While the Federal Government Dithers, Human Stem Cell Research Gathers Momentum Even in the US. (July 28, 2006)

Credits: Charles Dharapak/AP photo (image); data compiled by Science's News Staff  from Media Sources

    Legislation passed by the US Congress to make more human embryonic stem (ES) cell lines available to federally funded researchers was vetoed by President George W Bush on July 19.

Five days later on July 24, the EU council agreed to the inclusion of ethically approved human embryonic stem cell research in its next round of research funding. The €50-billion (A$83-billion) 7^th Framework Programme for research (FP7) is due to start in January 2007, and runs until 2013.

However, in a compromise to placate EU members opposed to human stem cell research the council will not directly finance the destruction of human embryos., i.e. researchers will be unable to use FP7 funding to derive their own cell lines from embryos left over from in vitro fertilization procedures. Currently in both the UK and Sweden national funding is available for such procedures.

As if on cue Singapore-based biotech company ESI yesterday announce that it has produced, and will make available world-wide, four 'safe' human embryonic stem cell lines, which have been made from scratch specifically for clinical use.

Peter Andrews of the University of Sheffield, told Nature, "Most people don't think the existing human ES cell lines are good enough for clinical use," and Sheffield this year built its own facility for deriving human stem cell lines. Similar facilities are being set up in the US and Japan. Other groups are following another option bringing older lines up to clinical standards, rather than starting from scratch.

Two versions of the Singaporean cell lines will be available. "Research-grade" cells will be available to academic researchers for "a modest administrative fee", Alan Colman, ESI's chief executive, told Nature and will be distributed through the A*STAR Singapore Stem Cell Consortium, the government agency that coordinates stem cell research in Singapore.

However, clinical-grade cells will be significantly more expensive, and ESI will maintain control. Any groups wanting to use them will need to negotiate a fee and royalty agreement to obtain the cells and the documentation needed for regulatory approval.

Nature in its featured editorial of July 27 was scathing in its denunciation of President Bush's veto, "The obduracy of the White House will slow the progress of stem cell research in the United States — just as Europe agrees to move forward with it.

"[And] over the past two years, the campaign to win public support for stem cell research in the United States has been successful. Some two-thirds of the American public now support the work."

On the other hand a number of advocates feel that the presidential veto has galvanised supported of ES research.

According to Science, "Rather than being despondent over the veto, many stem cell advocates are feeling pumped up [see graphic]. One is California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who announced last week that the state is loaning the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) $150 million to get rolling. 'I think with one stroke, the president energized the CIRM program,' said CIRM President Zach Hall at a 20 July press conference. Sean Morrison, a stem cell researcher at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, agrees that the president's veto speech was 'the best advertising we could have asked for.' In fact, he says, a donor handed university officials a check for $50,000 right after the White House announcement."

Meanwhile Australian researches continue to be thwarted. The federal Coalition party room expected to debate the future of stem cell research on Monday week (August 7). And yesterday Victorian Treasurer John Brumby yesterday suggested his state, as are a number of US states, would be moving ahead with plans to go it alone. This comes after the Federal Government suggested possibly  refusing research funding, with Treasurer Peter Costello saying he would not fund "ethically repugnant" work.

Mr Brumby told The Australian "In both [the US and Australian] cases we have a federal government that has unilaterally decided without any informed debate to restrict or ban highly promising lines of stem cell research."

"And in both cases it has been left to state governments like California in the US and Victoria and Queensland in Australia to pick up the ball on research of national significance that could have immense impact on our health and our productivity."