Senators Specter and Santorum Move to Fund "Alternative Methods" Stem Cell Research
Now this is interesting: Two senators, both from Pennsylvania and on opposite sides of the therapeutic cloning debate, have co-sponsored legislation to fund research into ways to obtain pluripotent stem cells without creating and destroying embryos. Research pursuing my friend Bill Hurlbut's idea of altered nuclear transfer (ANT) would undoubtedly be one of the methods that would be funded. There are other ideas, too, all worthy of a good look to see if we can heal the ethical rift that divides us about human biotechnology.
Hopefully, a trend has started in this regard. First, unanimous agreement was achieved to fund a federal umbilical cord blood stem cell bank. And now, perhaps, the Feds will pay for research into "alternative methods," as they are sometimes called. I wish the PA Senators success in their new joint venture.
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 8:35 PM
4 Comments
4 Comments:
I looked up ANT and setting aside it's ethical considerations it still stumbles into the conundrum associated with egg procurement and for that reason alone will prove to be a less than fruitful endeavor. I cannot attest to whether the ethical considerations with ANT are any different then with SCNT as I haven't had the opportunity to examine it beyond a letter by Rudolf Jaenisch to Nature.
I do support more research funding for stem cell related therapies. I don't see how anything will come ANT or SCNT for the same reasons.
The research is still in the animal stage and is ongoing. We will only be able to tell the tale when that process is complete.
Unless I'm understanding things incorrectly ANT and SCNT are identical save for the insertion of what appears to be a piece of siRNA to block the Cdx2 gene. Dr Jaenisch asserts that the cell lines created are identical in every other way to blastocysts created with SCNT. I still fail to how silencing a single gene is going to improve the stark inefficency of the process.
Dr Hwang used 2000+ eggs to no avail. This issue is one that you have detailed at length in your columns in The Weekly Standard. I would assume given that fact Dr Hurlbut would have developed a response for it. I can find none as of yet.
You should contact Hurlbut. He can give you more about the science than I can. But people I trust believe this is a potentially doable procedure. Plus, that particular manipulation is not the only one being contemplated.
Again. Let's see what the animals studies show and then decide. There is no need to make the decision now since no human studies are yet contemplated.
Post a Comment
<< Home