Sens. Specter, Harkin say 'hype' surrounding Nature study harms chances of expanding Federal stem cell funding

Sep 7 2006

Sens. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) during a Senate Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services Subcommittee hearing on Tuesday said that the "hype" surrounding a study published in the Aug. 24 edition of the journal Nature describing a technique that could derive human embryonic stem cells without destroying the embryo is harming chances of approving legislation to expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, CQ HealthBeat reports (Reichard, CQ HealthBeat, 9/6).

Federal funding for embryonic stem cell research is allowed only for research using embryonic stem cell lines created on or before Aug. 9, 2001, under a policy announced by President Bush on that date. Bush in July vetoed the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005 (HR 810), which would have expanded stem cell lines that are eligible for federal funding and allowed funding for research using stem cells derived from embryos originally created for fertility treatments and willingly donated by patients. The House in July voted 235-193 to try to override Bush's veto of the enhancement act, which was 51 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 7/20). The Senate in July voted 63-37 to approve the measure, four votes shy of what would be needed to override a veto (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 7/19). For the Nature study, Robert Lanza, medical director of Worcester, Mass-based Advanced Cell Technology, and colleagues described the technique as removing a single cell - known as a blastomere - from a three-day-old embryo with eight to 10 cells and using a biochemical process to create embryonic stem cells from the blastomere. Researchers removed 91 blastomeres from 16 thawed embryos donated by fertility clinic patients and found that more than half of the blastomeres began to multiply and that in two cases the blastomeres became embryonic stem cells. The method of removing a cell from the embryo is based on preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD, which usually is used to test the cell for genetic deficiencies. At the time the Nature article was published, Lanza said that the research destroyed some of the embryos used but that single-cell extractions that leave the embryo unharmed should be feasible in the future. Nature last month corrected wording in a news release it had distributed in advance of the study's release, and officials from the journal last week said they plan to change the study to further clarify that none of the embryos used survived the experiment (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 9/1).

Comments on Potential Effect on Federal Legislation

Specter, who chairs the appropriations subcommittee and sponsored the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, said reports like the Nature study might make it more difficult for Congress to override Bush's veto, according to CongressDaily. He added that such studies could lend support to assertions that funding current stem cell research is unnecessary because researchers will be able to derive methods of creating embryonic stem cells in which embryos are not destroyed, CongressDaily reports (Povich, CongressDaily, 9/6). "Our job has been made a lot tougher" by statements made by ACT officials, Specter said, adding, "It's very hard to get Congress to focus on stem cell research, so if you give them any reason not to, if you give them a lot of good reasons not to, they brush it off like lint off their jacket." Lanza at the hearing testified that he is a fervent supporter of the enhancement act, adding, "Our hope is that the new method that we describe in [the study] ... can be used to increase the number of stem cell lines that qualify for federal funding within the framework of existing U.S. laws and regulations - and thus give the field a very much needed jump start" (CQ HealthBeat, 9/6). According to CongressDaily, Specter said it is unlikely that Congress will consider the issue before the November elections (CongressDaily, 9/6).

Comments on Study

Harkin, ranking member on the subcommittee and co-sponsor of the enhancement act, said that Advanced Cell Technology "should have made it more clear from the beginning that none of the embryos survived" the experiment, adding that the stem cell research field has "been hyped too much" (Weiss, Washington Post, 9/7). Specter said, "We have a representation which created a lot of hopes ... and now they appear to be dashed" (Hefling, AP/Forbes, 9/6). Lanza said that the method reported in the study "has been used throughout the world for years and years," adding, "Everything I said is absolutely correct and accurate" (Fox, Reuters, 9/6). Harkin also said that even if the method reported in the study could be used successfully, "it will still take years for it to produce a substantial number" of new stem cell lines. Ronald Green, chair of ACT's ethics advisory board, said he estimates the company "could produce at least 50 new cell lines every year from now on." James Battey, chair of the NIH Stem Cell Task Force, said the method has the potential to derive embryonic stem cells that could provide medical advantages. He added that it has yet to be shown if such cell lines would have the same benefit as lines derived from later-stage embryos. Harvard University stem cell researcher Kevin Eggan said the method could delay transmission of the embryo to the uterus in an in vitro fertilization procedure, thus "putting the treatment of the patient couple at risk" (CQ HealthBeat, 9/6).