Opinion Pieces on Embryonic Stem Cell Research Bill, S. Korean Cloning Announcement Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report

Main Category: Stem Cell Research
Article Date: 25 May 2005 - 11:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   view / write opinions   rate article

President Bush on Friday promised to veto a bill HR 810 that would loosen restrictions on federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research because the research results in the destruction of human embryos. The legislation, which could come to a vote this week in the House, would allow researchers to receive federal funding for the study of embryonic stem cells derived from embryos originally created for fertility treatments and willingly donated by patients. The bill would not allow federal funding for embryonic stem cell research on stem cell lines or embryos created expressly for research purposes. The current embryonic stem cell research policy -- which Bush announced on Aug. 9, 2001 -- limits federal funding for the research to stem cell lines created on or before that date. Critics of Bush's policy have said that the embryonic stem cell lines available for federally funded research are not biologically diverse, are contaminated with nonhuman material and are useless for research into possible cures for degenerative diseases. Bush on Friday also voiced his disapproval for research conducted by South Korean scientists who on Thursday in the journal Science announced that they have created 11 genetically matched human embryonic stem cell lines (Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, 5/23). Several newspapers recently have published opinion pieces on the legislation and research. Some of these are summarized below.

Editorials

• Akron Beacon Journal: U.S. scientists "have been hamstrung by President Bush" in pursuing stem cell research, a position that "harms the medical community as a whole in this country," a Beacon Journal editorial says. "Thankfully, that could change" if legislators "defy the president and expand the American role in this area of research" by approving legislation to loosen restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, the editorial says (Akron Beacon Journal, 5/24).
  
  
• Baltimore Sun: Bush "can't stop scientists around the world from experimenting with human embryos" for stem cell research, and his "refusal to consider [the] use of new stem cell lines" has left the United States without federal rules governing the research, a Sun editorial says. "It's time to unshackle federal scientists and academic research dependent on federal help so the promise of stem cell therapies can be explored in a way that respects the dignity of human life by improving its quality for those desperate for a cure from debilitating ailments," the editorial concludes (Baltimore Sun, 5/23).
  
  
• Chicago Tribune: Bush's threat to defeat HR 810 is "shortsighted" because the science involved in stem cell research is "advancing rapidly" and, without the proper funding, the United States "risks falling behind in this promising field," a Tribune editorial says. The measure has drawn "widespread support" in the Senate and House, and Bush "shouldn't stand in its way," the editorial concludes (Chicago Tribune, 5/23).
  
  
• Denver Post: HR 810 is "commonsense" legislation and should be approved because it "could lead to cures for a range of diseases and holds promise for people with paralysis and even various cancers," a Post editorial says. Bush should "chang[e] his mind" and approve loosening restrictions on funding for stem cell research because the existing policy "slow[s] researchers' effort to work toward breakthroughs," the editorial says (Denver Post, 5/23).
  
  
• Denver Rocky Mountain News: Recent advances in human embryonic stem cell research show that the "science is coming," and U.S. legislators "should take note" of these "breakthroughs," a Rocky Mountain News editorial says. "The question now is will the federally funded medical establishment, with the expertise and oversight it brings, become irrelevant to that process" of advancing the research, the editorial concludes (Denver Rocky Mountain News, 5/23).
  
  
• Honolulu Advertiser: The announcement that South Korean scientists created new stem cell lines "demonstrates the need to more aggressively explore the promise of stem cell research," but the United States is "still locked in an ideological debate," an Advertiser editorial says. "It's time for the United States to revisit its restrictive policy on stem cell research, lest we relinquish our position as a cradle for scientific discovery," the editorial concludes (Honolulu Advertiser, 5/23).
  
  
• Miami Herald: It is "unfortunate" that Bush plans to veto HR 810 because "it puts the fate of clusters of cells in a petri dish above that of saving the lives of people suffering with crippling injuries and diseases," a Herald editorial says, adding that a veto "also will diminish the U.S. leadership role in some of the most important scientific inquiries of our times." The House should "critically" examine the legislation and "vote with their heads, not on the basis of emotional appeals that paint inaccurate and exaggerated images of viable lives being destroyed by evil scientists," the editorial says (Miami Herald, 5/24).
  
  
• Long Island Newsday: Despite Bush's veto threat, the House "shouldn't be dissuaded from passing" HR 810 because the research "is too promising to be sacrificed to antiabortion sentiment," a Newsday editorial says. The "choice between either allowing pin-point-sized embryos to be discarded or used for potentially lifesaving research is an easy call," so "Congress should opt for the research," Newsday concludes (Long Island Newsday, 5/24).
  
  
• New York Times: The announcement that South Korean scientists have created new stem cell lines is "sobering evidence that leadership in 'therapeutic cloning' has shifted abroad while American scientists, hamstrung by political and religious opposition, make do with private or state funds in the absence of federal support," a Times editorial says. Because cloning for research purposes is "potentially much more useful" than extracting stem cells from surplus embryos at fertility clinics, "supporters of sound science must ensure that no ban is imposed on therapeutic cloning that would further shackle American researchers while scientists in Asia and Britain forge ahead," the editorial concludes (New York Times, 5/22).
  
  
• Philadelphia Inquirer: "Stem cell research must be strictly regulated to address the justified fears of cloning or other abuses of human reproduction," an Inquirer editorial says. "But rather than thoughtful debate on the proper safeguards needed, Americans are being treated to more political grandstanding that leaves us all poorer," the editorial concludes (Philadelphia Inquirer, 5/21).
  
  
• San Francisco Chronicle: "The potential of stem cell work puts President Bush in a bind" because his existing policy "doesn't grow with the fast-moving field," a Chronicle editorial says. The "existing pool of stem cells" available for use under Bush's policy "is already too small for effective research" and, "[a]s long as the United States appears unwelcoming, it will be difficult to keep research from heading overseas," according to the editorial (San Francisco Chronicle, 5/24).
  
  
• Santa Rosa Press Democrat: While scientists elsewhere "hit home runs on stem cell research, the U.S. government can't get to first base," a Press Democrat editorial says, adding that Bush's veto threat "tempered" the optimism of the South Korean researchers' announcement. "The president's refusal to consider even this moderate bill is an example of the politics that have kept U.S. researchers on the bench while scientists in other countries round the bases on stem cell research," the editorial concludes (Santa Rosa Press Democrat, 5/23).
  
  
• St. Louis Post-Dispatch: While "[s]ocial conservatives have used their stranglehold on the GOP" in order to "stifle stem cell research they find morally objectionable, ... science marches on," a Post-Dispatch editorial says. "We can join the bold push toward a new frontier and try to influence the direction and ethics of science, or we can fall by the wayside and become irrelevant," the editorial concludes (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 5/24).
  
  
• USA Today: It is "time to remove the Bush administration's barricades" to embryonic stem cell research because "America's best scientists and institutions are handcuffed by the lack of usable cell lines," a USA Today editorial says. Human embryonic stem cell research "will advance with or without federal support," but it likely will "advance faster with the USA in the forefront of innovation, not relegated to the sidelines," the editorial concludes (USA Today, 5/24).
  
  
• Washington Post: Congress should pass legislation to loosen restrictions on federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research because -- although the science "is still a long way from providing cures and nobody knows whether it ever will" -- it is "evidently developing quickly and impressively," a Post editorial says. Bush's policy "has outlived its usefulness, and the president shows no sign of relaxing it on his own," the editorial says, concluding, "Congress needs to do it for him" (Washington Post, 5/21).
  
  
• Washington Times: Opponents of embryonic stem cell research "are on weak scientific ground" while supporters "are on weak ethical grounds," but opposition to the research is "an ethical -- not technological -- judgment," a Times editorial says. "Those whose religious or ethical values prohibit the extinguishing of a life will be fully justified in opposing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research," the editorial says, concluding, "Reduced American participation in an emerging technology will be the likely price of such conviction" (Washington Times, 5/24).
  

Opinion Pieces

• Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Extracting stem cells from a human embryo "kills a living human embryo, an incipient person with all the same genetic information that every reader of these words possesses," Akin, a member of the House Science Committee and its research subcommittee, writes in a Post-Dispatch opinion piece. Although embryos "look like little more than dots in a petri dish," neither their "size nor appearance diminishes their humanity, their personhood and their value" and "[n]either should we," Akin says, concluding that HR 810 should be defeated (Akin, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 5/24).
  
  
• David Broder, Washington Post: Although the legislation loosening restrictions on funding for stem cell research "still faces strong conservative opposition," the House this week "may witness a rare victory by a bipartisan moderate coalition on a major social issue," Post columnist Broder writes in a Post opinion piece. Despite "last-ditch" efforts by the bill's opponents, as well as Bush's veto threat, it is "remarkable" that an initiative "with such parentage" has made it "even this far," Broder concludes (Broder, Washington Post, 5/22).
  
  
• Rep. Russ Carnahan (D-Mo.), St. Louis Post-Dispatch: "Scientists working on [human embryonic stem cell] research believe it may point to lifesaving, disease-defeating breakthroughs," but their work "is on hold because of drastic restrictions imposed by the Bush administration," Carnahan -- a co-sponsor of HR 810 and a member of the House Science Committee and its research subcommittee -- writes in a Post-Dispatch opinion piece. The United States "must ease these crippling restrictions and set reasonable, ethical standards to move this medical research forward" because "lives are being lost" while the research is being delayed, Carnahan says (Carnahan, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 5/24).
  
  
• Cardinal William Keeler, USA Today: Allowing researchers to "destroy new human embryos" to extract stem cells "in the name of 'progress' crosses a fundamental moral line," Keeler, who is archbishop of Baltimore and chair of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee for Pro-Life Activities, writes in a USA Today opinion piece. "The fixation on destroying embryos has diverted resources away from more promising therapies and therefore ill serves suffering patients as well as embryonic human beings," Keeler says, concluding, "Congress should reject this bill and support promising medical research that all Americans can live with" (Keeler, USA Today, 5/24).
  
  
• Michael Kinsley, Los Angeles Times: It is "disheartening" that U.S. policies restricting funding for stem cell research could "slow the process" of finding cures for diseases while other countries "are racing for the leadership role in stem cell research that the United States has abandoned," Times columnist Kinsley writes in a Times opinion piece. Calls for a "moratorium" on the research to allow bioethicists to examine the issues also are delaying research advancements because "no crash research program is going to produce some dazzling bioethical principle we never thought of before," Kinsley says, adding, "We know all that we're going to know about the moral issues. [W]e just have to decide" whether to move forward with the research (Kinsley, Los Angeles Times, 5/22).
  
  
• Stephen Levick, New York Times: Bush's veto threat "imperils progress" and "dampen[s] our hopes" that new cures can be found for life-threatening diseases, Levick, a physician and a member of the science advisory board of the Genetics Policy Institute, writes in a Times letter to the editor. Instead of "promoting a 'culture of life,'" Bush "appears to be furthering what seems more like a culture that cares too little for the suffering of both adults and children," Levick concludes (Levick, New York Times, 5/24).
  
  
• Dale McFeatters, Tri-City Herald: The "real significance" of the recent "breakthroughs" in stem cell research is the "speed" at which they came and that they happened overseas, not in the United States, syndicated columnist McFeatters writes in a Herald opinion piece. Lawmakers should pass legislation to allow federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research because limitations "to constrain and slow stem cell research" did not work and only accelerated the research overseas and in private organizations, McFeatters says (McFeatters, Tri-City Herald, 5/20).
  
  
• David Shaywitz, Wall Street Journal: "Human embryonic stem cell research represents one of the most important scientific frontiers and also one of the most controversial," Shaywitz, an endocrinologist and stem cell researcher at Harvard University, writes in a Journal opinion piece. "Our national debate on it deserves to be informed by our loftiest ethical aspirations but also grounded in our most rigorous scientific standards," he concludes (Shaywitz, Wall Street Journal, 5/24).

"Reprinted with permission from kaisernetwork.org kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/repro The Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation . © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.