Defintions .

org
Stem cells are biological cells found in all multicellular organisms, that can divide (through mitosis) and differentiate into diverse specialized cell types and can
self-renew to produce more stem cells. In mammals, there are two broad types of stem cells: embryonic stem cells, which are isolated from the inner cell
mass of blastocysts, and adult stem cells, which are found in various tissues. In adultorganisms, stem cells and progenitor cells act as a repair system for the body,
replenishing adult tissues. In a developing embryo, stem cells can differentiate into all the specialized cells (these are called pluripotent cells), but also maintain the
normal turnover of regenerative organs, such as blood, skin, or intestinal tissues.
Stem cells can now be artificially grown and transformed into specialized cell types with characteristics consistent with cells of various tissues such as muscles or
nerves through cell culture. Highly plastic adult stem cells are routinely used in medical therapies. Stem cells can be taken from a variety of sources,
including umbilical cord blood and bone marrow. Embryonic cell lines and autologous embryonic stem cells generated through therapeutic cloning have also been
proposed as promising candidates for future therapies.[1] Research into stem cells grew out of findings by Ernest A. McCulloch and James E. Till at the University
of Toronto in the 1960s.[2][3]
There are three sources of autologous adult stem cells: 1) Bone marrow, which requires extraction by harvesting, that is, drilling into bone (typically the femur or
illiac crest), 2) Adipose tissue (lipid cells), which requires extraction by liposuction, and 3) Blood, which requires extraction through pheresis, wherein blood is
drawn from the donor, (similar to a blood donation) passed through a machine that extracts the stem cells and returns other portions of the blood to the donor.
Of all stem cell types, autologous harvesting involves the least risk. By definition, autologous cells are obtained from one's own body, just as one may bank his or
her own blood for elective surgical procedures.

Time MAgazine

Embryonic stem cells are controversial. They come from the inner cell mass of a blastocyst, the term for a fertilized egg four days after conception. But while many pro-life
advocates stand firm in their opposition to using embryonic cells for research, others, including Senator Orrin Hatch, have cast their lot with the scientific community in favor of
continuing research funding. High-profile activists, including actor Michael J. Fox, who suffers from Parkinsons disease, have appeared before congressional subcommittees
urging that research continue. (Stem cell research, of course, will continue on some level no matter what the President decides; private foundations, clinics, and drug companies
are unaffected by government funding).
The scientific debate
What can stem cells do for us? We dont know, exactly. We do know, however, that because stem cells are undifferentiated, (they arent committed to becoming a liver cell,
say, or a blood cell), scientists may be able to prompt them into becoming whatever type of cell is needed. The cells may also be able to replace damaged or sick cells in a
patient with an injury or degenerative disease.
Where are scientists getting these cells? Until very recently, the vast majority of stem cells used in research came from discarded (or excess) embryos stored at in-vitro
fertilization clinics. If potential parents decide against having more children, scientists working with stem cells might ask them to consider donating the unneeded embryos to
research.
In the most controversial method, scientists can also pull stem cells from aborted fetuses, first asking for signed consent from a patient whod previously (and independently)
decided to terminate her pregnancy. This is the procedure most often highlighted by pro-life activists who oppose supporting stem cell research.
As opponents of stem cell research are quick to point out, there are other, slightly less controversial means of culling the precious cells. Unfortunately, none of those methods
seems to yield stem cells with the same vitality and versatility as those taken from embryos.
Is there another way?
Adult stem cells taken from the blood or organs of healthy adults have recently demonstrated an unexpected adaptability in lab experiments. But these cells are marginally
helpful to scientists, and do not show the same promise as those culled from embryos. Adult cells are fairly set in their ways, and dont seem to grow or replicate themselves
as quickly as their younger counterparts.
New techniques for gathering the cells are in quiet development; scientists are generally wary of disclosure, because public reaction is difficult to predict. Revelations that
scientists at a privately-funded Virginia fertility clinic are growing human embryos with the intent of harvesting stem cells have provoked widespread hand-wringing, among both
advocates and opponents of stem cell research. Advocates worry that publicizing such a blatant and systematic cell harvesting procedure can only harden hearts against the
science; in the crude terms of public relations, using stem cells from discarded embryos is one thing, but purposefully creating an embryo only to dismantle it is something else
altogether. Opponents of the research see the Virginia clinics methodology as the best indication yet that we are carelessly sliding down the slippery slope of destroying
human life in order to advance our scientific curiosity.
Science is the search for answers
Beyond the political debate swirling around stem cells, there remains a great deal of scientific skepticism. Will stem cells help us understand the course of cellular development
and differentiation? Could we develop stem cells for transplant that did not set off an autoimmune attack from their new host? Some day in the future, could scientists use stem
cells to eliminate the need for human subjects in drug tests?

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,167245,00.html#ixzz1cHv55f6k

Federal law
No federal law ever did ban stem cell research in the United States, but only placed restrictions on funding and use, under Congress's power to spend. [4]
In February 2001, George W. Bush requested a review of the NIH's guidelines, and after a policy discussion within his circle of supporters, implemented a policy in
August of that year to limit the number of embryonic stem cell lines that could be used for research. [1] (While he claimed that 78 lines would qualify for federal
funding, only 19 lines were actually available.[1])
In April 2004, 206 members of Congress, including many moderate Republicans, signed a letter urging President Bush to expand federal funding of embryonic
stem cell research beyond what Bush had already supported.

In May 2005, the House of Representatives voted 238-194 to loosen the limitations on federally funded embryonic stem-cell research by allowing governmentfunded research on surplus frozen embryos from in vitro fertilization clinics to be used for stem cell research with the permission of donors despite Bush's
promise to veto if passed. [3] On July 29, 2005, Senate Majority Leader William H. Frist (R-TN), announced that he too favored loosening restrictions on federal
funding of embryonic stem cell research.[5] On July 18, 2006, the Senate passed three different bills concerning stem cell research. The Senate passed the first bill,
63-37, which would have made it legal for the Federal government to spend Federal money on embryonic stem cell research that uses embryos left over from in
vitro fertilization procedures.[6] On July 19, 2006 President Bush vetoed this bill. The second bill makes it illegal to create, grow, and abort fetuses for research
purposes. The third bill would encourage research that would isolate pluripotent, i.e., embryonic-like, stem cells without the destruction of human embryos.
The National Institutes of Health has hundreds of funding opportunities for researchers interested in hESC. [7] In 2005 the NIH funded $607 million worth of stem
cell research, of which $39 million was specifically used for hESC. [8]
During Bush's second term, in July 2006, he used his first Presidential veto on the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. The Stem Cell Research Enhancement
Act was the name of two similar bills, and both were vetoed by President George W. Bush and were not enacted into law. New Jersey congressman Chris
Smith wrote a Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005, which was signed into law by President Bush. It provided $265 million for adult stem cell therapy,
umbilical cord blood and bone marrow treatment, and authorized $79 million for the collection of cord blood stem cells.
By executive order on March 9, 2009, President Barack Obama removed certain restrictions on federal funding for research involving new lines of human
embryonic stem cells.[9] Prior to President Obama's executive order, federal funding was limited to non-embryonic stem cell research and embryonic stem cell
research based upon embryonic stem cell lines in existence prior to August 9, 2001. Federal funding originating from current appropriations to the Department of
Health and Human Services (including the National Institutes of Health) under the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, remains prohibited under the Dickey
Amendment for (1) the creation of a human embryo 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.
In a speech before signing the executive order, Mr. Obama noted the following:

President Obama lifts federal funding restrictions on stem cell research.

Today, with the Executive Order I am about to sign, we will bring the change that so many scientists and researchers; doctors and innovators; p

In 2011, a United States District Court "threw out a lawsuit that challenged the use of federal funds for embryonic stem cell research."[11]The decision was a case
on remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.[11][12]
[edit]State

law

[edit]Legalization

and funding

S1909/A2840 is a bill that was passed by the New Jersey legislature in December 2003, and signed into law by Governor James McGreevey on January 4, 2004,
that permits human cloning for the purpose of developing and harvesting human stem cells. Specifically, it legalizes the process of cloning a human embryo, and
implanting the clone into a womb, provided that the clone is then aborted and used for medical research. Missouri Constitutional Amendment 2 (2006) (Missouri
Amendment Two) was a 2006 law that legalized certain forms of embryonic stem cell research in the state.
California voters in November 2004 approved Proposition 71, creating a US$3 billion state taxpayer-funded institute for stem cell research, the California Institute
for Regenerative Medicine. It hopes to provide $300 million a year. However, as of June 6, 2006, there were delays in the implementation of the California program
and it is believed that the delays will continue for the significant future. [4] On July 21, 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-Calif.) authorized $150 million in
loans to the Institute in an attempt to jump start the process of funding research. [13]
Several states, in what was initially believed to be a national migration of biotech researchers to California , [14] have shown interest in providing their own funding
support of embryonic and adult stem cell research. These states include Connecticut [5], Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts [6], Missouri, New Hampshire, New
York, Pennsylvania, Texas [7][8],Washington, and Wisconsin.
[edit]Bans

and restrictions

Other states have, or have shown interest in, additional restrictions or even complete bans on embryonic stem cell research. These states
include Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana,Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Virginia. (States play catch-up on stem cells, USA Today, December
2004) Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota andSouth Dakota have passed laws to "prohibit the creation or destruction of human embryos for
medical research."[4]
[edit]Policy

stances of political parties and politicians

Policy stances on stem cell research of various political leaders in the United States have not always been predictable.
As a rule, the Democratic Party has favored laws allowing funding for stem cell research.[15][16] President Bill Clinton supported the NIH's guidelines in 2000. [1] Both
the major candidates in 2008 had supported the 2005 and 2007 bills, in particular Hillary Rodham Clinton, Bill Clinton's First Lady, then U. S. Senator for New
York,[17] and Barack Obama, then U.S. Senator for Illinois, who promised to sign the EFCA into law, and was a cosponsor of such bills.[18] Massachusetts
governor Deval Patrick is also a proponent of stem cell research. There have been some minor disagreements amongst members of that party. For
example, Carolyn McCarthy has been a supporter of stem cell research, but restricted to the use of embryos that would be discarded.[19][20]
The Republicans have, generally, been against embryonic stem cell research, but the issue has split the party.[4] Prominent Republican leaders against embryonic
stem cell research include Sarah Palin, Jim Talent, Rick Santorum, and Sam Brownback.[4] In July 2001:
Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), a vocal abortion opponent, call[ed] for limited federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research.... House
Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) and other Republican House leaders [came] out in opposition to federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.
NPR story.[1]
2008 "GOP" Presidential Candidate John McCain is a member of The Republican Main Street Partnership, and supports embryonic stem cell research,[4] despite
his earlier opposition.[21] In July 2008 he said, "At the moment I support stem cell research [because of] the potential it has for curing some of the most terrible
diseases that afflict mankind."[22] In 2007, in what he described as "a very agonizing and tough decision," he voted to allow research using human embryos left over
from fertility treatments.[23] Former First Lady Nancy Reagan and Senator Orrin Hatch also support stem cell research, after first opposing the issue. [4] Former
Senator Frist also supports stem cell research, despite having initially supported past restrictions on embryonic stem cell research. 2008 V.P.
candidate Palin opposed embryonic stem cell research, which she said causes the destruction of life, thus this research is inconsistent with her pro-life position
and she does not support it.[24] She said, in an interview with Charlie Gibson, that she supports adult stem cell research approaches.[25]
A few moderates or Libertarians support such research with limits. Lincoln Chafee supported federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. Ron Paul, a
Republican congressman,physician, and Libertarian and Independent candidate for President, has sponsored much legislation, and has had quite
complex positions.
[edit]National

Academies Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research

In 2005, the United States National Academies released its Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research. These Guidelines were prepared to enhance
the integrity of human embryonic stem cell research in the public's perception and in actuality by encouraging responsible practices in the conduct of that research.
The National Academies has subsequently named the Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Advisory Committee to keep the Guidelines up-to-date. [26]
[edit]Timeline

1993 - As per the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act, Congress and President Bill Clinton give the NIH direct authority to fund human
embryo research for the first time.[27]

1995 - The U.S. Congress passes an appropriations bill attached to which is a rider, the Dickey Amendment which prohibited federally appropriated
funds to be used for research where human embryos would be either created or destroyed. President Clinton signs the bill into law. This predates the
creation of the first human embryonic stem cell lines.

1999 - After the creation of the first human embryonic stem cell lines in 1998 by James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin, Harriet Rabb, the top
lawyer at the Department of Health and Human Services, releases a legal opinion that would set the course for Clinton Administration policy. Federal funds,
obviously, could not be used to derive stem cell lines (because derivation involves embryo destruction). However, she concludes that because human
embryonic stem cells "are not a human embryo within the statutory definition," the Dickey-Wicker Amendment does not apply to them. The NIH was
therefore free to give federal funding to experiments involving the cells themselves. President Clinton strongly endorses the new guidelines, noting that
human embryonic stem cell research promised "potentially staggering benefits." And with the guidelines in place, the NIH begins accepting grant proposals
from scientists.[27]

20012006 - U.S. President George W. Bush signs an executive order which restricts federally-funded stem cell research on embryonic stem cells to
the already derived cell lines. He supports federal funding for embryonic stem cell research on the already existing lines of approximately $100 million and
$250 million for research on adult and animal stem cells.

2 November 2004 - California voters approve Proposition 71, which provides $3 billion in state funds over ten years to human embryonic stem cell
research.

5 May 2006 - Senator Rick Santorum introduces bill number S. 2754, or the Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act, into
the U.S. Senate.

18 July 2006 - The U.S. Senate passes the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act H.R. 810 and votes down Senator Santorum's S. 2754.
19 July 2006 - President George W. Bush vetoes House Resolution 810 Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, a bill that would have reversed the
Dickey Amendment which made it illegal for federal money to be used for research where stem cells are derived from the destruction of an embryo.

7 November 2006 - The people of the U.S. state of Missouri passed Amendment 2, which allows usage of any stem cell research and therapy
allowed under federal law, but prohibits human reproductive cloning.[28]

16 February 2007 The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine became the biggest financial backer of human embryonic stem cell research in
the United States when they awarded nearly $45 million in research grants.[29]

4 November 2008 - The people of the U.S. state of Michigan passed Proposal 08-2, allowing Michigan researchers to make embryonic stem cell
cultures from excess embryos donated from fertility treatments.[30]

23 January 2009 - The United States Food and Drug Administration approves clinical trials for human embryonic stem cell therapy.[31]

9 March 2009 - President Barack Obama signs an executive order reversing federal opposition to embryonic Stem Cell research.[32]