The debate on stem-cell research: How to decide

President Bush should reject the argument that adult stem cells can take the place of embryonic ones in critical medical research.

The intense controversy over federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research has already equaled, at times eclipsed, attention paid to a patient's rights bill or Medicare restructuring, the two putative contenders for top medical issue before the Bush administration.

President Bush is being heavily lobbied by media commentators, religious leaders and political figures to reject federal funding of the most promising, direct and rapid path of stem-cell research -- that is, using embryonic, pluripotent cells -- in favor of limiting funding to adult stem-cell research. To follow that course would be a serious mistake and an enormous disservice to millions of Americans now or in the future faced with devastating illnesses such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, ALS, diabetes, paralyzing injury or heart disease.

Back in January, when federal funding of stem-cell research was still little talked about outside the scientific community, the AMA joined with 122 other scientific and medical organizations in writing a letter to then President-elect Bush. The letter urged him to allow the federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, previously approved by President Clinton, to move forward.

The letter underscored the important distinctions between what is known about adult and pluripotent, embryonic stem cells: "A vocal minority has argued that adult stem cells will be sufficient to pursue treatments or cures for disease. But, the prevailing expert scientific opinion is that it is far too early to know if adult stem cells have the same potential as embryonic stem cells. For diseases that prove not to be treatable with adult stem cells, impeding human pluripotent stem-cell research risks unnecessary delay for patients who may die or endure needless suffering while the effectiveness of adult stem cells is evaluated." [...]