“Latest Stem Cells News”

Five years after the passage of Proposition 71, the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine is awarding grants for stem-cell research targeted at clinical applications. In what both the San Diego Union-Tribune and Knight Science Journalism Tracker are calling an “irony,” ten of the 14 grants are going to researchers working with adult stem-cells.

On Thursday, October 29, the New York Times reported: “In a tacit acknowledgment that the promise of human embryonic stem cells is still far in the future, California’s stem cell research program on Wednesday awarded grants intended to develop therapies using mainly other, less controversial cells.

“The $230 million in grants awarded Wednesday to California universities and companies represent a big step toward moving stem cells from basic research toward application in treating diseases like cancer and AIDS. Grant recipients are supposed to have a therapy ready for initial human testing in four years.

“But only four of the 14 projects involve embryonic stem cells. The others will use so-called adult stem cells or conventional drugs intended to kill cancer stem cells, which are thought to give rise to tumors.

“The grants thus represent a departure from the program’s original mission. California voters approved the 10-year, $3 billion effort in 2004 largely to get around restrictions on embryonic stem cell research imposed by the administration of President George W. Bush.”

A husband and wife pair in western Washington state are trying to raise money for him to go to Germany for a stem cell transplant for his failing heart. Erik and Jenn Gelhar have already raised $40,000 of the $100,000 they need to get him to Germany for the treatment at XCELL Centre in Dusseldorf Germany.

So why does an American have to travel to Germany to get such a treatment? Why are they farther ahead than the United States in adult stem cell treatments for heart disease? According to this article that quotes Dr. Charles Murray of University of Washington, it is because of Bush’s funding restrictions on embryonic stem cell research and cloning:

Erik Gelhar is unable to get treatment in the United States because they are not as advanced as Germany in stem cell research. Germany has cutting edge technology and the people’s view about stem cell therapy is different, Jenn Gelhar said.

Dr. Charles Murry, co-director at the University of Washington’s Institute for Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine, said the U.S. is still in the early stages of stem cell research. He said the ban that the Bush administration put on federal funding for the research slowed down the progression since it was a controversial and political issue (…)

The reason Germans are so far ahead in adult stem cell treatments is because they don’t waste time or money on stem cell research that does not now, and may never, treat patients i.e. embryonic stem cell research and cloning. (Imagine where the United States would be if millions of dollars that are spent on embryo destructive research were put into adult stem cell research instead.)

Gelhar also has to fly to Germany because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the U.S. has ruled that harvesting one’s own stem cells and using them as treatment, a procedure called an autologous stem cell transplant, falls under the same strict guidelines as a new drug. This means that an autologous stem cell transplant, like the one Eric wants, has to go through long years of clinical trials.

I wish the Gelhars all the best in their efforts. (If I lived closer I would go to the concert they are putting on to help raise money.) I pray that Erik gets his stem cell transplant and gets to live a long and happy life. I hope he will not fall victim to the politics of embryonic stem cell research.

from http://www.marymeetsdolly.com/blog/index.php?/archives/904-Why-Germany-is-REALLY-ahead-in-stem-cell-treatments.html

The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) and the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) have agreed to collaborate on stem cell research. The agreement will make it easier to form cross-border teams that are working in similar areas. If the teams’ funding requests are approved, the researchers in each country will be supported by their respective agency, CIRM or MOST. The formal announcement, made today, adds details to a story that ChinaBio® Today originally broke late last week (…)

“Our collaboration will benefit patients in our countries and patients around the globe,” said Wan Gang, Minister, MOST. “We should be aware that stem cell research will require a long-term effort and basic research to address unanswered questions. When we move to medical therapies, it must be with the highest standards.”

“One of CIRM’s primary goals is to accelerate the field of stem cell research as a whole, and in some instances we can do this more effectively through collaborations that involve the best scientific endeavors, regardless of geography,” said CIRM’s Trounson. “China is developing a major national program in stem cells and regenerative medicine that can be effectively matched with California’s excellence in stem cell science that is rapidly evolving in academic and biotechnology settings. I would expect major developments for patients to occur through this new partnership.”

CIRM was established in 2005 by a California ballot initiative that provided $3 billion in funding for stem cell research in California institutions. The money is to be allocated over 10 years. So far, CIRM has approved 307 research and facility grants for a total of more than $781 million. CIRM claims to be the largest source of funding for human embryonic stem cell research in the world.

from http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewarticle/articleid/3562981

THE SWIRL of controversy that greeted President Obama’s executive order lifting the ban on federal funding of stem cell research in March didn’t make a significant return when the final rules were released over the summer. That’s because the National Institutes of Health successfully navigated a minefield of ethical and moral questions. To protect those regulations from politics and changes by another administration, Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) soon will introduce the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2009. The legislation would codify Mr. Obama’s executive order permitting federal funding of such research within guidelines established by the NIH and would require that they be reviewed periodically (…)

Mr. Obama’s executive order overturned one issued by President George W. Bush in 2001 that allowed federal funding only for those stem cell lines already developed. Scientists ultimately found the number of approved lines too few and the utility of those lines limited.

For facilities with stem cell lines developed on or before July 7, the NIH will establish a committee of scientists, ethicists and advocates to examine on a case-by-case basis the procedures and paperwork to determine whether the lines were derived with voluntary informed consent from donors and in a manner consistent with the new rules. This panel would also make the same evaluation of stem cell lines originating outside the United States. There are an estimated 700 stem cell lines already in existence.

The bill specifically outlaws human cloning, as do the NIH guidelines. And Congress already prohibits federal funding for collecting stem cell lines from human embryos, which are destroyed in the process. But the NIH rules make it clear that taxpayer money will not be used on lines from embryos created solely for research. The life-saving treatments and therapies that could result from stem cell research should not come from crossing this clear moral and ethical boundary.

from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/09/AR2009100904188.html

A clampdown on unproven and potentially unsafe stem cell research is being called for by an expert group.
Bionet, a group of expert Chinese and European doctors, lawyers and bioethicists, says countries throughout the world must develop more effective regulation for this emerging science (…)

They had provided a wealth of anecdotal evidence about their concerns that stem cell research was being moved too rapidly into clinical practice without proper study.
He said: “The key is informed consent. Doctors should be able to tell the patient about the short-term and long-term prognosis and the things we don’t know about the risks.”

Bionet is recommending that the safety and efficiency of stem cell treatments is investigated through state-of-the-art clinical trials before they are offered to patients (…)

And there should be quality standards for stem cells used in clinical practice.
These should include the bacterial and viral contamination applied during the production of the stem cells.

China introduced new regulations in May calling for clinical trials before stem cell treatments were offered to patients.
Professor Qui Renzong, vice-president of the ethics committee at the Chinese Ministry of Health, said: “In China there are about 150 institutions now providing stem cell therapy for diabetes through to spinal injuries.” (…)

“When stem cell ‘treatments’ are based overseas, regulatory oversight and jurisdiction is particularly problematic.
We take this very seriously and strongly encourage anyone considering participating in overseas stem cell ‘research trials’ or buying internet treatments to talk to their doctor and follow health guidelines.”

from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8234206.stm

“For the first time, taxpayer money will be used to kill human beings in the embryonic state in order to harvest stem cells,” wrote the Osservatore Romano newspaper, which underlined how this is the result of new guidelines “after President Barack Obama overturned a decision by the Bush administration banning publically funded stem cell research”.

The Vatican newspaper cited the website of the Episcopal Conference of the United States which said “this is a new chapter in the division between biomedical research and its necessary ethical basis, the respect for human life at all stages.” “Although an embryo risks being abandoned by its parents in a fertility clinic, this does not authorize the government and researchers to kill a human being, much less give them the right to force us to finance this destructive project,” pointed out the website cited by the Observer, which also underlined the progress by researchers with non-embryonic stem cells.

According to the American bishops, embryonic stem cells have been given lots of attention, but in reality adult cells are more important for research. The Observer also cited the Archbishop of Denver, Monsignor Charles Joseph Chaput, who said “religious convictions must play an important role in public debate” and “the United States must remain faithful to its founding principles”.

The Archbishop of Denver told the Osservatore that “public life in America cannot function if we keep our religious beliefs in the closet. America does not need to be a Christian country, but it cannot survive if it is not open to acceptance, solidarity, and faith”. Monsignor Chaput also told the Osservatore about his “perplexity regarding US President Barack Obama’s inaugural address where he spoke about the role of science in society.

Science,” he concluded, “must serve human dignity, and can never be above or beyond God’s moral judgment. Jews, Protestants, Catholics, and other religions have something precious to protect: faith in God, and we must defend it with reciprocal respect and without alibis, excuses, or conflicts”. The Osservatore also spoke about the outcry against Obama at Notre Dame due to an honorary degree he received at the catholic university, which “was expected”. “But from the podium, set up in the basketball arena, the president asked Americans of all religions and ideologies to ‘take part in a common effort’ to reduce the number of abortions”.

“Search for a common ground is what seems to be the path chosen by the President of the United States to face the delicate issue of abortion,” reported the Vatican newspaper. “Aside from the heated debates during the electoral campaign, Obama confirmed what he said at his 100 days press conference, when he said that passing abortion legislation is not a priority of his administration.”