Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Court Rules Against Stem Cell Policy

Posted by Soulskill on from the two-steps-forward,-two-steps-back dept.

An anonymous reader sends this quote from Reuters: "A US district court issued a preliminary injunction Monday stopping federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research, in a slap to the Obama administration's new guidelines on the sensitive issue. The court ruled in favor of a suit filed in June by researchers who said human embryonic stem cell research involves the destruction of human embryos. Judge Royce Lamberth granted the injunction after finding that the lawsuit would likely succeed because the guidelines violated law banning the use of federal funds to destroy human embryos. '(Embryonic stem cell) research is clearly research in which an embryo is destroyed,' Lamberth wrote in a 15-page ruling."

7 of 388 comments (clear)

  1. Federal funds used to destroy embryos... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Informative

    Federal funds used to conduct research on embryos that would otherwise be destroyed anyway...

    Why distinguish?

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
    1. Re:Federal funds used to destroy embryos... by Ironhandx · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm not exactly a bio chem geek per say, but I have done a fair amount of research, particularly into the embryonic stem cell thing.

      The problem is, destroying embryo's purposefully is what people think it always entails, in reality thats just a shortcut. Once they have embryonic stem cells from a source(something like a miscarriage etc, cells that would have been destroyed anyways) they can basically grow them in a petri dish almost indefinitely and multiply them almost infinitely. After they have a line of embryonic stem cells going they add a slurry of your DNA to them and viola, embryonic stem cells tailored to you without all that nasty purposely killing embryo's. The thing is, they need more lines of embryonic stem cells as the closer the original is to your line the easier it is for your own tailored cure, but that goes for both types of embryonic stem cells, however it adds more layers of difficulty to the non embryo destroying method than the embryo destroying one, hence the need for more lines.

      There are so many miscarriages and abortions anyways that theres no need to not use the byproduct for something useful. Its either use it or it goes in the garbage anyways.

      Any real bio chem geek feel free to correct me if I've jumbled things badly, but from what I understand, the funding was also conditional upon no embryo destruction, but lifted the blanket restriction against research into stem cells originating from embryo's period.

    2. Re:Federal funds used to destroy embryos... by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 4, Informative

      Federal funds used to conduct research on embryos that would otherwise be destroyed anyway...
      Why distinguish?

      Because it was the manifest and obvious intent of Congress to forbid the Federal funding of such research. See, e.g. the dickey amendment which provides in no uncertain terms that no funds are to be expended on research in which embryos are destroyed irrespective of the origin or fate of those embryos.

      SEC. 509. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act may be used for--
      (1) the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes; or
      (2) research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero under 45 CFR 46.208(a)(2) and Section 498(b) of the Public Health Service Act [1](42 U.S.C. 289g(b)) (Title 42, Section 289g(b), United States Code).
      (b) For purposes of this section, the term "human embryo or embryos" includes any organism, not protected as a human subject under 45 CFR 46 (the Human Subject Protection regulations) . . . that is derived by fertilization, parthenogenesis, cloning, or any other means from one or more human gametes (sperm or egg) or human diploid cells (cells that have two sets of chromosomes, such as somatic cells).

      It is absolutely galling that Obama (& his subordinates at HHS/NIH, for whom he is responsible) would just ignore the clear language of the statute and decide to fund this research. There is just no way to square it with the statute.

      [ As an aside, as a personal political matter, I would vote against such an amendment and for unrestricted funding for stem cell research. As a legal matter before the court here, the question is whether the NIH policy comports with the law not whether the law is a good, or even coherent, one. ]

    3. Re:Federal funds used to destroy embryos... by bcmm · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm not a biochem geek either, but it is my understanding that embryonic stem cells are not harvested from fetuses but from blastocysts - a much earlier stage in the human lifecycle which consists of a sphere of undifferentiated cells, not yet even implanted in the uterus wall. They can't be obtained from abortions or miscarriages, which occur later, but rather are typically surplus IVF embryos. They sidestep a lot of ethical objections by not having any sort of nervous system, or indeed any tissue differentiation apart from a separate type of cell on the outside of the sphere that is destined to form a placenta.

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
      Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
    4. Re:Federal funds used to destroy embryos... by burnin1965 · · Score: 5, Informative

      There are so many miscarriages and abortions anyways that theres no need to not use the byproduct for something useful.

      Embryonic stem cells are not harvested from miscarriages or abortions. They are harvested from artificially fertilized eggs that grow into embryos and have reached the blastocyst phase and have grown to 50 to 150 cells in size.

      The blastocyst that is the source of ebryonic stem cells has never came into contact with a uterus, has never been implanted into the wall of a uterus and absolutely positively never will develop beyond the blastocyst phase since there is no uterus in which to embed itself and start the process of developing the umbilical cord.

      There are ethical issues that we need to deal with but it is important to have the facts on which to base conclusions as there are many people who try to confuse the uninformed and have them believe that the evil scientists are ripping babies from the womb and killing them to collect stem cells. This is nowhere near reality.

  2. Re:Playing devils advocate here by esocid · · Score: 5, Informative
    Yes, but they accomplish different things. Somatic (adult) stem cells are pretty much isolated to tissues/organs. They might work well at that, but getting them to do anything else that pluripotent (embryonic) stem cells can is out of reach.

    About this claim that embryonic stem cell research hasn't yielded anything useful yet...
    1. January 20th, 2009: Researchers produced massive volumes of “universal donor” type O-negative blood from human embryonic stem cells, potentially making blood donation a thing of the past.
    2. December 5th, 2008: Harvard scientists created spinal motor neurons from hESCs, and were able to replicate the ALS, or Lou Gehrig’s disease, process in a Petri dish.
    3. September 8th, 2008: Neural cells derived from hESCs showed effectiveness at reducing the clinical systems of multiple sclerosis in animals.
    4. March 15th, 2008: Scientists developed a way to convert human embryonic stem cells into dopamine-producing nerve cells, holding great promise for therapy for Parkinson’s disease.
    5. February 21st, 2008: Scientists at Novocell, Inc. created insulin-producing islet cells from human embryonic stem cells that effectively controlled insulin levels in diabetic mice.
    6. January 31st, 2008: Scientists coaxed hESCs into functional hepatocytes (liver cells) that may be used for treatment of liver diseases.
    7. September 21st, 2006: Vision was improved in rats suffering from a disease similar to age-related macular degeneration with the injection of human embryonic stem cells into the retina.
    8. July 14th, 2006: UCLA Aids Institute researchers used hESCs to create lines of mature T-cells that could fight viruses like HIV, which destroys certain types of T-cells.
    9. October 12th, 2005: Scientists used hESCs to create cancer-killing cells.
    10. September 24th, 2004: Scientists in Israel derived fully functional cardiomyocytes (heart cells) from human embryonic stem cells, paving the way for hESC-derived pacemakers and heart tissue repair.
    --
    Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
  3. Re:Was this one of Obama's first things to do? by fusellovirus · · Score: 5, Informative

    The absurdity of this "debate" is astounding. Blastocysts, which is the correct, but less headline grabbing, name for the clump of cells the "Embryotic Stems cells" are harvested from are all the result of in-vitro fertilization. The excess eggs that are a invariably a result of this procedure are then left in a freezer until become inviable and are discarded. "Embrytoic" stem cell research puts these cells to a use that benefits mankind rather that throwing them in a trashbin. Anyone who truly has a problem with destroying blastocytes needs to rail against the procedure that causes them, in vitro fertilization. But of course this makes for a far less compelling election speech or political rant.