Stemcell Therapy Technology News

A constitutional amendment approved by Missouri voters in November 2006 that was expected to expand and protect human embryonic stem cell research in the state has "run into political and financial roadblocks, putting the future of the research in doubt," the New York Times reports. According to the Times, the debate over the amendment has become a "fight over what constitutes 'cloning.'"

Supporters of the amendment say that it bans human cloning, which is defined in the amendment as an act that could result in a pregnancy and the creation of a human fetus inside a woman's uterus. Opponents say that cloning is the replication of cells, regardless of implantation in the uterus. Some state lawmakers who oppose the amendment said they will continue to fight it by introducing new bills that would ban some types of stem cell research.

"We think it's a false distinction to say that a clone exists only based on geography," Pam Fichter, president of Missouri Right to Life, said, adding that the group supports "ethical stem cell research, and we think cloning was misrepresented to voters. We know that a majority of Missourians oppose cloning." Donn Rubin -- chair of the Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, which led efforts to pass the amendment -- said that reproductive cloning was a major concern among voters. "What we protect is a very promising form of medical research that involves cells in a lab dish, not something that involves pregnancy," Rubin said.

Jaci Winship, executive director of Missourians Against Human Cloning, said the group is considering the possibility of a new initiative against the amendment, perhaps as soon as next year. Members of MRTL have been gathering signatures and contributions for the effort, the Times reports. According to Rubin, MCLC has continued raising money to prepare for another fight over the amendment.

Future of Research
According to the Times, although legislative efforts have failed so far, the "uncertainty" of the research's future in the state has made it difficult for facilities to attract stem cell specialists (Davey, New York Times, 8/10).

Many scientists who considered moving to Missouri to conduct stem cell research will not come to the state because of the uncertainty over whether the legislation will be overturned. The Stowers Institute for Medical Research in late July canceled plans to expand in Kansas City, Mo., because it was unable to recruit top stem cell researchers. The institute also transferred a large portion of its $2 million endowment to Delaware because the political climate in Missouri was too hostile (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 8/1).

Kevin Eggan, an assistant professor of molecular and cellular biology at Harvard University, said he strongly considered moving to Stowers but delayed his plans. "Everybody hoped that Missouri was going to be a good test case," Eggan said, adding, "It was exciting to us that stem cell research was being voted in a state which has very restrictive abortion laws. But it has turned out to be a big disappointment."

Sen. Chuck Graham (D) said, "For a bright shining moment in time, we were moving ahead as a state to protect research." He added, "But now the other side wants to walk away, not only from stem cell research, but all research. Their attitude now is, if there's a beaker or a Petri dish involved, we're not going to fund it." Rep. Jim Lembke (R), who opposes embryonic stem cell research and proposed legislation outlawing elements of the research, said, "As people are educated about this issue, they come around" (New York Times, 8/10).

"Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation . © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.