A look at Rep. Diana DeGette’s stem-cell legislation in Congress:
Arguments for: Many scientists say embryonic stem-cell research could lead to treatments for a variety of diseases and injuries afflicting millions, such as Type 1 diabetes, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal-cord damage. In theory, stem cells could be used to form organs, brain tissue or muscle to repair damage to the body.
Various surveys show most Americans support the research.
Arguments against: Opponents object to embryonic stem-cell research because it destroys human embryos. Many see research on “adult,” or somatic, stem cells – found in mature tissues, such as bone marrow – as a promising alternative, although some scientists regard these cells as less potentially versatile than embryonic stem cells. Some also point to promising recent research into stem cells from amniotic fluid as a possible alternative.
Highlights of the bill: In August 2001, President Bush ordered that federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research be restricted to cell lines then in existence. But the National Institutes of Health says that few, if any, stem-cell lines existing in 2001 are still usable for research.
The DeGette bill would allow federal funding for research on newer stem-cell lines using donated embryos that would otherwise be discarded from fertility clinics.
The House initially passed the DeGette bill in 2005 and the Senate approved it last year, but President Bush killed it with the first and, so far, only veto of his presidency. Now, backers are trying again.
Sources: Denver Post reporting, National Institutes of Health, wire services.
