An Open Letter to House Republican Leader John Boehner
March 11, 2009 by Ryan Ward
Wednesday March 11, 2009.
Dear House Republican Leader John Boehner,
I am writing in response to your public statement released March 9th, 2009 regarding President Obama’s decision to reverse the limits on federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research. Specifically your comments:
“The president has rolled back important protections for innocent life […], I am hopeful that the president will re-evaluate this and other controversial decisions that put government at odds with the sanctity of human life […]Congress and the Administration should support bipartisan solutions like Rep. Randy Forbes’ Patients First Act, which would promote stem cell research that is actually getting results.”
On Monday, President Obama reversed President Bush’s policies prohibiting the use of federal funds to support research involving human embryonic stem cell lines created after August 9th, 2001. This change in policy now allows NIH funds to be directed to American researchers to pursue the groundbreaking science that is hoped to generate better, longer lasting therapies for the most serious health issues facing North Americans: diabetes, heart attack and stroke, Alzheimer’s disease, and spinal cord injury to name a few. This decision in no way “rolls back important protections for innocent life” as you assert, and your statement does a disservice to, and misinforms the constituents you represent and the American electorate as a whole.
Strictly speaking the United States Federal Government has no limits regarding the source of human stem cells, and has no laws affording any protections to the American people when it comes to the tissue and techniques used in embryonic stem cell research. As such, President Obama cannot “roll back protections”.
On two separate occasions however, legislation which sought protections to prenatal life and patients was passed by both House and Senate, but vetoed by President Bush. And, it is interesting to note, also opposed and voted against by you. Your own voting record demonstrates that when it comes to bipartisan, reasonable and safe limits to the source of human embryonic stem cells, you favor socially conservative partisan politics rather than the protection of vulnerable people and tissue.
Your support of the Randy Forbes’ Patients First Act is equally disingenuous. Despite the title, this legislation would enact no protections to patients, tissue donors, doctors or scientists; rather it seeks to ban the use and derivation of human embryonic stem cells for research and therapeutic purposes. As I am sure you are aware, the first clinical trial using human embryonic stem cells for the treatment of spinal cord injury is now underway. This trial is fueling the hope that loss of function from spinal cord injury might be partially, or fully reversible. Yet, the legislation you support would quash any such possibility for the sake of your personal ideologies. From this it is abundantly clear that you do not have patients’ best interest in mind.
Finally, as someone who is pursuing stem cell-based scientific research, it is disheartening to read your prejudice against this work. You would seek to support “stem cell research that is actually getting results” however you also seek to ban some of the most promising therapeutic approaches. Scientific research is the pursuit of knowledge and application of discoveries, and predicting what preclinical strategies will and will not actually get results is arrogant and presumptuous, especially when these predictions are guided by personal standards. If you are truly devoted to improving the lives of your constituents and their children, I call on you to oppose any outright bans on the use of stem cells in research and therapy, and support legislation that actually protects donors from coercion, tissue from exploitation, and doctors and scientists from harassment while promoting therapeutic avenues that patients so genuinely long for.
Respectfully,
Ryan Ward
PhD Candidate,
University of Toronto,
Toronto, Canada.
Ryan Ward is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Lab of Dr. Peter Dirks at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, Canada. He studies cancer stem cells in adult and pediatric brain tumors and regularly draws upon knowledge and methodologies generated from the study of normal stem cells.
Comments
6 Responses to “An Open Letter to House Republican Leader John Boehner”
Got something to say?
By using this site you agree to the Connecting for Kids terms of use. Click here to review the Terms of Use guidelines for this site.
Rett Syndrome and induced Pluripotent Stem cells goes “Green”
June 17, 2009 by Aaron Cheung
Stem cell researchers at The Hospital for Sick Children have now devised a method, reported in the scientific journal Nature Methods, that will facilitate the generation of induced Pluripotent Stem (iPS) cells. I have previously blogged about the promise of iPS cells (see related articles). iPS cells are cells which have been reprogrammed from a differentiated somatic cell (such as your skin cells) to a pluripotent stem cell (like an embryonic stem cell, only that you don’t need to use embryos!). The generation of iPS cells is inherently very rare which occurs at a frequency of about 0.01% meaning you can generate about one iPS cell line out of hundred thousand cells. Out of which, many lines fail to satisfy the different rigorous tests necessary to be given the prestigious name of “iPS cell”.
A group led by Dr. James Ellis, and lead author Dr. Akitsu Hotta, at The Hospital for Sick Children has generated a reporter, named EOS, that will facilitate the generation of iPS cells for both mouse and human. The reporter has DNA elements (called promoters) that will drive the expression of a fluorescent protein (GFP) and an antibiotic resistance gene (puromycin) that will only turn on in pluripotent stem cells, but remain off in differentiated cells. Therefore, scientists can now generate iPS cells from different sources and the iPS cells will literally “light up with a green colour” once reprogramming has been achieved. Furthermore, by adding puromycin to your culture, it will keep the iPS cells in a pluripotent state as iPS cells will normally spontaneously differentiate.
To demonstrate the applicability of EOS, Ellis also derived iPS cells from patients who have a neurodevelopmental disorder called Rett Syndrome. Rett Syndrome is an Autism Spectrum Disorder which affects almost exclusively females at an incidence of 1 in 10,000 and is one of the leading causes of mental retardation in girls. These Rett Syndrome iPS cells were green when placed under a fluorescent microscope and Ellis demonstrated that neurons can be generated from these Rett Syndrome iPS cells, the cell type affected in Rett Syndrome.
In conclusion, the EOS reporter will facilitate the generation of iPS and will be particularly useful for new labs going into this rapidly developing field. Furthermore, Rett Syndrome iPS cells that were also generated in this study will be invaluable for future drug screens that may be beneficial to those with Rett Syndrome.
Article:
Hotta, A. et al. Isolation of human iPS cells using EOS lentiviral vectors to select for pluripotency. Nature Methods 6, 370–376 (2009).
Related articles:
Breakthrough of 2008 – Reprogramming
A New Era for Disease Modeling and Drug Screening
Some of our experts
Stem Cell Origins
Cancer stem cells
Stem Cells and the Nervous System
Just wanted to say HI. I found your blog a few days ago on Technorati and have been reading it over the past few days.
You know, I have to tell you, I really enjoy this blog and the insight from everyone who participates. I find it to be refreshing and very informative. I wish there were more blogs like it. Anyway, I felt it was about time I posted, I?ve spent most of my time here just lurking and reading, but today for some reason I just felt compelled to say this.
Well said? Great information, keep up the great work!
Nice site. There?s some good information on here. I?ll be checking back regularly.
Mr. Ward,
As a cancer survivor, I must say that I am morally, ethically and vehemently opposed to embryonic stem cell research. There is simply no justification, other than the callous disregard for human life, for experimenting on the weakest among us.
Study after study has shown progress and roughly 70 advances derived from adult stem cells and cord blood stem cells, yet zero advances have come from destroying embryos. I can’t help but think that perhaps there is some divine intervention going on there.
Furthermore, venture capital dollars follow promising science. Venture capitalists are all over adult stem cell and cord blood stem cell research, but have avoided embryonic experimentation. One must wonder why, if embryonic stem cells hold the promise some claim, is the government the only entity willing to fund the research?
In the name of those of us who have had dreaded diseases, including my own father who has Alzheimer’s, and is also against killing embryos, I ask you to support research that does not destroy human life in a misguided effort to save another.
Respectfully,
David B. Roney
President, Survivors For LIFE
I agree. People should not get distracted or get sucked into the hype. Sure, we might gain valuable knowledge from the lift on the ban of federal funding for Embryonic stem cell research but for those who are waiting for treatments…don’t hold your breath!
I’m continually amazed at people and organizations that put all of their hopes into embryonic stem cell research to provide treatments while turning a blind eye to the reality expressed by Dr James Thomson, father of embryonic research:
“…embryonic stem cells are not being used in any clinical applications yet, while alternatives such as adult stem cells figure in scores of therapies.” and “Ten or 20 years from now…there will be transplantation-based therapies (from ESC) , but even if there was none, and it was a complete failure, this technology is extraordinarily important”
Meanwhile, these same people also turn a blind eye to both the limitations of embryonic stem cells and the huge advancements around the world that have been made over the past 8-10 years by adult stem cell therapeutic treatments. http://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/category/victories-success-stories/
Embryonic…Adult…Induced Pluripotent… What’s the difference they ask?
While Embryonic stem cells (ESC) were previously thought to be more powerful than Adult Stem Cells (ASC) because they can become any cell in the body, new studies on ASC are showing that they can become virtually anything. Scientists recently turned Skin-ASC into Neuron-ASC. http://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/2009/02/25/researchers-make-nerve-cells-from-new-stem-cells-science-reuters/
A decade of ESC research around the world has resulted in no human treatments & because the ESC continue to divide beyond the scientist’s control, they can turn into tumors. ESC also require immunosuppressive drugs, which one of the most common forms of ASC (autologous) used in treatment do not.
Over the same decade of research, adult stem cell treatments have given thousands improved health, extended lives, helped paraplegics to walk… http://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/spinal-cord-injury-sci-stem-cell-trials-japan-plays-catch-up/
Gave a man with AIDs 2 years (so far) free of symptoms… http://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/?s=aids+symptom+2+years
Successfully improved MS & Cerebral Palsy patients, the list goes on and on… http://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/category/victories-success-stories/
ASC are already helping improve & extend the lives of patients with dozens of “incurable” diseases,” 73 diseases when you count only US published scientific papers & well over 100 if you read all of the papers from outside the USA.
Additionally, Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSC) are ASC modified to be able to become any cell in the human body & seem to have all of the benefits of ESC without the tumor potential & with significantly less of a rejection issue; not to mention without the political & religious controversy. http://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/embryonic-stem-cell-alternative-has-another-advance-ips-cells-yield-nerve-cells/
And now, even the NIH is jumping into the ASC research and treatment pool. http://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/nih-says-adult-stem-cells-are-ready-for-the-prime-time-yah-baby/
Why focus on ESC when both ASC & iPSC seem capable of achieving everything ESC can do with a fraction of the obstacles?
Embryonic stem cell supporters say that we could learn a lot from ESC research. Adult stem cell supporters say that we could heal millions from ASC research now.
Which is more important?
The world is treating thousands successfully with ASC. The majority of funding and research should go into ASC & iPSC so we can treat the multitude of patients dying and debilitated NOW?
David Granovsky