Carter said. "If we identify caregivers early who have depression, we might be able to intervene early to treat their depression. Another option may be to teach people to be more optimistic." Another notable finding is that mutuality is a risk factor for declining health. "Mutuality is the quality of relationship itself between the patient and spouse - how much time they spend together, how much they enjoy each other, care for each other, how easy it is to be with each other," Carter explained. "We think high mutuality is protective against experiencing a lot of strain." Carter said the lesson to be learned from the study is that families of Parkinson's disease patients suffer, too. "It's not just the patient who has the disease. It's the family that has the disease," she said. "People with Parkinson's disease aren't isolated from their environment. Their environment is primarily their families and, therefore, the health of the family becomes critical in providing good health to the patient. "We're interested in looking at the family experience as an interactive unit, as a dynamic thing. It's even having clinicians think about their patients from a family caregiving approach." Carter's collaborators at the OHSU School of Nursing were: Karen S. Lyons, Ph.D., assistant professor of population- based nursing; Barbara J. Stewart, professor of population-based nursing; and Patricia G. Archbold, R.N., D.N.Sc., FAAN, professor and director, John A. Hartford Center of Excellence in Geriatric Nursing. The study was supported by the Medical Research Foundation and the Parkinson Study Group. ### To access all OHSU news releases, visit http://www.ohsu.edu/news/ SOURCE: EurekAlert, DC http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-05/ohs-pca052604.php * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn