IT WAS one hell of a double act, if you’ll pardon the phrase: a keynote address given by the vice president of the United States – followed by a speech from Pope Francis. Their remarks were addressed to a small crowd, by the standards of the Vatican’s audience chamber, but a distinguished one: pioneering researchers, visionary technologists, dignified patients – and deep-pocketed philanthropists.
They were assembled for a glitzy on regenerative medicine orchestrated by the New York-based Stem for Life Foundation and the , intended to catalyse funding and “reduce human suffering throughout the world”. Its centrepiece, the papal audience, epitomised how the new wave of precision medicine sits at the nexus of science, society and money.
The science was cutting-edge. Delegates heard about bold advances in the use of stem cells to treat rare diseases. There was also time dedicated to new cancer treatments and to organ repair. It was difficult not to be moved by stirring accounts of miraculous cures, and talk of how the convergence of big data, gene editing and targeted therapies will create an “inflection point” for medicine.
Advertisement
But the programme didn’t touch all aspects of this unfolding revolution. There was little mention of the devastating failure of some early gene therapy trials, and certainly not of the repeated scandals that have dogged stem cell research – exacerbated by huge financial pressure to deliver results, in the view of some delegates I spoke to. That sort of bad publicity tends to spook funders.
Nor was there so much as a whisper about using stem cells from human embryos, which the Catholic church staunchly opposes. And the emphasis on curing children – the Vatican line being that it is unconscionable to turn away from “innocents’ pain” – wasn’t mirrored by discussion of genetic screening, whose likely consequence, abortion, is also anathema. While there wasn’t much overt religiosity in evidence during the two days I attended, nor did there seem to me to be much deep engagement with ethical and social questions.
So is this just a well-heeled talking shop, or do deals get done? “You definitely want outcomes,” was how one fundraiser put it bluntly to me. That’s why US vice president Joe Biden was there: to drum up support for his $1 billion Cancer Moonshot. His for a global coalition to address the “constant emergency” of cancer, but his project is likely to be spurned by Republicans back home. That leaves Biden looking for private-sector support.
Fortunately for him, funds are pouring into this area. Sean Parker, who made his fortune from Facebook, was on hand to explain why he set up an eponymous Institute to encourage knowledge-sharing among cancer researchers, bankrolled with his own cash. “Many of us in Silicon Valley have got bored of making consumer-focused products, mostly for teenagers,” he said. So he had looked for a way to use his skills in the services of a more profound effort.
“Pope Francis addressed a distinguished crowd, including deep-pocketed philanthropists“
The mix of boosterism, worthy causes and peerless bragging rights made for a well-crafted appeal to plump wallets, particularly those of Catholics. For those who are neither wealthy nor religious, it’s hard to argue with megabucks for medical research: it’s less nakedly self-aggrandising than many other pet projects of billionaires. But I was still left wondering how usefully the money raised would be spent – and about the prospects for research that might not tug at the heartstrings – and the wallets – of the rich and famous.
This article appeared in print under the headline “An audience with the rich and famous”
