Bailey Porter
Editorial Director
Proposition 71, authorizing embryonic stem cell research, is one of the most debated issues on the November ballot, shaking up the religious and scientific communities.
Proposition 71 would authorize embryonic stem cell research through the initiation of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine and significant tax-free funding of research.
Unlike other cells, such as heart muscle cells or red blood cells, embryonic stem cells have no specialized functions. Instead, these cells can be transformed into more specialized cells and can reproduce themselves over time making them desirable for researchers looking to cure diseases.
Scientists hope to harness embryonic stem cells and grow them as replacement tissue for the body.
Currently, scientists are working with a small number of stem cell lines, but many believe further research of embryonic stem cells is necessary.
“Most people who would weigh in on the stem cell debate believe we need both,” said Christine Broussard, biology professor at the University of La Verne.
Critics often approach the debate over embryonic stem cell research as an ethical issue and want no further research being done with these cells.
President Bush has limited federal funding of stem cell research to the existing cell lines.
There is no limit on adult stem cell research, but adult stem cells give rise to limited regenerative cells for the body’s tissues. This is because the adult body does not function the same as an embryo. There are few regenerative cells in the adult body such as hair follicles, stomach and immune system cells, Broussard said.
Broussard said use of cell lines (cultivated cells of a known origin) also poses considerable problems for scientists.
She compared cell lines to cancer cells.
One cancer cell does not become cancer until it divides and has multiple mutations in the gene, she said.
The same is true of cell lines – they must be mutated before they are useful to scientists and then they may or may not have the ability to derive regenerative tissues.
The longer cell lines are cultivated, the more abnormal they become, she said, making them unstable for research.
Furthermore, cell lines may not perform the way scientists predicted when put into a human body, Broussard said.
“This is a big problem and most people feel cell lines are not reliable enough,” she said.
Embryonic stem cells provide more opportunities for success as recently cultivated stem cells.
Because an embryo is a developed fertilized egg, it contains every possible cell type for the body’s tissues and when placed in a culture under different conditions can form neurons, muscle cells, heart and liver cells, Broussard said.
An embryo can give rise to any cell.
John Kerry and other supporters of embryonic stem cell research have criticized Bush for restricting research because of an extreme right wing ideology – human embryos must be destroyed to collect new stem cells.
“Using religion to justify a policy decision on religious grounds is inappropriate,” said professor of philosophy and religion Dan Campana. “However, policies are made by people and people have religious commitments, whether or not they have a religion, so there’s no way to keep religion out of policy.”
Proponents of the proposition believe stem cell research can provide cures for diseases that affect millions of people each year: diabetes, cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer’s, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s Disease, ALS, Osteoporosis and spinal cord injuries.
There are always going to be two points of view from religion, Campana said, especially over a controversial issue like embryonic stem cell research.
Religious conservatives see the Bible as providing guidelines and principles to live by, whereas the more liberal have a broader interpretation, he said.
In this case, the Bible provides stories people must bring into their own contexts.
The Catholic church defines life at conception, which becomes a huge part of the argument against Proposition 71 for religious conservatives, Campana said.
A more liberal approach would be to ask how this research effects the the quality of life for people, he said.
Proposition 71 would grant up to $3 billion in general obligation tax-free bonds to pay for research in the U.S. that some say is years behind other countries.
A cap would be placed each year at $350 million. An oversight committee could borrow up to $3 million for the state general find for startup costs.
The proposition states that stem cell research would boost the state’s economy allowing the state to collect on up to $1 billion on royalties, patents and licensing of research activities.
Opponents see borrowing into more bond debt is not responsible for California’s economy.
Bailey Porter can be reached at porterb@ulv.edu.
