Abstract

any scientists and patient advocates cheered earlier this summer when the National Institutes of Health (NIH) released new guidelines for human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research. The guidelines came after President Obama’s March 2009 executive order lifting the restrictions on federal support for research using embryonic stem cells. Obama’s directive revoked the Bush administration’s restrictions and funding ban on hESC research, which had limited scientists to using only 21 approved cell lines out of about 700 in existence. The directive also ordered the NIH to issue new guidelines for hESC research, which were released in July 2009. These new guidelines specify that NIH funding can be provided for research on hESCs derived from human embryos “that were created using in vitro fertilization for reproductive purposes [but] were no longer needed for this purpose,” and were donated by individuals who were fully informed about embryo treatment and gave their voluntary, written consent to use the embryos for research. The guidelines also stipulate that there can be no financial inducements for embryo donations, and that NIH-funded research must remain separate from privately funded research. Additionally, the NIH will establish a working group of scientists and ethicists to review existing cell lines, determine their eligibility for federal funding, and post those hESCs eligible for federal funds in an online registry. The presidential directive greatly expands the research potential in this field, but Obama noted in his remarks about the order that the “full promise of stem cell research remains unknown, and it should not be overstated.” Many advocates of stem cell research agree: Much more stem cell research will take place, yet much more policy work still awaits action. The spotlight is currently on the NIH working group. This is because until the NIH determines which cell lines are eligible for federal funding, hESC research remains on hold and, as of early September 2009, the NIH registry was still empty. Alan Smith, senior research scientist at Stemina Biomarker Discovery (a metabolomics company in Madison, Wisconsin), says that this void in the registry is a major concern for industry because it is slowing efforts to build new collaborations with other companies that are using yet-to-beapproved cell lines and to spur innovations in stem cell research. It is unclear when new stem cell lines will be entered into the registry—no timeline has been announced—but some researchers are concerned that the addition of the new lines may take years. Other pressing policy issues remain. Some analysts have suggested that the government focus on developing a coalition among all the entities that work on stem cells, perhaps by supporting the formation of geographic innovation hubs. Such a large-scale collaboration between universities and industries could be transformative for the field of regenerative medicine. Other experts, such as Jonathan Moreno, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, believe that the next grand policy challenge will be to develop guidelines for

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call