 |
 |
Note in 1999 (when I was still a Republican almost 10 years ago), in CA Repugs were touting umbilical cord blood as the answer. This article pretty much explains the truth. Note the "no credible clinial trial for PD" statement. I really think we would know if there was any such treatment and ESCR opponents would be publicizing it since they don't hesitate to lie about it. Ray Morrison Lab - In the News - Stem Cell Policy Let truth guide stem cell policy By Sean J. Morrison June 11, 2006 Michigan House Republicans announced a bill last week that they touted as allowing stem cell research to "flourish" in the state, helping to "grow the state's high-tech economy" and providing "hope for families that are dealing with serious diseases." Nothing could be further from the truth. The press release explaining the reasoning behind the bill, which would establish an umbilical cord blood bank, got nearly all of the facts wrong. It explained that House Republicans were backing this type of research as an alternative to embryonic stem cells because, while "billions of dollars have been spent on embryonic stem cell research over a 30-year period, no treatments or cures have been developed." Not true. Human embryonic stem cells were first isolated in 1998 and have been available to most researchers only for the past few years. There has not been time to develop cures using embryonic stem cells. The press release went on to say: "Adult stem cells, which come from umbilical cords, have helped treat 65 debilitating diseases, including Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis, sickle cell anemia, and brain cancer." Not true. Umbilical cord cells are used clinically only to replace blood-forming cells. There is no compelling evidence that these cells could ever be used to replace cells in other tissues. These cells are not an alternative to embryonic stem cells, which can replace any cell type in the body. No credible clinical trial has ever treated Parkinson's disease with umbilical cord blood. The "adult stem cells" that have been used to treat some Parkinson's patients were from the brains of aborted human fetuses. Scientists would prefer not to use aborted human fetal tissue. That is one of the motivations behind attempts to develop alternative therapies using embryonic stem cells. The misguided idea that umbilical cord blood can replace embryonic stem cells makes it more difficult for Michigan scientists to pursue these alternatives. The proposed legislation will have little impact, because it is already legal to bank cord blood in Michigan, and cord blood samples are already readily available. In contrast, Michigan makes it illegal to derive new human embryonic stem cells with some of the most restrictive laws in the world, far tighter than federal laws and equaled in the United States only by South Dakota's. Meanwhile, a growing list of states, including California, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland and Connecticut, have decided that embryonic stem cells are so important to their citizens they are using state taxpayer money to fund research that would be punished by imprisonment in Michigan. My laboratory studies umbilical cord blood. It is useful for replacing blood-forming cells in children that have been treated for cancer. However, it cannot do the same things as embryonic stem cells. That is why there is near universal agreement among respected scientists and patient advocacy groups that current restrictions should be relaxed. These restraints are touted as protecting human embryos. However, Michigan law does not protect a single embryo from destruction; it only delays medical research. Many more embryos than would ever be needed for stem cell research are already legally discarded by fertility clinics, either because they are not healthy and could never be used for fertility treatment or because they are no longer needed for fertility treatment and donors elect to discard them. Leading pro-life Republicans in Congress have publicly debunked the press release's arguments. Senate majority leader Bill Frist, a doctor from Tennessee, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, and Rep. Joe Schwarz, a Michigan doctor, have all described embryonic stem cell research as the pro-life position. Legislation to further loosen federal restrictions passed the U.S. House with an overwhelming majority. Similar legislation pending before the U.S. Senate is supported by a broad bipartisan majority. Yet in Michigan, state Rep. Andy Meisner's bill, which would bring Michigan's laws into line with those of other states, cannot even get a vote in the Legislature. Michigan is widely viewed as having regressive policies in this area. Where legislators have taken the time to educate themselves about these issues, they have consistently supported increased embryonic stem cell research. Here's hoping our representatives will also learn the facts before legislating. SEAN J. MORRISON is director of the University of Michigan Center for Stem Cell Biology. This piece represents Morrison's opinion, not university policy. Write to him in care of the Free Press Editorial Page, 600 W. Fort St., Detroit 48226 or [log in to unmask] Copyright 2006 Detroit Free Press Inc. Rayilyn Brown Board Member AZNPF Arizona Chapter National Parkinson's Foundation [log in to unmask] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn