|
Embryonic Stem-Cell Research Spreads Despite Curbs
By Antonio Regalado
The Wall Street Journal
Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
04 April 2006
For U.S. scientists studying human-embryo stem cells, it is the best of times and the worst of times.
More than four years after President Bush decided to strictly limit public funding for studies of embryonic stem cells, the federal government's spending on such research hit a high of more than $37 million last year, according to the National Institutes of Health.
The growth in NIH funding, up more than 60% from 2004, is one of several signs that despite the heated debate over the controversial cells, U.S. research in the area is gaining steam.
"There is a lot going on in the U.S. The official story [of stem-cell advocates] is how we are falling behind in tragedy and dismay. And I don't think that is the case," said Renee Reijo-Pera, co-director of the Human Embryonic Stem Cell Center at the University of California, San Francisco.
That doesn't mean U.S. policy is popular with scientists or patients hoping for cures. In his 2001 decision, President Bush greenlighted public spending, but only for 60 supplies of stem cells the administration estimated had already been taken from embryos, and for which, Mr. Bush said, the "life and death" decision had already been made.
That hastily gathered figure has proved wildly optimistic, since most of the supplies proved useless or are held in foreign countries and can't be accessed. Only a half-dozen are now in regular use, and newly created cells are off limits for government funding.
Scientists are split on how badly the policy crimps research. Some believe the effects are already being felt, while others say the available cells are good enough to answer most basic questions.
Properly coaxed, stem cells from embryos can form any part of the human body, including heart muscle or brain neurons. The cells are taken from five- to seven-day-old human embryos, a process that destroys the embryo.
What is certain is the research is spreading. Last year, NIH grants and contracts supported about 154 research projects involving the administration-approved stem cells. The spending included $4.2 million for a new, national stem-cell bank in Madison, Wisc., $3,000 for a stem-cell conference in Colorado, and hundreds of thousands of dollars for government scientists tracing the effects of cocaine and marijuana on human nerves.
With little fanfare, the federal dollars are beginning to support research at places like the Maine Medical Center in Portland, Maine. Research director Kenneth Ault says $315,000 in grant money last year helped him pay for a facility that grows stem cells. "From our point of view, the ability to use these stem-cell lines is going to be part of the tool kit for modern biology," Dr. Ault said.
He adds that, so far, the approved cells are enough to carry out research. "I wouldn't say [the policy] has been an impediment to us."
The activity at centers like Dr. Ault's represents a success for the NIH. Early on, the agency concluded that the main roadblock to research was that few experts knew how to grow and handle the cells. Starting in 2002, the agency moved quickly to award small "supplemental" grants to scientists already working in related fields.
"This is not `Joy of Cooking'-type of science," says Gary Gibbons, a basic researcher at Morehouse School of Medicine in Atlanta, who received $110,000 in supplemental funds from the NIH last year to work with embryonic stem cells. "It was definitely a learning curve for us."
The expertise needed to grow these cells also explains why NIH spending has been concentrated at a few institutions, says James Battey, chairman of the agency's stem-cell task force. According to the NIH's funding data, 10 institutions together captured more than 50% of the funds.
Leading all recipients of NIH dollars for embryonic stem-cell research were University of Wisconsin and WiCell, a private institute associated with the school, which together took in more than $7 million in 2005. Most of the money was a contract given to WiCell to collect, study and distribute the President Bush-approved stem-cell lines.
The bad news, say researchers, is that the clock is ticking on those supplies. The more they are grown in the lab, the more genetic mutations the cells develop. Eventually, they may become all but useless. "I think we can operate under this policy a couple more years, but that is not optimal," says UCSF's Dr. Reijo-Pera, who helps distribute two of the approved lines.
Last summer, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, said the problems were real enough that he supported a change in administration policy and promised action on a stem-cell bill that passed the House in 2005. Republicans still haven't brought that bill up for debate, and President Bush has said he would veto any measure aimed at altering his policy.
According to Dr. Battey, the president's policy is allowing "good basic research" to go forward. He says it is true that not every supply of cells is equal. Some work better than others and newer supplies may have fewer problems. "The more you have, the more you could achieve," he says.
The stalemate has prompted several top university centers to begin making new stem-cell supplies using private money. Typically, such work is done in labs where microscopes and other supplies are paid for with donated funds, to avoid any conflict with the government-funding ban. Paul Nurse, president of Rockefeller University in New York City, which has been creating lines, said such steps are "expensive and waste money."
The limits imposed by Mr. Bush's policy have had a silver lining for top schools. Rockefeller and other institutions have raised millions of dollars in private funding to support their work, often from donors angry with the President.
For instance, B.D. Colen, a spokesman for Harvard University's stem-cell institute, says it has raised more than $30 million from donors for all forms of stem-cell research. By contrast, in 2005 Harvard and its affiliated hospitals received $1.7 million in NIH grants for work on the Bush-approved stem-cells lines.
The NIH's Dr. Battey thinks it is unlikely the NIH would match such private donations, even under ideal circumstances. "Would we be spending twice as much if we lived in a different policy universe?" Dr. Battey said. "I would say no."
|
