Irish Echo editorial: Revisit stem-cell research

And in many places it has been. But the fact that to achieve these pioneering advances will likely require advances in stem-cell research has dampened the enthusiasm in some quarters, especially in the United States.
Stem cells are essentially building blocks for other human cells. Found in human embryos, placentas, bone marrow and umbilical cords, they can be manipulated into an array of different types of body tissues. But because harvesting the cells often requires destroying a human embryo, many social conservatives have called it unethical. Since August 2001, under federal policy promoted by President Bush, stem-cell scientists in the U.S. have been severely restricted in their work. The policy does not permit taxpayer dollars to pay for the destruction of embryos. It thus restricts research in the U.S. to the 64 stem cell lines already in existence. But that number itself is misleading. The National Institutes of Health say only 19 lines are currently available and many of those may not be appropriate for therapeutic use. Meanwhile, other nations are busy creating new stem-cell lines that top U.S. scientists are prohibited from studying.
A chorus of protest to the restrictions has been growing both outside and inside government. Last month, in fact, 206 members of Congress, including some in the Republican leadership and nearly three dozen opponents of abortion, signed a letter urging the president to allow the federal government to finance studies on the estimated 400,000 leftover embryos frozen at in vitro fertilization clinics. Even the Senate’s Republican leader, Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee, a heart surgeon who persuaded the Bush to address the stem-cell issue in the summer of 2001, has said he would like to see the policy reviewed, saying, “I’m very interested in answering the question of whether or not scientists are really leaving this country in droves because of limitations on research.”
Even more recently, Gov. James McGreevey of New Jersey took the bold and welcome step of signing legislation that would establish the nation’s first state-supported stem-cell research facility. Saying it would “set a course to achieve almost unimaginable good,” McGreevey noted that embryonic stem cells are thrown away at fertility clinics every day. Earlier this year he signed a law requiring fertility doctors to inform couples that they have the option of donating any unused embryos for medical research.
McGreevey is already at odds with the New Jersey Conference of Bishops over his pro-choice position on the abortion issue. And some have tried to make a connection between abortion and stem-cell research. But the link is tenuous at best. McGreevey has taken an important step in reinvigorating the stem-cell debate. Under the circumstances, it seems that the sensible thing for the president to do at this time is revisit his misguided policy.