 |
 |
# 422 Tuesday, March 4, 2008 - NEBRASKA, AND THE FIFTY-STATE STEM CELL STRATEGY What if every state in the Union was working on stem cell research? Think of the progress we could make! Only-what program should be used in the widely varying states? Would undecided states choose the California model, Proposition 71, with its serious funding-and equally serious restrictions-but strong guarantees of scientific freedom? Or a more narrow research policy, acceptable to religious/ideological conservatives? Or something in between? Hold that thought, please. First, let me talk about food. I do not like vegetables. Philosophically, I am opposed. A salad, to me, is like mowing the lawn and eating the clippings. And yet one of my favorite meals is pad Thai, a noodle dish made of shrimp, tofu, ground up peanuts, thin little blankets of beef-- spices from various corners of heaven-and raw bean sprouts. As often as I can, I visit the Tung Kee Noodle House in Fremont (39226 Argonaut Way-- free plug-eat there once, you'll understand-be sure to get the honeydew pearl drink.) As a practicing non-vegetarian, I should of course decline the bean sprouts. But I eat them anyway. Some oppose all such compromises, as an abandonment of principle. Meanwhile, back in the world of stem cell research. Could we call Nebraska an anti-research state? Well, maybe not-but it is true that in this reddest of red states, stem cell advocates have had to work hard-just to keep their scientists out of jail! I am not joking. One proposed bill, LB 700, mandated half a decade of imprisonment for any scientist involved with Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT), therapeutic cloning. In Nebraska, the opponents of stem cell research take their job seriously. But so do Cornhusker State patient advocates. Led by Nebraskans for Research and the University of Nebraska Medical Center, research supporters here are as dedicated as any on earth. Like swords which begin as hot metal hammered in a forge, these advocates have been tested in the fires of adversity, battling proposed research bans every year since 2000. When a scientist like UNMC's Dr. David Crouse stands up to oppose a state ban on SCNT, that takes more than a little courage. When patient advocates like Julie Erickson, Carol Russell, Victoria Kohout, or Sandy Goodman speak for embryonic stem cell research, they do so in the face of multiple, conservative and religious lobbying efforts-but they do stand up, and take the heat, and that benefits us all. Even so, I considered Nebraska a place to be a place of little hope. Until two brave State Senators, Brad Ashford and Steve Lathrop, sought a compromise. After weeks of negotiations a compromise bill emerged, LB 606. From my perspective the terms were nothing to write home about, when it came to research freedom and funding. The opposition pushed hard for every conceivable advantage for their side-but so did the scientists and patient advocates-and a legitimate compromise was achieved. Even so, when I first read the bill, it irritated me, because its core provision starts off so negatively: "No state facilities, . funds, or fees, . shall be used to destroy human embryos for the purpose of research.(nor) to create a human embryo by somatic cell nuclear transfer for any purpose." In effect, it means that Nebraska would not fund the derivation of new stem cell lines by anything which destroyed an embryo or created one (SCNT, Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer). The language made it sound like scientists were contemplating something bad, from which they had to be restrained. It also dedicated a half a million dollars a year (for five years) in matching funds to non-embryonic stem cell research: official preference for the sort of stem cell research I think is less likely to lead to breakthroughs, although it does include iPS research. That grinds my teeth. But it does allow the embryonic stem cell research to go forward. And an associated side agreement may bring some relief from annual legislative battles. According to the terms of the agreement hammered out by both sides, new legislation on cloning and/or embryonic stem cell research will not be raised for at least two years. That means two years of peace for the stem cell researchers. Two years in which researchers may pursue their work without fear of legislative censure. Neither side is completely happy-but something each can live with is now possible. Is a compromise something to jump on the table and cheer about? Probably not-except maybe for a Nebraska scientist who wants to be left alone to do the work, taking on the challenge, struggling to do what has been more difficult till now. Or maybe for another conservative state, currently bogged down in the mire of religion-versus-science, and which is looking for a middle ground to try. For Nebraska, the rules at least are clear. Assuming Governor Dave Heineman does not blight the hard work of both sides and veto the bill, scientists can settle into doing the hard labor only they can do. At the University of Nebraska Medical Center, three teams of researchers are using embryonic stem cell research to learn "the liver, emphysema and stem cell mechanics", according to the Associated Press. (N. Jenkins, T. Ross, 2/28/08). They no longer need to fear state government interference in their work: no worries of waking up to find some wacko new law has legislated them into outlaws, jailing them, or ruining their careers. True, the best cards in this deal went to the side I consider least promising: half a million a year in matching funds to adult stem cell research. What if they spend the money and find (as I suspect) that they are wrong? It still helps. Even if they find out what does not work, that is hugely valuable. And if their area of funding (non-embryonic) turns out to be right, we need to know that as well. Like a 50-state checkerboard, each separate state must have a place, doing what it can according to its philosophy and policy, strengths and limitations: advancing the research. Different states, different tactics: blue state or red: but Nebraskans and Californians are united by the love of our families. We seek an end to the chronic disease and incurable disability which now affects one in three Americans. We want every state involved as we fight side by side-- for cures which benefit us all. (p.s. for more information about the Nebraska stem cell struggle, go to www.nebraskansforresearch.org) Here is a short selection from an excellent press piece, followed by some key talking points, which might apply to other conservative states looking for a compromise. "Stem cell bill sails through first round. BY MARTHA STODDARD WORLD-HERALD BUREAU LINCOLN - A compromise on embryonic stem cell research and cloning could hit the governor's desk by mid-March, barring an unforeseen glitch. Gov. Dave Heineman is monitoring Legislative Bill 606 but has not taken a position on it yet, spokeswoman Jen Rae Hein said Tuesday, after lawmakers gave the measure first-round approval on 45-0 vote. (emphasis added) The bill is expected to sail through two more rounds of consideration, thanks to an agreement between those who oppose research using human embryonic stem cells and cloned embryos and those who support such research work. Senators on both sides hailed the deal. They said those who worked out the compromise had accomplished what many thought impossible. "I wouldn't have believed it had I not seen it," said State Sen. Tony Fulton of Lincoln. Sen. Steve Lathrop of Omaha. did the bulk of the negotiating. Sen. Brad Ashford of Omaha, chairman of the Legislature's Judiciary Committee, said the compromise represented a "great day" for Nebraska. The compromise on LB 606 brought together groups that have been fighting for more than eight years over whether to ban certain types of medical research in Nebraska. On one side of the compromise were the groups Nebraska Right to Life, the Nebraska Coalition for Ethical Research, the Nebraska Catholic Conference and Family First. On the other were the University of Nebraska and the group Nebraskans for Research." --World Herald Bureau, Martha Stoddard, February 26, 2008 TALKING POINTS ON LB 606 Continues to allow research on embryonic stem cell lines but bans the use of state funds or state facilities to create cell lines from embryos o Would allow UNMC to do research on hESC lines so long as UNMC uses hESC lines developed elsewhere, or uses techniques that do not destroy an embryo · Bans state funding and use of state facilities to create a human embryo through SCNT o Would allow UNMC to do research on SCNT lines so long as UNMC uses SCNT lines developed elsewhere · Makes available state matching funds for non-embryonic stem cell research o Peer reviewed with representatives from both Nebraska medical schools and scientists outside of Nebraska, nominated from the 2 medical schools o Will match, dollar for dollar, up to $500,000 of tobacco settlement funds per year Don Reed www.stemcellbattles.com Don C. Reed is co-chair of Californians for Cures, and writes for their web blog, www.stemcellbattles.com. Reed was citizen-sponsor for California's Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research Act of 1999, named after his paralyzed son; he worked as a grassroots advocate for California's Senator Deborah Ortiz's three stem cell regulatory laws, served as an executive board member for Proposition 71, the California Stem Cells for Research and Cures Act, and is director of policy outreach for Americans for Cures. The retired schoolteacher is the author of five books and thirty magazine articles, and has received the National Press Award. 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