Ethical Embryonic Stem Cell Research Holds Greatest Promise

Statement

Energy and Commerce Committee Vice Chair Diana DeGette (D-CO), the chief architect of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, today unveiled her new legislative strategy aimed at reversing President George W. Bush's 2001 restrictive stem cell research policy. Despite two Presidential vetoes, DeGette highlighted the need to pursue embryonic stem cell research under a strict ethical framework in the United States during the Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee's first hearing on stem cell research entitled, "Stem Cell Science: The Foundation for Future Cures." This is the first hearing on stem cell research in the House of Representatives since the enactment of the President's 2001 restrictive policy.

Below is Ms. DeGette's opening statement as prepared for delivery:

"Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for holding today's hearing on the future of stem cell research. Over the past year there have been many important developments in the field of cell-based scientific research. We saw breakthroughs and accomplishments that couldn't have been predicted even months before they happened—insulin producing islet cells created from embryonic stem cells, induced pluripotent stem cells (IPS) developed from adult skin cells, and monkey embryonic stem cells generated through somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). All of which proves that one can rarely predict the outcomes of scientific research and underscores why it is crucial to make the investment in all ethical forms of research to begin with. This is what we are going to explore during this hearing: where we are now and we are going with stem cell research.

"Every time there has been a new discovery in some type of research besides embryonic stem cells, the Bush Administration says that that it is a substitute for embryonic stem cell research. Yet, in actuality the numerous types of cell-based research are all complementary—they aide future developments or provide the background necessary for some yet-to-be-discovered breakthrough. It simply does not make sense to remove one avenue of research from the equation—we should continue pursuing all forms of ethical research and see where the science takes us.

"It is important that we still pursue embryonic stem cell research, for example, since it remains the most promising avenue of research for certain debilitating diseases like diabetes, Parkinson's and Multiple Sclerosis. However, there is still plenty to learn about both embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells. Embryonic stem cells, as the vast majority of scientists agree, are currently the gold-standard for stem-cell research, and are the basis upon which to measure the success of IPS cells. The goal of IPS cell research is to make them mimic embryonic stem cells. But, how are we ever going to know whether the IPS cells are acting like embryonic stem cells if we haven't done enough research on embryonic cells to even know what we are looking for?

"None of the recent progress in the adult stem cell field would have even been possible without the original embryonic stem cell research. Looking forward, we simply do not know where the advances will come from for each of the many diseases that we need to address—we do not know which will come from embryonic stem cell research and which will come from IPS research. We need to support both embryonic stem cell research and IPS research and let the science decide which is more promising over the long-run.

"We do not yet fully know what the recent IPS stem cell breakthrough means in terms of application. It seems as though it will likely prove to be a significant scientific advance. However, we do not yet know whether it will prove to be a significant medical advance. For example, IPS cells currently remain far too dangerous for actual treatment, and we do not know whether they will ever be safe for humans. Cutting-off funding for other promising avenues of research in the meantime, would be about the most short-sighted things we can do. When we develop new tools, we don't throw out the old ones that still serve a valuable and unique purpose. Why should it be any different when it comes to medical research?

"Although we are making great progress in the field of stem cell research, it has not progressed as far as it might have had the Administration instituted a cohesive federal policy for ethical oversight of stem cell research, rather than simply banning the use of federal funding for research on embryonic stem cell lines developed after August 9, 2001. Progress has been even further hindered because of inadequate resources for all research at NIH.

"With all the new research coming down the pipeline, much of which we have yet to even imagine, it is clear to me that we need a comprehensive, ethical oversight framework for all cell-based research, as well as a national commitment to a robust research program in the United States.

"So, in light of these issues, I have been working to develop new stem cell legislation with my dear friend Mr. Castle, who was kind enough to join us here today. We know that NIH is best-suited to overseeing and coordinating all forms of ethical stem cell research. It is best positioned to ensure that all research meets high ethical standards, as it has long experience overseeing cutting edge research and establishing regulations that ensure the research is done ethically. So, the new legislation will:

- Construct a framework for ethical oversight of all cell-based research, with NIH as a key player
- Ban certain unethical activities
- Lift the ban on federal funding for research on embryonic stem cell lines developed after August, 2001.
"Input from the experts in the fields is key to crafting quality legislation, which is also part of the reason we are holding this hearing. I look forward to a vigorous discussion here today with our witnesses about where the science is currently, where the science is likely to go in the future, and what we, as federal lawmakers, should do in order to best support and promote all the promising new research that our scientists are working on.

"Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time."

Source