It was reported last week that, for the first time, surgeons in the U.K. have successfully treated an extremely ill heart patient with a combination of an artificial heart and his own stem cells.  The patient was fitted with a mechanical pump and then injected with 6 million of his own stem cells, in hope that those cells would repair damage in the patient’s heart.

This success raises questions for us in the United States.  First, why are embryonic stem cell advocates—and the President and his administration—still pushing for destructive research that has yet to successfully treat a single human person, while ignoring the need for substantial funding of adult stem cell research?  Once again, AUL is here to point out that adult stem cells have been used to treat or cure patients with over 70 different diseases and conditions, while there have been absolutely no successes with embryonic stem cell research.  We’re starting to feel like a broken record.

Yet the message is still not getting across.  To date, only sixteen states promote or encourage the use of umbilical cord cells and/or other forms of adult stem cells for research.

But an underlying question is also raised, one that is timely as we wait to find out what kind of health care we will be left with once the federal government takes over. 

In relaying the patient’s story, Sky News reported that NHS in the U.K. will not pay for this life-saving treatment.  Instead, the patient said he “relies on charity funding—or travels abroad to implant pumps in countries where governments are prepared to fund the £60,000 devices.” 

Interesting.  This patient—in a country with nationalized healthcare that is the predecessor to what President Obama is seeking for the United States—has to travel outside of the U.K. to other countries that are willing to pay for his treatment.

The surgeon himself stated, “I am very frustrated that all the work that I have done back home in the UK has to be translated into patient care in other countries,” and “”[w]e have helped to develop implantation programmes in France, Greece and Japan. It’s time we did it in the UK.”

He believes that this treatment protocol for heart patients could save 12,000 patients each year.

The article continues:

The Greek government has recently agreed to fund pumps for some patients with serious heart failure.

Professor Papakonstantinou [a heart surgeon at the Ahepa University Hospital in Thessaloniki] said they offer good value for money because patients are able to leave hospital and do not need drug treatment.

But in Britain, the NHS will only fund pumps in transplant patients who are waiting for a donor heart. Around 100 a year are implanted.

In a statement, the Department of Health said: “Before making such technology more widely available as an indefinite long-term treatment in end-stage heart failure, the NHS needs to ensure there is clear evidence of benefit.

Apparently 11,900 extra lives saved isn’t a clear enough benefit.
I’m not sure this is what most Americans have in mind when they think “health reform.”

The article from Sky News can be viewed at http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Health/Artificial-Heart-And-Stem-Cells-Save-Mans-Life-In-Pioneering-Surgery-By-British-Surgeon/Article/200909415387553?lpos=Health_Second_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15387553_Artificial_Heart_And_Stem_Cells_Save_Mans_Life_In_Pioneering_Surgery_By_British_Surgeon

Taxpayers in New York may soon be paying women to put their lives at risk.

The ethics committee of New York’s Empire State Stem Cell Board recently recommended that taxpayer money be given to researchers who have paid women for the harvesting of their eggs for research purposes.  If the full stem-cell board agrees, New York will become the first state to allow such reimbursement.

But the ethics committee shirked a glaring problem: egg harvesting endangers women’s health.  Egg donation requires preliminary hormone treatment, and this hormone therapy is accompanied by serious health risks including an increased risk of ovarian cancer and complications with future pregnancies.  Other risks include ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome (OHSS), which can cause loss of fertility, organ failure, and death.

And in the current economic climate, more women will be putting their lives at risk.  At a “reimbursement” rate around $10,000, women hard-hit by the economy will be more likely to take risks they would not have otherwise taken.  The result is the commoditization of eggs and the exploitation of women.

What’s more is that there is no benefit in sight, and certainly not to the women involved.  Quoting Dr. David Prentice, Wesley Smith in Human Dignity in the Biotech Century explains that it is not possible to obtain even enough eggs to treat diabetic patients in the U.S., let alone all of the other patients who have been promised (intangible) benefits from embryonic stem cell research.  Dr. Prentice has computed that it would take 800 million eggs just to treat the 16 million Americans suffering from diabetes.  Smith concludes, “There simply aren’t enough women of childbearing age to supply all these eggs.”

In other words, the harvesting of eggs will not help produce cures, and women’s lives are placed in danger simply to satisfy scientific curiosity.  This can be categorized as nothing other than the exploitation of women.

In 2008, AUL, in conjunction with Dr. Prentice, provided an extensive report to New York’s stem cell board demonstrating that therapies utilizing adult stem cells are already treating patients and that any taxpayer money should be used for treatments that are already proven to be working.  The ethics committee ignored these hard facts.

Apparently, scientific whim is more important than the lives of women.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Oklahoma City, OK — Last night, Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry vetoed Oklahoma House Bill 1326, a bill making it illegal for any Oklahoma business to conduct research that would kill a human embryo or subject an unborn child to a substantial risk of death or injury.  The Oklahoma House of Representatives immediately overrode the veto; however, the Oklahoma Senate failed to follow suit.

The bill would have banned research requiring the destruction of unborn children.  Maressa Treat, AUL Oklahoma State Director, stated, “This life-saving bill was vital to keeping Oklahoma a leader in the pro-life movement.  The veto is disappointing to all who support life issues, such as banning embryonic stem cell research.”

Daniel S. McConchie, AUL Vice President of Government Affairs, added, “This important legislation was the victim of a disinformation campaign designed to scare the public and prevent them from understanding its true purpose:  saving human lives.  We look forward to educating the people of Oklahoma about why this legislation is vital to the state.”

About Americans United for Life
Americans United for Life (AUL) is a nonprofit, public-interest law and policy organization whose vision is a nation in which everyone is welcomed in life and protected in law.  The first national pro-life organization in America, AUL has been committed to defending human life through vigorous judicial, legislative, and educational efforts at both the federal and state levels since 1971.  The Wall Street Journal has profiled AUL, and PBS’ Frontline program chronicled AUL’s successful efforts in Mississippi.

AUL President, Charmaine Yoest, was on the G. Gordon Liddy Show on March 10th, the day after President Obama lifted the embryonic stem cell research restrictions of the Bush administration. Liddy and Yoest discuss the ramifications of this action and the slippery slope of stem cell research.

They discuss the reasons why we allow the destruction of embryos as a society and Yoest explains that it “is a question of our humanity, of who we are as a culture. To me, the fact that the media didn’t want to talk about the fact that we crossed this line yesterday of human experimentation…That speaks to something about our culture and our civilization and we like to think of ourselves as being the most advanced civilization ever.”

Liddy and Yoest continue by explaining the benefits of adult stem cell research and the fact that they supersede those of embryonic stem cell research.

The interview concludes with both Yoest and Liddy answering questions from both supporters and those in opposition of embryonic stem cell research.

The entire interview is available at RadioAmerica.org.

In today’s Human Events

Despite his talk of economic hardship, President Obama has been on an ideological spending spree — expanding government, increasing taxes, and doubling the national debt. New money pits are dug daily. Consider Obama’s commitment to government controlled health care and the possible nationalization of banks. But little discussed has been the financial ramifications of taxpayer-funded human embryonic stem cell research.

The morality of such life-destroying science aside, it is a prime example of pork barrel spending as it funds the kind of stem cell research that has the least chance of leading to real therapies for real patients. While it’s “only” a billion dollars so far — chump change, perhaps, out of a $3 trillion budget — at a time of fiscal crisis, it’s an “investment” in failure.

Continue Reading at Human Events

Washington, DC — President Obama is set to sign an executive order today authorizing more federal taxpayer spending for human embryonic stem cell research, overturning limits on federal funding for such research in place since 2001.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President & CEO of Americans United for Life responded, “Embryonic stem cell research is the research of the past.  Millions of dollars have been spent on embryonic stem cell research and it has failed.  To pour more money into it is simply a waste.”

Dr. Yoest continued, “Even more, this research destroys lives at the very earliest stage of development.  Adult stem cell research is helping people now.  If we’re going to put tax dollars into research — particularly at a time of unprecedented federal deficits — it needs to be research that protects life and helps patients now.
There is a critical difference between adult (or better, non-embryonic) stem cells and embryonic stem cells.  Non-embryonic stem cells have a clear record of medical success without ethical controversy.  Despite years of research, human embryonic stem cells have yet to be used in real therapies for patients.

Recent advances in reprogramming cells — induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) — only bolster the case that this new policy is nothing short of wasteful.  Researchers are moving to the field of iPSC research because these cells are relatively easy to produce and do not require the use of human eggs or the destruction of human embryos.

Clarke Forsythe, Senior Counsel for Americans United for Life, stated, “It’s very troubling that, one by one, the Obama Administration is needlessly pulling down effective laws that protect human life.  We expect the Administration will soon move to completely pull down the moratorium against federal funding for human embryo research that has been in place since the National Research Act of 1974.”

For additional background, please see http://action.aul.org/escr

UPDATE: the video is now available

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President & CEO of Americans United for Life (AUL), is scheduled to appear on the FOX News program FOX & Friends Weekend on Sunday, March 8 at 9:20 AM Eastern, 8:20 AM Central.

Charmaine is set to debate Arthur Caplan of the University of Pennsylvania on President Obama’s coming Executive Order to overturn President Bush’s limits on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.  The order is expected Monday.

Also, please visit AUL’s YouTube Channel to see other recent media appearances, such as when Charmaine and Art Caplan last debated bioethics issues on FOX News program Huckabee.

Yesterday, Texas Governor Rick Perry announced that the State will invest $5 million in promising adult stem-cell research.  Specifically, the funds will be used to expand and recruit researchers to the Texas A&M Health Science Center (TAMHSC) College of Medicine’s Institute of Regenerative Medicine at Scott and White. The governor also urged the Texas Legislature to continue to appropriate funds to the Texas Emerging Technology Fund (ETF).

“Commercialization of adult stem cell research will provide much-needed solutions for Texans suffering from various tissue and organ disorders while protecting the unborn from exploitation,” Gov. Perry said. “This investment will promote innovation and commercialization in this evolving biotechnology sector and attract top researchers and outside investment to the Institute of Regenerative Medicine.”

Texas is one of 15 states that have passed legislation or taken other action encouraging the use of adult stem cells or umbilical cord blood for research.

Adult stem cells have a proven record of effective clinical remedies, which cannot be said for embryonic stem cells.  No clinical use of human embryonic stem cells has yet been published in the scientific literature.  Medical remedies involving embryonic stem cells are still conjectural.  In contrast, adult stem cells are being used in numerous therapeutic procedures.

Conversely, proponents of embryonic stem-cell research have created a false impression that these cells have a proven therapeutic use. In fact, embryonic cells have never helped a human patient; any claim that they may someday do so is mere speculation.

Given the lack of medical evidence to support the claims being made by proponents of embryonic stem-cell research and other forms of life-destroying research, bans on such procedures have the indirect benefit of allowing research money and effort to be directed to the already productive field of adult stem-cell transplantation and somatic cell gene therapies.  Importantly, these procedures are free of the ethical dilemmas associated with destructive human embryo research.

For more information, see the Governor’s press release at http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/11935/

Today the biotech company Geron will make an unprecedented announcement: the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has agreed to allow the company to conduct human trials utilizing human embryonic stem cells.

Ironically (or perhaps not), the FDA’s decision came right after President Obama’s inauguration.  It is just one of the many steps planned by the new administration to tear down the walls protecting human life.

Geron plans to conduct its trial on 8 to 10 people with spinal cord injuries.  The embryonic stem cells will be injected into the spinal cord at the injury site.  Geron has emphasized that the focus of this first trial will be safety (rather than efficacy), but it’s difficult to see how Geron can “safely” protect patients from the disastrous effects embryonic stem cells have had in mice, as well as the devastating results we have seen in the use of more advanced fetal stem cells in human trials.

For example, in animal testing, embryonic stem cells cause a significant number of recipients to develop tumors.  Using more developed fetal stem cells, a 52-year-old man died when the cells implanted in his brain became hair, cartilage, and connective tissue.  In another case, a group of patients with neural degenerative diseases with violent, uncontrollable shaking received fetal cell transplants into their brains.  Rather than improving, 15-25 percent developed severe dyskinesia (worse shaking than they had before).  This failure of more specialized fetal cells is an indicator of how much more difficult it likely will be to get less specialized embryonic stem cells to work.

Furthermore, as we report in Defending Life:

One of the inherent problems in using embryonic stem cells in therapies is the problem of transplantation.  If a transplanted cell’s DNA is even minorly different from the person’s being treated, the body usually sees those cells as an invader and kills them off-much like what happens when whole-organ transplants are rejected due to an immune system response.  Without the use of drugs to depress the patient’s immune system, transplanted tissue generally doesn’t survive but a few hours or days.

– Daniel McConchie, “Working for Cures, Not Clones,” Defending Life, available at http://www.aul.org/Cures_Not_Clones.

Even other researchers in the industry are skeptical of the safety and effectiveness of Geron’s first trial.  See Andrew Pollack, “F.D.A. Approves a Stem Cell Trial,” New York Times (Jan. 23, 2009), available at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/business/23stem.html.

The lack of success in animal trials, the lack of success in human trials using more advanced fetal cells, and the skepticism of researchers in the field beg the question: Why, in this time of economic trouble, is the FDA allowing clinical research that is dangerous and ineffective?  All the while, more prominent research using adult stem cells-which has already helped human patients with over 70 different conditions and diseases-remains underfunded and underutilized.

Perhaps the answer lies in the timing of the decision — on the inauguration of the most pro-abortion President in U.S. history.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 11, 2008

Americans United for Life Releases Eight New Model Legislation & Policy Guides: Twenty-Three Model Legislation & Policy Guides Now Available

Chicago, Illinois — Americans United for Life (AUL) today released its 2009 Model Legislation & Policy Guides. With the addition of eight new guides this year, AUL now offers 23 pieces of model legislation on key issues related to abortion, protection of unborn victims of violence, bioethics, healthcare rights of conscience, and the end-of-life.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, AUL President & CEO said, “AUL is the leading developer of cutting-edge pro-life legislation that saves lives today and lays the groundwork for a nation in which everyone is welcomed in life and protected in law.”

New additions to AUL’s library of model legislation include a state legislative resolution opposing the federal Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), a prohibition on coerced abortions, and The Child Protection Act—comprehensive legislation to ensure abortion providers report child sexual abuse and prevent the transportation of children across state lines for clandestine abortions.

Denise Burke, AUL Vice President of Legal Affairs added, “Each year, AUL legal and policy experts provide extensive consulting and support to legislators across the nation, helping to enact protective laws that advance a culture of life. We look forward to partnering with legislators and pro-life allies in 2009 to build on our past successes.”

All of AUL’s Model Legislation & Policy Guides are available at http://www.aul.org/Legislative_Guides

Today’s Wall Street Journal reports on the agenda of the incoming Congress. Near the top of the list is expansion of federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. We’ve released the following statement in response.

Embryonic Stem Cell Research Unethical Waste of Taxpayer Money Says Americans United for Life President

Washington, DC — Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President & CEO of Americans United for Life released the following statement in response to news that leaders in Congress plan to make funding embryo destructive stem cell research a priority.

Given the current state of the economy, to squander taxpayer resources on research that destroys human embryos, that shows no actual therapeutic results, and that in fact runs counter to the latest stem cell discoveries (induced pluripotent stem cells or iPSCs) is nothing more than ideologically-driven government at its very worst.

It is mystifying why Speaker Pelosi and other leaders in Congress continue to push for funding to destroy human embryos in the face of continued success with stem cells from bone marrow, umbilical cords, and other non-embryonic sources.

On November 4, 2008, the pro-life movement suffered losses on five state ballot initiatives. Yet there is much we can learn from the three pro-life ballot initiatives defeated (in California, Colorado, and South Dakota) and the two anti-life ballot initiatives passed (in Michigan and Washington). 

Specifically, these losses demonstrate that legislative efforts at the state level must remain at the forefront of the cause for life during the coming Obama administration. With dangerous legislation like the Freedom of Choice Act—a radical bill Obama has promised to sign—looming, pro-life forces continue to enact laws protecting women and the unborn from the negative impact of abortion and take immediate action to counter the increased efforts by abortion advocates to enshrine abortion-on-demand into American law. We have learned that our greatest successes—as demonstrated in South Dakota—have come not through ballot initiatives, but through such state legislative action.

To read the entire article, please visit the Culture of Life Foundation’s website at http://culture-of-life.org//content/view/519/1/

During the 110th Congress, at least 97 bills and resolutions were considered in the areas of abortion, contraception, stem-cell research and cloning, artificial reproductive technologies, genetic counseling, healthcare rights of conscience, and the end-of-life.

Read the full article at AUL.org/110Review

Americans United for Life (AUL) today released analysis of the results of yesterday’s life-related ballot initiatives. The election saw pro-life ballot initiatives on abortion defeated in California, Colorado, and South Dakota while initiatives legalizing physician-assisted suicide in Washington state and destructive embryonic stem cell research in Michigan were approved.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President & CEO of AUL said: “We applaud the work of those who strove to protect human life through state ballot initiatives this year. We will continue working at both the state and federal levels in the days ahead to advance the culture of life. These results do not square with an American electorate that is increasingly pro-life. The life movement will reassess and regroup for the next election cycle with new ways to communicate that even the weakest amongst us should be welcomed in life and defended in law.”

California: Defeat of Proposition 4 (Parental Notice)
For the third time in six years, California voters failed to pass Proposition 4, or “Sarah’s Law,” an amendment to the California Constitution that would have protected parental rights and the safety of minors by ensuring that parents are notified of their minor daughter’s abortion at least 48 hours prior to the abortion.

“The defeat of Proposition 4 is a loss for California parents and children who remain vulnerable to sexual abuse, coerced abortions, and inadequate care at abortion facilities” said Denise Burke, AUL Vice President of Legal Affairs. “Proposition 4 would have put California in line with the rest of the nation, as the vast majority of the states have enacted parental involvement laws.”

Washington: Approval of Initiative 1000 (Physician-Assisted Suicide)
In Washington state, I-1000 was approved by voters, making Washington the second state — after Oregon — to legalize physician-assisted suicide. The newly enacted measure creates financial incentives for healthcare insurance companies to deny coverage for life-saving treatment and to pressure vulnerable patients to choose physician-assisted suicide. In addition, the measure does not provide adequate safeguards for those suffering from treatable mental illnesses, and requires physicians participating in patient suicides to falsify death certificates.

“The approval of Washington Initiative 1000 poses dangers for the rest of the nation,” stated J. Margaret Datiles, AUL Staff Counsel. “Now that physician-assisted suicide has been legalized in a state other than Oregon, assisted-suicide advocates will be working relentlessly to legalize the practice across the country.”

Michigan: Approval of Proposal 2 (Embryonic Stem-Cell Research)
Michigan voters approved Proposal 2, the “Stem Cell Initiative.” The amendment legalizes destructive research on human embryos, and will allow government funding for research on human embryos produced in fertility clinics.

“It’s deeply troubling that a state would vote to legalize destructive embryonic stem-cell research at a time when research using adult stem cells is making such progress. It is truly a waste,” added Smith.

South Dakota: Defeat of Initiated Measure 11 (Abortion Ban)
South Dakota failed to pass Initiated Measure 11, a constitutional amendment that would have banned abortions in South Dakota, except for those performed in cases of rape or incest, or when continued pregnancy severely endangers the woman’s life or health. In 2006, South Dakota voters failed to pass a similar ban.

“Although ultimately unsuccessful, Initiated Measure 11 furthered the debate over the impact of abortion on women, the unborn, and our nation,” said AUL Senior Counsel Clarke Forsythe. “Given the mounting evidence of the negative impact of abortion, this is a discussion that we must continue to pursue in the days ahead.”

Colorado: Defeat of Proposition 48 (Human Life Amendment)
Colorado voters failed to pass Proposition 48, the “Colorado Equal Rights Amendment,” which would have amended the Colorado Constitution to define “person” as “any human being from the moment of fertilization,” impacting actions undertaken by the State and its officials.

“As with the South Dakota abortion ban, the Colorado Human Life Amendment sparked needed debate and discussion within the pro-life movement,” said Denise Burke, AUL Vice President of Legal Affairs, “We are confident that the pro-life movement will emerge from this election cycle stronger, wiser, and more determined.”

With today’s election, the pro-life movement is at a critical crossroads. We need every pro-life American to vote today!

But after we’ve voted and the dust settles, what will we do next? Please join me and our AUL experts for a post-election conference call (toll free) on Wednesday, November 5 at 3pm ET (2pm CT, 1pm MT, 12pm PT) for 30 minutes of pro-life election summary and analysis, followed by a time of Q&A.

We will discuss the impact of the new President, the changed makeup of Congress, countless state legislative races, and the five pro-life state ballot measures.

To join the call, you must register. Visit http://tinyurl.com/5gfebx to sign up ASAP.

And please invite your friends to join us.

In the comments, Gary asks:

I heard Mr. McConchie on KTOK in OKC this morning and I understood him to say that we have no proof of embryonic stem cell research producing any results but there is alot of evidence adult stem cell research helping people. Can you please provide links to these statistics.

Thanks for asking, Gary. Great question.

Our friends at the Do No Harm coaltion have a website devoted to the successes of adult stem cells. They list 73 diseases and conditions where patients are experiencing benefits from adult stem cells. They include a list of peer-reviewed resources (PDF) to back their claim.

In contrast, the number of conditions being treated with embryonic stem cells is 0.

For more on stem cell research, see Working for Cures, Not Clones: An Overview of Cloning and Stem Cell Research from our book Defending Life, Mr. McConchie’s testimony before the Oklahoma House this week, and Adult Stem Cells from The President’s Council on Bioethics.

While the Presidential election has naturally garnered the majority of the media’s and the public’s attention, there are also critical races and issues being considered in the states.  Five states, California, Colorado, Michigan, South Dakota, and Washington are considering ballot initiatives that directly implicate important life issues:  abortion, biotechnologies, and the end-of-life.

California Proposition 4: Parental Notice

Proposition 4, or the “Abortion Waiting Period and Parental Notification Initiative” (also known to its supporters as “Sarah’s Law”), will appear on the November 4, 2008 ballot in California.  Proposition 4 proposes a new amendment to the California Constitution that would ensure that parents are notified (and involved) when their minor daughters are considering abortion by requiring abortion providers to notify the minor’s parent, legal guardian, or, if parental abuse has been reported, an alternative family member.  Once the parent or guardian is notified, the provider may not perform an abortion on the minor for 48 hours.
In addition, the initiative mandates that abortion providers report statistical information about all abortions (including abortions on minors) to state officials, requires the minor’s non-coerced consent for an abortion, and authorizes monetary damages against physicians if any portion of the new law is violated.

For more information, click here.

Colorado Proposition 48: Human Life Amendment

Proposition 48, the “Colorado Equal Rights Amendment,” proposes amending the Colorado Constitution to define “person” to “include any human being from the moment of fertilization.”  This definition of “personhood” would apply to specific sections of the Colorado Constitution and would inform future actions take by the State, the state government, and state officials.

For more information, click here

Michigan Proposal 2: Embryonic Stem-Cell Research

The “Stem Cell Initiative,” also known as “CureMichigan,” will appear on the November 4, 2008 ballot as Proposal 2.  This amendment would allow unregulated and unrestricted destruction of human embryos for research purposes.  It would also allow government funding for research on human embryos produced in fertility clinics and could open the door for the legalization of human cloning.

Proposal 2 would drastically alter existing Michigan law.  Michigan currently prohibits “nontherapeutic research” on a “live human embryo, fetus, or neonate,” fetal experimentation, and human cloning.

For more information, click here (PDF, pages 14-16).

South Dakota Initiated Measure 11: Abortion Ban

An abortion ban initiative, known as “Initiated Measure 11,” will appear on the November 2008 ballot in South Dakota as a constitutional amendment.  If voters approve it, the South Dakota Constitution would ban all abortions except for those performed in cases of rape or incest, or when pregnancy severely endangers the woman’s life or health.  Anyone performing an abortion in violation of the amendment could be charged with a Class 4 felony, which in South Dakota carries a maximum punishment of 10 years in jail and a $20,000 fine.

For more information, click here (PDF, page 8).

Washington Initiative 1000: Legalization of Physician-Assisted Suicide

Washington Initiative 1000, also known as “I-1000,” purports to give “mentally competent, terminally ill adults, medically-predicted to die within six months,” the legal choice to request and self-administer a lethal overdose of medication prescribed by a physician.  The measure requires two oral and one written requests by the patient, two physicians to diagnose the patient and determine the patient is competent, a waiting period, and physician verification of the patient decision.  Physicians, patients, and others acting in “good faith compliance” with the measure would not face criminal or civil liability.

For more information, click here.

Chicago, Illinois — Americans United for Life (AUL) Vice President Daniel McConchie is scheduled to testify before the Oklahoma House of Representatives Health Subcommittee on Thursday, October 16 at 2:30 pm. Mr. McConchie will be addressing the moral and ethical issues surrounding stem cell research

AUL President Dr. Charmaine Yoest said, “The only stem cell research that State governments should be promoting is stem cell research that upholds the dignity of every human being. Oklahomans can be proud that their state is taking a lead in pro-life stem cell research.”

Oklahoma this year passed the Advancement in Stem Cell Cures and Therapies Act (HB 3126), which is designed to encourage and foster stem cell research using only adult stem cells. The bill was sponsored by Rep. John T. Enns, who suffered a spinal cord injury in a farming accident in 2004.

Mr. McConchie said, “We are seeing amazing advances from stem cell research every day. What most people don’t realize is that all of these advances are from adult stem cell research, not embryonic. Oklahoma can be a leader in cutting-edge research that doesn’t violate the sanctity of human life, and Representative Enns’ bill leads the way.”

The Health Subcommittee is hearing testimony as part of an interim study on the bill.

Mr. McConchie is available for interviews.

Last week, long-time friend of AUL, Representative (Dr.) David Weldon went to the House floor and stated with authority, “[T]here is no medical reason to proceed with research into cloning human embryos for their stem cells because that science is obsolete, it is more cumbersome, it is more expensive.  We have a better, quicker, easier way to do it.”

Dr. Weldon was referring to recent breakthroughs this summer, which he termed “breath-taking” and thought to be “impossible” just a few short years ago.  Specifically, he highlighted two such breakthroughs.

First, Dr. Weldon explained that researchers at Harvard University recently used mice to show that it is possible to directly reprogram adult cells in the pancreas into insulin-producing cells, without removing any cells from the pancreas.  In other words, these researchers were able to directly and specifically transform one adult cell type into another adult cell type.  AUL reported on this breakthrough here.

Dr. Weldon added that these researchers have “shown that, in principle, it is possible to induce the body to heal itself by reprogramming one cell type into another.”  In other words, we don’t need cloning, and we don’t need embryonic stem cell research, in order to reach cures and treatments for the millions of suffering patients in the U.S.

The second breakthrough reported by Dr. Weldon also involved a reprogramming technique.  In this breakthrough, researchers from Harvard and Columbia were able to create 21 disease-specific stem cell lines that will enable researchers to study diseases such as Lou Gehrig’s Disease, Type I diabetes, and Parkinson’s disease.  And again, through the reprogramming technique, researchers will be able to study these diseases—in the quest for cures and treatments—without the creation, use, or destruction of any human embryos.

Dr. Weldon noted that both of these breakthroughs occurred despite the fact that federal funding was extended only to embryonic stem cell lines that were created prior to August of 2001.  This research is moving forward at “breakneck speed,” leaving embryonic stem cell research far behind.

In concluding, Dr. Weldon remarked, “Science is moving beyond the debate.  Science is taking us in a direction of ethically responsible research.”

Dr. Weldon’s speech can be viewed here.

Yesterday, the journal NATURE published a new breakthrough in stem cell technology.  For the first time, researchers have been able to directly reprogram adult stem cells in mice into a different needed cell type.  Specifically, the Washington Post reported that the scientists pinpointed “three crucial molecular switches that, when flipped, completely convert a common cell in the pancreas into the more precious insulin-producing ones that diabetics need.”

But what does this mean—in plain English?

The scientists were able to go in, reprogram adult cells inside the pancreas of the subject mice, causing those cells to become and function as insulin-producing cells needed by the diabetic mice.  This finding raises hope for future treatments of diabetes, heart disease, strokes, and other ailments in humans.  It means that patients will be able to have some of their own cells reprogrammed without the need for drugs, transplants, or other therapies.

But it also means much more than that.

It means that destructive embryonic research is definitely on the way “out.”  No embryos were necessary for this breakthrough.  In fact, even the breakthrough from last year—the finding that adults stem cells could be reprogrammed back into the embryonic state (iPS cells)—was unnecessary here.  Instead, the breakthrough announced yesterday skipped the intermediary step of iPS cells and directly transformed cells within the subject mice into the desired cells.

Stated George Q. Daley, a stem cell researcher at Children’s Hospital in Boston, “This experiment proves you don’t have to go all the way back to an embryonic state.  You can use a related cell.  That may be easier to do and much more practical to do.”

Indeed, in addition to practicality is the fact that reprogramming a patient’s own cells—rather than using embryonic stem cells—will reduce the risk of tumor formation.

Finally, it also means that the time is now for states to pass legislation prohibiting the funding of destructive embryo research and cloning.  Not only are there moral and ethical issues surrounding such research, but scientists are continually proving it to be obsolete.  State and federal funds should be spent on research that holds the most promise.  And as demonstrated by these scientists, that research certainly is not destructive embryo research.  Every dollar spent on embryo research means a dollar not spent on research that is actually developing treatments and cures.

True, this initial breakthrough was conducted on mice and not humans.  However, Douglas A. Melton, co-director of the research team, stated that he hopes to start planning the first studies involving humans with diabetes within one year, with human trials starting within five years.  The prospects look good for human patients, as the pancreatic development of mice and humans is closely related.

Other scientists have started preliminary testing with other cells which could be used to treat spinal cord injuries and neurodegenerative disorders such as Lou Gehrig’s disease.

As stated by Richard Doerflinger of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, “This is a ‘win-win’ situation for medicine and ethics.”

We’re back this morning at the Minneapolis Convention center as the GOP platform delegates continue their consideration of amendments to the platform.  This morning has been devoted to the national defense section. 

But it still provided a great example of how life issues affect so many different areas:  in a section focused on international organizations, language was inserted to reaffirm the Mexico City policy barring funding to organizations that promote or provide abortion as a method of family planning.

All in favor, say AYE.

The motion passed.

We break for lunch in a little while and will come back this afternoon to consider the Health sections which include the Rights of Conscience sections and a portion that references stem cell research and human cloning.  The hall is buzzing with rumours that the stem cell section might be watered down.

More later.

It is a shame that contemporary debate about stem cell research is driven by ideology rather than data.  A straightforward examination of the data shows that embryonic stem cell research has yielded little to no results.  Any type of treatment using embryonic stem cells remains aloof.  Yet the same cannot be said of research done with adult stem cells, as highlighted by www.stemcellresearch.org. As noted in a publication by www.stemcellresearch.com, such research has already led to promising treatments.

In a recent study done by researchers at Harvard and Columbia, Lifenews.com reports that motor neurons were created using a new technique that reprograms human adult skin cells into cells that resemble embryonic stem cells.  Studies performed last November in Japan and Wisconsin revealed that doing so was possible with skin cells from healthy humans.  At that time, however, it was unknown if motor neurons could be created from skin cells from chronically-ill patients.  The recent study shows this is possible because the motor neurons were created using skin cells from ALS (Lou Gehrig’s disease) patients.  (The study was published in the July 31 edition of the medical journal Science.)

Chris Henderson, a professor of pathology, neurology and neuroscience at Columbia said, “Our paper now shows that we can generate hundreds of millions of motor neurons that are genetically identical to a patient’s own neurons. This will be an immense help as we try to uncover the mechanisms behind this disease and screen for drugs that can prolong life.”

Bioethicist Wesley Smith hails these results as yet another example of the fruitful research performed with adult stem cells as a result of President Bush’s courage not to force taxpayers to fund embryonic stem cell research.  This courage has led to highly successful research alternatives.  Comparing the ineffective results of embryonic stem cell research to the more recent and successful adult stem cell research, Smith said, “[S]o far no human cloned embryonic stem cells have been derived despite years of trying. . . . But in less than one year since the first iPSC human line was created, that precise achievement has already been accomplished.” 

In fact, as reported by Lifenews.com, Dr. David Prentice, a Family Research Council fellow and former Indiana State University biology professor, notes that this is not the first time researchers have successfully made patient-specific and disease-specific stem cell lines.

Just think: Treatments for diseases without a single human being destroyed.  This is not a dream.  Such treatments already exist and this study reveals the immense promise of further research using adult stem cells.

As the general election campaign gets underway, it is important for us to examine where each candidate stands on the issues affecting us today. Below are quotes taken from John McCain’s and Barack Obama’s websites summarizing their stance on life issues.

John McCain

Senator McCain has an entire section on his campaign website devoted to “Human Dignity & Life,” showing voters that this is a vital and pressing issue in the election. It states:

“John McCain believes Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned, and as president he will nominate judges who understand that courts should not be in the business of legislating from the bench . . . However, the reversal of Roe v. Wade represents only one step in the long path toward ending abortion. Once the question is returned to the states, the fight for life will be one of courage and compassion . . . The pro-life movement has done tremendous work in building and reinforcing the infrastructure of civil society by strengthening faith-based, community, and neighborhood organizations that provide critical services to pregnant mothers in need. This work must continue and government must find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion. These important groups can help build the consensus necessary to end abortion at the state level.”

The discussion of human dignity and life continues as McCain’s website addresses bioethics and stem cell research:

“John McCain opposes the intentional creation of human embryos for research purposes. To that end, Senator McCain voted to ban the practice of ‘fetal farming,’ making it a federal crime for researchers to use cells or fetal tissue from an embryo created for research purposes. Furthermore, he voted to ban attempts to use or obtain human cells gestated in animals. Finally, John McCain strongly opposes human cloning and voted to ban the practice, and any related experimentation, under federal law. As president, John McCain will strongly support funding for promising research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research and other types of scientific study that do not involve the use of human embryos.”

Barack Obama

Under the section entitled “Women” on Senator Obama’s website is his stance on what he terms “reproductive choice”:

“He has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women’s rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as President. He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision in that case.”

Also under the “Women” section is his stance on stem cell research.

“Barack Obama believes that we owe it to the American public to explore the potential of stem cells to treat the millions of people suffering from debilitating and life-threatening diseases. Obama is a co-sponsor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which would allow research of human embryonic stem cells derived from embryos donated (with consent) from in vitro fertilization clinics.”

For the full text, go to:

John McCain’s platform

Barack Obama’s platform

Our friends at the Family Research Council have just posted an update on adult stem cell successes. Not simply statistics or lists of treatments, these are stories of real people who have experienced the benefits of adult stem cells. To cite but one example:

Jill Rosen was diagnosed with antiphospholipid syndrome, a form of lupus and an autoimmune disorder causing blood clots, in 1997. Her health was gradually deteriorating. Between 2002 and 2004 she was in hospital every two months, was not responding to treatments and was exhausted. She contacted Dr. Richard Burt from Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, who was working on a new treatment involving stem cell transplants for auto immune disorders.

In February 2005 she began chemotherapy, and a month later her own stem cells were replanted into her body. She was released from the hospital after 3 weeks. For several months she did not experience any notable improvement. However, in 2006, her conditions improved dramatically. Follow ups from 2006 through 2008 confirmed drastic improvements. Jill says that her family and friends all celebrate her new

birthday on March 7, 2005 , the day her own adult stem cells were transplanted back into her body.

The Empire State Stem Cell Board has drafted a strategic plan “to guide New York State’s $600 million, 11-year investment in stem cell research.” The New York State Department of Health has invited public comment on the plan, which is available at the New York State Stem Cell Science (NYSTEM) website.

While the goals of the plan are laudable, the thrust of the plan is aimed primarily at “embryonic stem cell lines” even though the goals are entirely plausible with adult stem cell research. While adult stem cell research is referenced, it is not given the preeminence it is due, nor is it certain that adult stem cell research will be funded under the Strategic Plan.

Americans United for Life has teamed up with New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, Family Research Council (FRC), and FRC’s Dr. David Prentice to provide further information on the escalating benefits of adult stem cell research and the limitations and dangers of embryonic stem cell research.

Click here to read our comments, “NYSTEM Should Fund Proven Cures and Treatments, Not Speculation.”

In its first statement devoted exclusively to the issue of embryonic stem cell research, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) last week firmly stated the following:

It now seems undeniable that once we cross the fundamental moral line that prevents us from treating any fellow human being as a mere object of research, there is no stopping point.  The only moral stance that affirms the human dignity of all of us is to reject that first step down this path.

The USCCB urges all Catholics—and others of good will—to join them in reaffirming that “the killing of innocent human creatures, even if carried out to help others, constitutes an absolutely unacceptable act.”

The statement—overwhelmingly approved by at vote of 191 to 1—is the first of two documents to be released by the USCCB.  The second document will be addressed to engaged and married couples in the Catholic Church, educating them on reproductive technologies and the link to embryonic stem cell research.

Stating that while the Catholic church “appreciates and encourages the progress of the biomedical sciences which open up unprecedented therapeutic prospects” (quoting Pope Benedict XVI), the USCCB focuses on the fact that embryonic stem cell research sacrifices innocent human life—stating that “[d]irect attacks on innocent human life are always gravely wrong.”

The USCCB explains that justifications set forth for embryonic stem cell research are founded on utilitarian principles that will eventually harm the dignity and autonomy of the very patients it is currently supposed to “help.”  For example, if we use embryos simply because the embryos are going to “die anyway”—where do we draw the line?  Patients with terminal illnesses and criminals on death row will “die anyway”—but that does not give scientists the ability to kill them for medical research.  As the USCCB states, “[t]he very same ethic that justifies taking some lives to help the patients with Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s disease today can be used to sacrifice that very patient tomorrow, if his or her survival is viewed as disadvantaging or other human beings considered more deserving or productive.”

This logic is not as strained as researchers would like us to think.  Just this week it was reported that in Oregon, the state’s health services will pay for patients’ lethal drugs for assisted suicide, but not for further treatments.

Similarly, if an embryo is not afforded human rights simply because it is too weak or undeveloped to possess such rights—where does that leave patients whose diseases have progressed to a degree that the patients lack all autonomy?  “If fundamental human rights such as the right to life are based on abilities or qualities that can appear or disappear, grow or diminish, and be greater or lesser in different human beings, then there are no inherent human rights, no true human equality, only privileges for the strong.”

The USCCB statement also explains that human cloning is argued as essential for the progress of embryonic stem cell research.  This leads to the creation of life for the purpose of destroying life.  It also leads to the deplorable practice of using women for their eggs—in complete disregard for the health of women.

And thus, the USCCB’s conclusion stated above: once we cross the line, there is no stopping point.

Having found that women are generally uninterested in going through a risky procurement procedure so scientists can use their eggs for cloning and embryonic stem cell research experiments, researchers are now calling for a repeal of state laws that currently ban financial payments for eggs according to the journal Nature.

To give a picture of how dry the applicant pool is, Kevin Eggan and Douglas Melton of Harvard University’s Stem Cell Institute spent two years and $100,000 on local advertising and could only secure a single egg donor – someone with ties to Harvard.

Because fertility clinics are allowed to pay for eggs, those women who had expressed interest in the Harvard program decided that they would rather be paid than donate. So researchers want the right to compete.

What most people don’t realize is what exactly a woman has to go through to donate eggs for any purpose. First, the woman must take fertility drugs to overstimulate their ovaries. Instead of the usual 1-2 eggs being released at a time, 10-15 eggs will be released. Periodic monitoring must take place to determine when the eggs will ripen. At the time of release, the woman must undergo laparoscopic surgery to obtain them. Side effects of the procedure range from mild discomfort to…infertility.

These researchers are willing to gamble on a young lady’s future ability to bear children in their frenetic quest for a supply of eggs just so they can create human life and then destroy it. Of course, the top candidates for this form of exploitation will be poor women looking for a quick way to make some cash.

If researchers fail at their effort to liberalize state laws on this issue, they may turn overseas where the pool of available women for exploitation is far larger and presumably less expensive to buy off. Even with the recent advances in stem cell research that opens the door to creating embryonic stem cells without the need to create and destroy embryos, it seems nothing will detour these scientists who have dedicated their careers to healing some by destroying others. It just may take greasing the wheels of destruction with a little cash, that’s all.

One needn’t search hard for new breakthroughs in adult stem cell research.  Even with the mainstream media strongly favoring embryonic stem cell research, stories of new cures, new uses, and new discoveries emerge on an almost daily basis.  Around the world, scientists are broadening the lead adult stem cell research has over embryonic stem cell research.  Currently, the score is 70+ to 0, in favor of adult stem cell research.

The most recent news comes from Australia, where scientists at Griffin University found that adult stem cells from patients’ own noses can be used to treat Parkinson’s disease, helping to reverse the loss of muscle control. 

When scientists harvested nasal stem cells and placed them in the brains of rats, the chemical in the brain that promotes muscle control spiked.  Rats infected with Parkinson’s went from running in circles to being able to run in straight lines.  Moreover, no tumors developed in the subject rats.

This treatment using adult stem cells will eventually be used on human patients, joining other treatments that are already being used to treat and cure 70+ human diseases. 

And where are the embryonic stem cell cures?  There are none.  There are no studies—on humans or animals—that have given us any cures or treatments using embryonic stem cells.

And while embryonic stem cells cannot cure, they can kill.  Studies have revealed that treatments using embryonic and fetal stem cells cause devastating results in patients, including the formation of tumors.  In one study treating Parkinson’s patients with fetal stem cells, the patients developed worse shaking than they had before the treatment.

With study after study trumpeting the successes of adult stem cell research, it is getting harder for the media to ignore the obvious superiority of adult stem cell research.

Science Alert Australia & New Zealand reports that Western Australia’s Upper House has rejected human embryonic stem cell research and human cloning.

Dr. Millet, director of Curtin University of Technology’s Centre for Applied Ethics and Philosophy explains why.

“The whole debate has changed, and it’s changed dramatically since the Yamanaka discovery because, while both his method and therapeutic cloning technologies have their problems, the advantage of the Yamanaka method is that you get 100 per cent of the donor’s own DNA and, of course, collecting skin cells involves minimum invasiveness and trauma. Most importantly, it is far less morally problematic than creating an embryo with the sole purpose of destroying it.”

He goes on to make the pragmatic public policy case in addition to the scientific and ethical case above:

“One of the arguments against therapeutic cloning is that the research has a low likelihood of a short- to medium-term outcome,” Dr Millett says. “So we have to ask ourselves, what is the opportunity cost of funding this research? By spending millions on embryonic stem cell research, what other important science is missing out? Are there better things to spend our money on?

What will the result be? Again, Dr. Millet:

“This could be the turning point for stem cell science here. It is entirely feasible that the (Upper House) decision could lead to [Western Australia] becoming one of the world centres of research into alternatives to embryonic stem cell research.”

Well said.

What US state will take a similar leadership position on adult stem cell research and attempt to establish itself as a “world center of research into alternatives to embryonic stem cell research?”