Hi- Actually, adult stem cells have not shown to be as
promisiing as embryonic stem cells, which is the real crux of the
argument for research to go forward. Let me submit to all of you
an excerpt of a letter from Dr.Irving Weissman (Professor of
Pathology and Developmental Biology, Stanford University;
Chair, National Academies Panel on Scientific and Medical
Aspects of Human Cloning) to the President's Council on
BioEthics, which addresses the very question of why not just use
adult stem cells, or the 64-odd cell lines that Bush said were
enough. At the end of it I will put a little "glossary" that I cobbled
together, which might help to get through the more technical
terms:

"There are 4 major areas of research that likely could be
accomplished with nuclear transplantation to produce human
pluripotent cell lines that cannot be accomplished with any other
methods today. These formed the core of research that 2
independent National Academies panels cited in their
recommendation that a legally enforceable ban on human
reproductive cloning should not be extended to nuclear
transplantation to produce pluripotent human stem cells.

Let me start by stating the obvious: the 64 or so approved human
ES lines do not represent the genetic, racial, or ethnic diversity of
the US population. Therefore to the extent that scientifically or
clinically useful information come from studying the development
of human tissue types from human ES cells, significant
segments of our population could be excluded. Thus we
proposed ˆ

1. Nuclear transplantation technology should be useful to
obtain ES cell lines representing the
genetic diversity of the US population.

In addition, we noted that while every one of us has inherited
some of the genetic risk factors for very common diseases, only
the patients who have those diseases combine the several
distinct genetic variants that lead to that disease. These include
most cardiovascular diseases, most neurodegenerative
diseases, most autoimmune diseases such as diabetes,
multiple sclerosis, and rheumatoid arthritis; and many, many
more. In mice it has already been shown that nuclei from tail
cells of mice with severe combined immunodeficiency (the
bubble boy disease) could be transferred into enucleated
mouse eggs to produce mouse ES cells, and the daughter cells
of these ES cells faithfully reproduce the immunodeficiency.
Thus we proposed˜

2. Nuclear transplantation technology should be useful to
produce human pluripotent cell lines
for the investigation of human diseases with predominant
inherited genetic components.

We noted that all human cancers, and neurodegenerative
diseases such as Huntington‚s diseases have in addition to
inherited risks, somatic mutations that are involved in the
progression from healthy cells to, for example, breast or colon
cancer cells. In these instances, no healthy somatic cell will
have these mutations. Only the cancer cell nucleus itself will
have the information of the life history of the development of the
cancer. Thus we proposed---

3. Nuclear transplantation technology should be useful to
produce human pluripotent cell lines
from diseases resulting from somatic mutations for the
investigation of relevant mutations and
events in the development of those diseases (e.g. breast
cancer).

The arguments most known to you and the public that support
nuclear transplantation technology are for therapeutic cloning,
that is, the production of human pluripotent cell lines with
nuclear genetic
compatibility to a patient who needs developed tissue stem or
progenitor cells to regenerate lost or
damaged tissues or organs. Thus we proposed˜

4. Nuclear transplantation technology should be allowed to
develop the field of therapeutic
cloning.

It is my view, shared by most scientists and clinical faculty that I
know, that these 4 points can lead to a revolution in scientific
medicine with applicability at least as wide as the recombinant
DNA revolution in the 1970‚s. As you know, even though that
revolution was opposed on religious and ethical grounds, the
development of the Recombinant Advisory Committee at NIH
opened the door to the production of therapies that
conservatively save or improve the lives of at least hundreds of
thousands of US citizens every year. Those therapies took at
least 9 years to develop from discovery to therapy, and so no
group should claim it will be any faster with this kind of stem cell
research. Luckily, because those therapies were mainly
developed by biotechnology companies in the US, US citizens
were the first to benefit. The current Brownback and Weldon bills,
and the statement by President Bush last week, would
guarantee that US citizens cannot benefit from the products
derived from nuclear transplantation stem cell research unless
they, their physicians, and those who make available such
products from foreign entities are willing to spend at least 10
years in jail and pay at least a $1 million dollar fine.

My final points reflect my own ethical perspective. First is an
issue of the locus of responsibility. Anyone in the chain of
authority that bans such medical research must be responsible
for the lives of patients who would have benefited from that
research. Had congress banned recombinant DNA research, as
they contemplated 20 years ago, those voting for the ban and
those executing the ban would in my view hold the responsibility
for lost patient lives. I doubt any of you on the panel doesn‚t have
family, friends, or colleagues who benefited from the
recombinant DNA products. I have little doubt that the same will
apply in terms of benefits from nuclear transplantation to
produce human pluripotent stem cell lines. The National
Academies were clear on the definition of human reproductive
cloning as implantation of a human nuclear transplantation
blastocyst, which it recommended be legally banned. No person
can transgress that boundary without incurring the penalty, so
even if a group of scientists + gynecologists + intensive care
units + hospitals or clinics + hormonally prepared women who
would be blastocyst recipients conspired to practice or attempt
human reproductive cloning in the US, they would face the
penalties. We use laws such as these to prevent rogues,
murderers, thieves, etc, from going beyond the unacceptable.
We should trust in such laws, and future regulatory bodies so
that this type of medical research can go forward. The advice you
give is an awesome responsibility, not only for your view of
morality and ethics, but also for the lives lost or saved based on
your decision. "

GLOSSARY OF BASIC TERMS
ADULT STEM CELLS- Stem cells that dwell in the adult body.
Each type generates replacement cells for the particular tissue
in which it is found (i.e. heart cells in the heart)

BLASTOCYST- A hollow sphere of some 250 cells that develop
four to five days after an egg is fertilized. Inside is a clump of
about 30 cells, the inner cell mass, from which the embryo
develops. When removed and grown in a laboratory dish, cells
from the inner cell mass are called EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS.

CELL LINE- A general term applied to a defined population of
cells.

CLONING- Creating a genetically identical organism, through
any of several techniques. Dolly the sheep, the first mammal to
be cloned, was created by inserting DNA from the nucleus of a
sheep mammary gland cell into an egg cell emptied of its own
nuclear DNA.

DIFFERENTIATION- The process in which a stem cell acquires
the features of a specialized cell, such as a heart, liver or muscle
cell.

EMBRYONIC GERM CELLS- Embryonic cells that are set aside
and protected from maturing. They migrate through the fetus to
the ovary or testes, where they form the egg and sperm cells. If
removed from the fetus and grown in culture, they behave much
like embryonic stem cells.

EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS- Derived from the inner cell mass of
a BLASTOCYST, these cells are thought to be pluripotent –
meaning they can grow into any of the body's 260 or so cell
types. Unlike the egg cell, which is totipotent, able to form a
complete embryo, the embryonic stem cells do not seem able to
form a new blastocyst and cannot by themselves create a new
individual.

GERM CELL or GERM LINE CELL- A sperm or egg, or a cell that
can develop into a sperm or egg; all other body cells are called
SOMATIC cells.

NUCLEAR TRANSFER- A procedure in which a nucleus from a
donor cell is transferred into an egg from which the nucleus has
been removed. The donor nucleus can come from a GERM
CELL or a SOMATIC CELL.

SOMATIC CELL NUCLEAR TRANSFER (SCNT)- Transfer of the
nucleus from a donor SOMATIC CELL to an unfertilized egg from
which the maternal chromosomes have been removed.

SOMATIC CELL- Any cell of a plant or animal other than a
reproductive cell.

STEM CELLS- Master cells that can reproduce indefinitely to
form the specialized cells of tissues and organs.

If after all of this you do think that this research should remain
legal, please do sign that petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/ncarolin/petition.html , and
consider emailing your friends, family, and colleagues and
asking them to get informed on the issue and consider signing.