Medical advances rely on stem-cell research

I once saw a particularly astute bumper sticker on the car of an outspoken high school science teacher. It read: “Support stem cell research; grow Bush a brain.” Though hyperbolic — we’ve yet to actually grow an entire brain from stem cells — the sticker effectively conveyed the sense of frustration that has characterized the decades-long dispute between religious conservatives and scientists seeking to advance medicine through research on embryonic stem cells. In 2009, the Obama administration reversed Bush-era restrictions on federal research funding, but legislation dating back to 1996 continues to slow progress on the topic. States such as California and Connecticut have emerged as hotbeds of state-funded studies on ES cells. For such a promising area of research, however, the lack of full federal support causes a tremendous impediment toward medical advancement and the patients who rely on it.

Stem cells are something of a blank check for bodily mechanics, endowed with a complete genetic code but not yet committed to a specific expression of that code. In other words, every stem cell can potentially adopt more specialization — as a brain cell or muscle cell, or any of the 200 other types of human cells. When placed among tissue-specific cells like neurons, stem cells assume that form. Thus, they are incredibly valuable in the regeneration of damaged organs, and their utility has been proven through the renewal of bone marrow and cardiac muscles. Researchers believe that further experimentation could yield cures for such intractable diseases as Parkinson’s or diabetes. Another remarkable quality of stem cells is their capacity to divide and renew themselves for long periods of time. This allows scientists to proliferate many generations of stem cells from a common embryo, which forms what is known as a “stem cell line” and ensures the possibility of long-term research.

But the grand promise of stem cell therapy has not been without its complications. Occasionally these have manifested in the form of scientific misconduct, such as last year, when the journal Nature retracted a heavily flawed paper that implied a simple acid bath could turn specialized cells back into stem cells. More persistently, the slow progress of stem cell research can be attributed to the objections of religious conservatives who protest the destruction of embryos in the attainment of viable stem cells. Most ES cells are derived from embryos that develop from eggs fertilized in vitro. Opponents take issue with what they perceive to be an affront to the sanctity of human life, despite the vast potential for improving the lives of the chronically ill or injured.

Their opponents’ antiquated perspective manifested through policy in 2001 when Bush issued an executive order banning federal funding of research on newly generated ES cell lines. At the time, 71 ES cell lines from 14 laboratories around the world were compliant with Bush’s funding criteria. In practice, only 21 of these lines were of value to researchers. Because these 21 lines were not genetically or ethnically diverse, the scope of research was greatly limited, and scientists engaged in ES cell work had to scramble to secure private funding lest their studies be wasted.

Those opposed to research involving ES cells have encouraged an exploration of adult stem cells. AS cells are undifferentiated cells found in the tissues, usually fat and blood, of grown adults. Seemingly, the existence of AS cells would obviate the dispute over stem cell research. However, fundamental differences exist in the capabilities of ES and AS cells. Most apparent is the ability of ES cells to assume the form and function of all cell types in the body. AS cells are limited in their transformative abilities and can only differentiate into cells of their tissue of origin.

Notable changes in policy since Obama took office have fostered a more robust scientific climate for studying ES cells. Early on during his administration, the president reversed the Bush ban on federal funding, and in 2013, the United States Supreme Court refused to hear a case that challenged Obama’s actions. But there is still work to be done. If we hope to remain at the forefront of scientific innovation, congressional action is needed for all-access funding policy for ES cell researchers.

Austin Reagan is a junior majoring in environmental studies and political science. His column, “The Scientific Method,” runs Mondays.