WASHINGTON — Thwarted by President Bush in their efforts to expand federal spending on embryonic stem cell research, Democrats are now debating whether to overturn federal restrictions through executive order or by legislation when they assume full control of the government this month.

Both President-elect Barack Obama and Democratic Congressional leaders have made repealing Bush administration restrictions announced in 2001 a top priority. But they have yet to determine if Mr. Obama should quickly put his stamp on the issue by way of presidential directive, or if Congress should write a permanent policy into statute.

The debate is not academic. Democrats who oppose abortion say such a legislative fight holds the potential to get the year off to a difficult beginning, even though the outcome is certain given solid majorities in both the House and the Senate for expanded embryonic stem cell research.

read full article

A colony of undifferentiated embryonic stem cells.

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Rick Weiss outlines a framework for a new federal policy that supports funding human embryonic stem cell research over on the CAP website. He writes that within the first week of taking office, President Obama “should call upon the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health to devise a plan for dismantling the current, overly restrictive Bush administration policy on the funding of human embryonic stem cell research.”

Within 90 days, he argues, NIH and HHS should have regulations in place for federal support of research involving ethically derived hESCs with these restrictions:

• The cells must have been derived from embryos produced for reproductive purposes.
• Those embryos must have been deemed in excess of medical need, were no longer being considered for transfer to a womb, and were slated for destruction.
• The embryos were freely donated by both of the adults who contributed genetic material to create them, as evidenced by proper written informed consent.
• No financial inducements were offered to donors, and the donors expressed through an informed consent process their understanding that any resulting cell lines will be used for research and not for the development of therapeutic benefits for the donors.
• All federally funded research on human embryonic stem cells must be conducted under the review of a Stem Cell Research Oversight committee that adheres to the standards put forth in the guidelines of either the National Academies or the International Society for Stem Cell Research.

Read the full outline for the policy recommendation here.

read full article

By Philip Pullella |  Fri Dec 12, 2008 8:56am EST

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) – A Vatican bioethics document Friday condemned artificial fertilization and other techniques used by many couples and also said human cloning, “designer babies” and embryonic stem-cell research were immoral.

The long awaited document from the Vatican’s doctrinal body marked a big step by the Vatican into the brave new world of biotechnology, an area in which governments around the world are struggling to formulate legislation.

The document also condemned new drugs that block pregnancy from taking hold, such as the so-called “morning-after pill” and the drug RU-486, which blocks the action of hormones needed to keep a fertilized egg implanted in the uterus.

These drugs, as well as the IUD (intrauterine device), which has been in use for decades, were deemed to fall “within the sin of abortion” and are gravely immoral.

“Dignitas Personae (dignity of a person), an Instruction of Certain Bioethical Questions,” is an attempt to bring the Church up to date with recent advances in science and medicine.

The document, the most authoritative of its kind from the Vatican in 20 years, said human life deserved respect “from the very first stages of its existence (and) can never be reduced merely to a group of cells.”
“The human embryo has, therefore, from the very beginning, the dignity proper to a person,” said the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith’s document, approved by Pope Benedict who headed the same office before his election in 2005.

It said most forms of artificial fertilization “are to be excluded” because “they substitute for the conjugal act … which alone is truly worthy of responsible procreation.”

Condemning in-vitro fertilization, it said the techniques “proceed as if the human embryo were simply a mass of cells to be used, selected and discarded.”

The highly technical document said only adult stem cell research was moral because embryonic stem cell research involved the destruction of embryos. It also condemned freezing embryos.

Governments Grapple

Governments in countries including the United States are grappling with legislation on embryonic stem cell research.

The outgoing administration of U.S. President George W. Bush has placed restrictions on federal funds for embryonic stem cell research but President-elect Barack Obama has promised to lift them.

The 35-page document also attacked the concept of “designer babies,” either by pre-implantation diagnosis during in vitro fertilization where embryos are selected before being transferred to a woman’s womb, or in attempts at human cloning in the future.

It branded as “shameful and utterly reprehensible” diagnosis aimed at ensuring that only embryos free from defects or having the desired sex or other particular qualities are transferred into a woman’s womb.
It condemned the concept of human cloning “to satisfy certain specific desires, for example, control over human evolution, selection of human beings with superior qualities, pre-selection of the sex of a child to be born, production of a child who is the “copy” of another, or production of a child for a couple whose infertility cannot be treated in another way.”

Saying life was sacred from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death, the document also defended the Roman Catholic Church’s right to intervene on such matters.

“There are those who say that the moral teaching of the Church contains too many prohibitions. In reality, however, her teaching is based on the recognition and promotion of all the gifts which the Creator has bestowed on man: such as life, knowledge, freedom and love,” it said.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which held a semi-annual meeting this month in Baltimore, says lifting a ban on funding for stem cell research would alienate millions.

By Mimi Hall, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama could reignite an emotional national debate over the promise and the perils of medical research using cells taken from human embryos.
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is warning that Obama will alienate millions, and abortion opponents are bracing for a fight. Medical researchers, meanwhile, are rejoicing at the prospect of freedom from a government policy they say has stymied efforts to develop life-saving treatments.

Like previous presidents, Obama is expected to issue a flurry of executive orders after he takes office Jan. 20. Some could reverse Bush administration policies; others could promote his own.

Ending a ban on government funding for research using embryonic stem cells would be among the most controversial.

“The question is, does the Bush policy get replaced with the law of the jungle” where scientists can create and clone human embryos for the sole purpose of studying their cells and then destroying them, asks Richard Doerflinger, the bishops conference’s associate director of the Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities. “We are very concerned about it as a moral issue.”

Samuel Casey of Advocates International, a Christian law firm that opposes abortion rights, says a change in the Bush policy “would give a green light to the kind of eugenic human experiments that people think of when they talk about cloning.”

Scientists say cells taken from human embryos offer the most promise of being used to develop therapies for Parkinson’s, diabetes and other diseases. Some scientists have found cells taken from adults also have lifesaving potential.

“Current policy has depressed the field” of research and caused an exodus of scientists from the United States to other countries where such research is flourishing, University of Iowa researcher Nicholas Zavazava says. But “we are a big country; we ought to be able to roll things back.”

States such as California have gone ahead and funded stem cell research on their own in the absence of federal money.

Obama’s campaign promised broad support for stem cell research. His website says he “believes we owe it to the American public to explore the potential of stem cells.”

After the election, John Podesta, chief of Obama’s transition team, said aides are reviewing a host of areas where Obama might act fast, including on federal funding for research using embryonic stem cells.

Controversy surrounding the research has simmered since 2001. That’s when President Bush imposed the funding ban during his first prime-time televised address to the nation. His decision, a month before the 9/11 attacks, was regarded at the time as likely to be one of the most important of his presidency.

Abortion opponents, Catholics and many political conservatives were elated. Others, including former first lady Nancy Reagan and California’s Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, support the research and have pushed for it ever since.

Twice during his presidency, Bush has vetoed bills passed by Congress that would have lifted restrictions on stem cell research.

If Obama issues an order reversing the ban, Congress will have to act again — and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has suggested it will. A law on the books since 1996 bans funding of research that harms embryos and would prevent funding for research even on cells from embryos slated to be discarded by fertility clinics.

Opponents of the research have no recourse against an executive order from the White House aimed at releasing tens of millions of dollars. But they can do battle on Capitol Hill.

go to the article