IN MANY countries, James Thomson and Doug Melton would be lauded by their political leaders as scientific heroes. But in the eyes of the US president, we were told last week, they are murderers. It was an obscene characterisation, but a revealing one, exposing George W. Bush鈥檚 morally inconsistent position on stem cell research 鈥� which after a tumultuous week continues to stymie the efforts of the world鈥檚 leading scientific nation in this important field.
Thomson, working at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, unveiled the first-ever line of human embryonic stem cells (ESCs) back in 1998 and he has produced further lines since. Melton is a newer entrant to the field, but his lab at Harvard University now rivals Thomson鈥檚 in deriving ESCs. Both men hope that these cells will one day help treat a range of debilitating diseases.
So it was shocking to hear their work equated with homicide by Bush鈥檚 press secretary, Tony Snow. 鈥淭he simple answer is he thinks murder鈥檚 wrong,鈥� Snow said on 18 July, explaining why Bush was planning to veto the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, passed in the Senate that day by 63 votes to 37. 鈥淭he president is not going to get on the slippery slope of taking something living and making it dead for the purposes of scientific research.鈥�
Advertisement
Snow has since retracted the comment about murder, adding to a swirl of moral confusion surrounding Bush鈥檚 policy. For a start, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act was a relatively modest measure designed to free federal funds for research on a wider range of ESC lines. It would not have included the bolder step of allowing researchers to create new ESCs using federal government grants.
In any case, if there is a slippery slope, it is one onto which Bush jumped squarely on 9 August 2001, when he announced that federal funds could be used to work with human ESCs isolated before this date. Researchers have since realised that there are fewer of these cells than was initially thought and that all are unsuitable for eventual clinical use. The act Bush vetoed merely recognised that his earlier attempted compromise was a failure.
Some Christian conservatives take the view that destroying a blastocyst embryo, which consists of a few hundred cells, violates the sanctity of human life. As a result, they oppose all work on human ESCs, which are isolated from blastocysts. It is a minority view, but it is at least consistent. Vetoing the act, Bush appealed to this constituency, saying that he was protecting 鈥渋nnocent lives鈥�.
鈥淚f Bush really believes it is an act of murder, why does he let privately funded labs continue to isolate cell lines?鈥�
But his moral stance withers under scrutiny. Were the blastocysts sacrificed to create the first human ESCs any less 鈥渋nnocent鈥� than those that must be used to create a new cell line? If Bush really believes it is an act of murder, why is he prepared to let privately funded labs continue to isolate new cell lines? The veto seems either to be the result of feeble moral reasoning, or more likely a gesture to his core supporters in the religious right.
That may be politically expedient for Bush, but not for many members of his Republican party, who face elections in November knowing that more than 70 per cent of the electorate support the expansion of ESC research. It may not be a defining issue in most campaigns but it is emblematic of Bush鈥檚 current unpopularity.
Among the Republican politicians who disagree with Bush is California鈥檚 governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, who followed the president鈥檚 veto by announcing that the state would lend $150 million to the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine. This agency was formed after a statewide vote in 2004 to back stem cell research that was denied federal funding. But the bonds that must be sold to raise its budget have remained tied up in the courts, as opponents of ESC research challenge the body鈥檚 constitutionality.
Even with state funding, California鈥檚 ESC researchers will have to spend yet more money to ensure that their work does not share lab space with federally funded projects. This would breach Bush鈥檚 restrictions by benefiting from federal grants covering basic overheads such as lighting 鈥� yet another consequence of Bush鈥檚 nonsensical policy.
The European Union agreed this week to allow part of its science budget to be spent on ESC research. That is good news, but the field cannot truly progress until the US government engages more fully.