| Article Index |
|---|
| H.R. 3 - Federal Funding for Embryonic Stem Cell Research |
| Page 2 |
| All Pages |
Page 2 of 2
“Where is the committee transcript that reveals to the majority of Members not on the committee, the ethical questions we, and every family, should be addressing concerning the proprietary nature of the DNA in any embryonic cell. We go to great lengths as a Congress to protect intellectual rights as our Constitution requires. After all, this nation provides patents for computer software, for medical devices, for seed corn genomes… and yet we provide no protection for the DNA of a human embryo? Whose DNA will be bequeathed to the future, and whose will not? How are we to evaluate this bill when so much is missing? How do we evaluate which embryos should be allowed to be sent to research, and how many to be adopted by infertile couples so those embryos can be developed into full human beings? Who will decide? Is it just a matter for the individual couple? Or is there a larger societal responsibility to protect life?
How is the woman whose eggs are being taken legally protected? How is her husband, or mate legally protected in this relationship? What are the rights of the embryo?
Where is the hearing record that informs us how to carefully manage any transfer of human embryos to research so their essential worth is recognized? We are told that the "Ethical requirements" section of the bill will suffice. Yet this section is but 156 words long. It directs that NIH will issue final guidelines within 60 days of passage if this bill. 60 days? That's not even enough time to conduct a session of Congress. I ask, is this realistic? And, who will influence NIH without more Congressional guidance?
Many of those questions remained unanswered as the House Committee has not held hearings on the measure in the 110th Congress.
Congressman Bart Stupak (D-MI) also questioned the procedure that allowed the measure to come to the floor without Committee hearings to properly explore the many questions surrounding this type of research. He also questioned the treatment of human embryos under H.R. 810.
He stated:
“Yesterday in a news show, the commentator asked me why not allow stem cell research on discarded medical waste. Is that what we have come to, to viewing embryos, which if allowed to grow and divide would become human beings, being treated as medical waste? Why are proponents of H.R. 810 so adamant that we do research specifically using embryonic stem cells? According to the proponents of this legislation, these stem cells are our best hope of finding cures. They can develop into all cells of the body. They say medical science can unlock the keys to life. We can cure any disease or injury. They argue we must create life and then kill it to unlock the mysteries of life for scientific medical research.
Create and clone the building blocks of life so we can manipulate and experiment? Is that the line we wish to cross today? We will hear today about other research with adult stem cells, cord and placenta cells, bone marrow, fetal tissue, and unraveling our DNA through mapping of genome, all in the pursuit of finding medical cures for the dreaded diseases, illnesses, and injuries we all wish to cure. But where do we draw the line on medical research and say we as a Nation, we as a people will not cross that line? This question has not been adequately addressed in this legislation.”
Also in the 109th Congress, the House passed by a vote of 413 to 0 the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005. The bill authorized funding for stem cell research from umbilical
cord blood. Umbilical cord blood is a rich, non-controversial source of stem cells. Currently hospitals throw away millions of umbilical cords / cord blood units each year because the infrastructure required to properly collect and store them is not available. When funded, the bill will increase the number of cord blood units and cord blood stem cells available for treating patients, and expanding research will greatly increase the number of people who can be treated. Despite passage of this landmark bill, the House bill did not provide any funding for this lifesaving treatment option that received 100 percent support from the 109th Congress.
In conclusion, we urge you to oppose H.R. 3 and support full funding for research, such as that from umbilical cord blood and adult stem cells that does not harm potential human life, has a track record, and will cure millions from debilitating diseases.
Sincerely,
Kristen Day
Executive Director
How is the woman whose eggs are being taken legally protected? How is her husband, or mate legally protected in this relationship? What are the rights of the embryo?
Where is the hearing record that informs us how to carefully manage any transfer of human embryos to research so their essential worth is recognized? We are told that the "Ethical requirements" section of the bill will suffice. Yet this section is but 156 words long. It directs that NIH will issue final guidelines within 60 days of passage if this bill. 60 days? That's not even enough time to conduct a session of Congress. I ask, is this realistic? And, who will influence NIH without more Congressional guidance?
Many of those questions remained unanswered as the House Committee has not held hearings on the measure in the 110th Congress.
Congressman Bart Stupak (D-MI) also questioned the procedure that allowed the measure to come to the floor without Committee hearings to properly explore the many questions surrounding this type of research. He also questioned the treatment of human embryos under H.R. 810.
He stated:
“Yesterday in a news show, the commentator asked me why not allow stem cell research on discarded medical waste. Is that what we have come to, to viewing embryos, which if allowed to grow and divide would become human beings, being treated as medical waste? Why are proponents of H.R. 810 so adamant that we do research specifically using embryonic stem cells? According to the proponents of this legislation, these stem cells are our best hope of finding cures. They can develop into all cells of the body. They say medical science can unlock the keys to life. We can cure any disease or injury. They argue we must create life and then kill it to unlock the mysteries of life for scientific medical research.
Create and clone the building blocks of life so we can manipulate and experiment? Is that the line we wish to cross today? We will hear today about other research with adult stem cells, cord and placenta cells, bone marrow, fetal tissue, and unraveling our DNA through mapping of genome, all in the pursuit of finding medical cures for the dreaded diseases, illnesses, and injuries we all wish to cure. But where do we draw the line on medical research and say we as a Nation, we as a people will not cross that line? This question has not been adequately addressed in this legislation.”
Also in the 109th Congress, the House passed by a vote of 413 to 0 the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005. The bill authorized funding for stem cell research from umbilical
cord blood. Umbilical cord blood is a rich, non-controversial source of stem cells. Currently hospitals throw away millions of umbilical cords / cord blood units each year because the infrastructure required to properly collect and store them is not available. When funded, the bill will increase the number of cord blood units and cord blood stem cells available for treating patients, and expanding research will greatly increase the number of people who can be treated. Despite passage of this landmark bill, the House bill did not provide any funding for this lifesaving treatment option that received 100 percent support from the 109th Congress.
In conclusion, we urge you to oppose H.R. 3 and support full funding for research, such as that from umbilical cord blood and adult stem cells that does not harm potential human life, has a track record, and will cure millions from debilitating diseases.
Sincerely,
Kristen Day
Executive Director
