Draft Stem Cell Guidelines Threaten Research 206
Death Metal suggests we peruse a piece up at Wired on how the Obama administration's draft guidelines for stem cell research could invalidate hundreds of cell lines. "Under the Obama administration's proposed rules for funding embryonic stem cell research, hundreds of existing cell lines could be ineligible, even those that qualified under President Bush. The guidelines were written by the National Institutes of Health and are currently in draft form and expected to be finalized in July. But in their current state, they restrict funding to stem cell lines produced according to new rules that are only now being established. Few existing cell lines will meet those requirements. 'The so-called Presidential lines aren't suitable for actual medical application,' said Patrick Taylor, deputy counsel at Children's Hospital Boston, who criticized the NIH guidelines in a paper published Thursday in Cell Stem Cell. 'But we're talking about many, many more lines. The new lines were created with extensive ethical oversight. They're at stake here.'"
This was pretty much already the case (Score:5, Informative)
The so-called Presidential lines aren't suitable for actual medical application
They were, and still are, suitable for research. Many of these lines have been contaminated in ways which pretty much already precluded any actual medical application.
At Least These Concerns Were Based On Ethics (Score:5, Informative)
At issue here are the NIH's proposed guidelines regarding a woman's consent to stem cell research when her donated eggs and embryos are used to create a cell line. The NIH wants to stiffen them to make sure that a woman has to specifically agree to let her eggs be used for stem cell research. I can understand that because I sure as hell wouldn't want cell lines made from my genetic material without my consent.
The problem is that these standards, if applied retroactively, would invalidate many of the currently-available stem cell lines. Scientists are more than happy to apply these new standards going forward, but obviously want current stem cell lines to be grandfathered in. I hope that the NIH clarifies the guidelines to allow already-existing stem cell lines to be used. After all, these are the draft standards, not the final ones.
I am happy that the NIH concerns do not seem to be motivated by a political agenda. Informed consent is the keystone of all medical treatment and medical research. This is a welcome change compared to the Bush Administration, which made scientific decisions based on religious and political grounds. Snow flake babies? Really? Come on.
The Obama Ban (Score:4, Informative)
Are the media going to do reports on the "Obama ban", like they've been doing on the "Bush ban"? Is it only a "ban" when you take funding from 0 to something non-0?
Re:At Least These Concerns Were Based On Ethics (Score:3, Informative)
It's my genetic material inside of those cells and I may not have a problem with them being used, but I deserve to be asked first. I agree that a grandfather clause is in order to enable the use of previously established cell lines, but I think requiring adequate informed consent going forward is an excellent idea.
No one will be throwing out anything. The cells will simply be used only by labs not receiving federal funding for the research. That means labs outside of the US primarily, and a small subset of labs within the US if the benefits outweigh the hassles of finding funding other than the NIH.
Re:And... (Score:3, Informative)
This will be even harder for you foreigners who don't know the proper term for American and use USian out of complete and total ignorance, but the role of the government is what the people allow it to be. Currently, the constitution and the bastardization of it is the limits for the federal government. The federal government has no power to regulate anything concerning fat nor does it have the power over the cost of medicine.
We are not subjects of the crown here in America. We are not the property of our elected leaders and we aren't subject to the whims of congress outside the established constitutional provisions in which what you eat and medical costs aren't involved.
Re:And... (Score:4, Informative)
I don't ever remember the government attempting to say who you could sleep with,
Then you must be younger than 6.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States [wikipedia.org]
Re:And... (Score:3, Informative)
There's a third option:
- Go around NIH's new requirements by simply going back to the donating couple and asking them if they'd like to sign a new contract.
Seems nearly impossible. Most of the researchers who are actually trying to use the stem cell lines probably have no access to the identifying information. If you're working on stem cell culture, you don't know and don't care who the cells were from, you respect their privacy. Until legalese gets arbitrarily in your way that is. It's not like the cells are labeled "Embryonic stem cells harvested from Jane Smith and Joe McDonald's aborted embryo."
Plus, if you did get the identifying information, contacted them, and they didn't tell you to go to hell, how would that conversation go
Researcher: "Would you sign this new form saying we can use your ESC?"
Donor: "You do research on this stem cell line?
Researcher:"Yes"
Donor: "Well since we're renegotiating contracts, I want to get paid this time, plus royalties on any grants you got with it."
Re:At Least These Concerns Were Based On Ethics (Score:3, Informative)
And if they were making stem cell lines out of embryos without consent, you'd have a point. As it is, they are making them WITH consent, and they are now making the consent form more specific. It isn't the same at all, really.
A right to privacy based on information in your genetic code is already a BIG DEAL in bioethics. While it really has nothing to do with stem cell lines, it is scary to think that your health insurance company could refuse to cover you because you carry genes that make you susceptible to cancer.
But really, it's more of a question of grandfathering in people who gave consent that their embryos were to be used in research with a form that was less specific as to HOW they might be used.
Re:Why does federal funding equate to research? (Score:3, Informative)
Yes. I will definitely tell you that stem cell research would be better off without Bush. In fact, I would bet that if we had a time machine, ALL research would probably do better without Bush, with the exception of "research" done to support abstinence only programs and homosexual conversion therapy.
Although it is true that it was during Bush's term that the first funding actually got passed out, Clinton and Congress actually allowed the NIH to fund stem cell research.
Bush ended the legal arguments that were holding up the process, but only by crippling the scientists.
Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#Funding_.26_policy_debate_in_the_US [wikipedia.org]
for a time line of legislation.