Obama Ends Stem Cell Research Ban

President Reverses Bush's Restrictions, Says Administration "Will Vigorously Support Scientists Who Pursue This Research"

(CBS/AP)  President Barack Obama said Monday he is allowing federal taxpayer dollars to fund significantly broader research on embryonic stem cells because "medical miracles do not happen simply by accident," and promised his administration would make up for the ground lost under his predecessor.

Fulfilling a campaign promise, Mr. Obama signed an executive order expected to set in motion increased research that supporters believe could uncover cures for serious ailments from diabetes to paralysis.

Mr. Obama's action, before a packed East Room audience, reverses former President George W. Bush's policy on stem cell research by undoing a 2001 directive that banned federal funding for research into stem lines created after that date.

Mr. Bush limited the use of taxpayer money to only the 21 stem cell lines that had been produced before his decision. He argued he was defending human life because days-old embryos - although typically from fertility clinics and already destined for destruction - are destroyed to create the stem cell lines.

The Obama order reverses that without addressing a separate legislative ban, which precludes any federal money paying for the development of stem cell lines. The legislation, however, does not prevent funds for research on those lines created without federal funding. (Read more about what this Executive Order will do -- and won't do.)

Researchers say the newer lines created with private money during the period of the Bush ban are healthier and better suited to creating treatment for diseases. Embryonic stem cells are master cells that can morph into any cell of the body. Scientists hope to harness them so they can create replacement tissues to treat a variety of diseases - such as new insulin-producing cells for diabetics, cells that could help those with Parkinson's disease or maybe even Alzheimer's, or new nerve connections to restore movement after spinal injury.

Mr. Obama called his decision a "difficult and delicate balance," an understatement of the intense emotions generated on both sides of the long, contentious debate. He said he came down on the side of the "majority of Americans" who support increased federal funding for the research, both because strict oversight would prevent problems and because of the great and lifesaving potential it holds.

CBS News polling on the topic shows that Americans do support medical research using embryonic stem cells. In 2007, the last time CBS News asked the question, sixty-five percent said they approved compared to twenty-five percent who disapproved. The number of those who approved had gone up steadily since the 2004 when fifty percent approved. (Read more about the polling.)

"Rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values," Mr. Obama said. "In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly." (Read all of Mr. Obama's remarks.)

Mr. Obama warned against overstating the eventual benefits of the research. But he said his administration "will vigorously support scientists who pursue this research," taking a slap at his predecessor in the process.

"I cannot guarantee that we will find the treatments and cures we seek. No president can promise that. But I can promise that we will seek them actively, responsibly, and with the urgency required to make up for lost ground."

It's a matter of competitive advantage globally as well, the president argued.

"When government fails to make these investments, opportunities are missed. Promising avenues go unexplored. Some of our best scientists leave for other countries that will sponsor their work. And those countries may surge ahead of ours in the advances that transform our lives," Mr. Obama said.

Early Show medical contributor Dr. Holly Phillips pointed out that such research was never banned or illegal. "The question that we're addressing today is what role, if any, federal funding should have" in this research.

"Many scientists for the last eight years have been complaining that they're spending more time trying to find funding for their research than actually doing their research. So for them this will really have a profound effect," Phillips said. "Certainly on an international level in medicine we're so excited about this research and the potential for healing that it has. So I think less red tape will have a profound effect."

Of the diseases or conditions that may be most affected by the end of the federal ban, Phillips said, "People are most excited about the neurological illnesses, things like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. A group in California will start using embryonic stem cells in humans to hopefully cure spinal cell injuries for people who have been paralyzed from the waist down. We're also seeing some hope in treating diabetes, heart disease and even strokes. So really, millions of people could be affected by this research."

"We've got eight years of science to make up for," said Dr. Curt Civin, whose research allowed scientists to isolate stem cells and who now serves as the founding director of the University of Maryland School of Medicine's Center for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine. "Now the silly restrictions are lifted."

Mr. Bush and his supporters said they were defending human life; days-old embryos - typically from fertility-clinic leftovers otherwise destined to be thrown away - are destroyed for the stem cells.

Family Research Council, which advocates for a "Judeo-Christian worldview" and warns against the reproductive cloning of a human being, opposes the use of embryonic stem cells, promoting instead adult stem cells as being superior.

Of Mr. Obama's new order, FRC's Dr. David Prentice told CBS' The Early Show, "In terms of scientific advances I don't think we are going to see anything for this. This is more of an ideological move."

House Republican Leader John Boehner said the president’s repeal of the ban, “runs counter to President Obama’s promise to be a president for all Americans. For a third time in his young presidency, the president has rolled back important protections for innocent life, further dividing our nation at a time when we need greater unity to tackle the challenges before us.” (Read more about Republican reaction to the move.)

The president was insistent that his order would not open the door to human cloning.

"We will develop strict guidelines, which we will rigorously enforce, because we cannot ever tolerate misuse or abuse," Mr. Obama said. "And we will ensure that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society."

Mr. Obama also issued a memo promising to restore "scientific integrity to government decision-making." That policy change was aimed more broadly than the stem cell debate, to reach into areas such as climate change as well.

"Promoting science isn't just about providing resources it is also about protecting free and open inquiry," Mr. Obama said. "It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it's inconvenient especially when it's inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.

Mr. Obama said the presidential memorandum was the beginning of a process that would ensure that his administration: bases its decision "on the soundest science," appoints scientific advisers based on their credentials and experience, not their politics or ideology, and is "open and honest" about the science behind its decisions.

"We view what happened with stem cell research in the last administration is one manifestation of failure to think carefully about how federal support of science and the use of scientific advice occurs," said Harold Varmus, chairman of the White House's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology.

[phyl247]

As we age, the number and quality of stem cells that circulate in our body gradually decrease, leaving our body more susceptible to injury and other age-related health challenges. StemTech Health Science's Stem Enhance is the alternative to the controversial stem cells we hear about in the news. Patented Product StemEnhance supports the natural release of stem cells to promote optimal healing and stem cell physiology.http://www.phyl247.biz 877-696-8581

[cbsantispin]

You failed to mention that it was UMBILICAL STEM CELLS that gave her sight back. The ban in the US was only on embryonic stem cells, NOT umbilical or adult stem cells.

Sorry, the case wasn't closed after all...
Posted by holy-joe-722 at 4:56 AM : Mar 11, 2009

We both are right! But I think I am closer to the truth than you are! Former Pres. Bush banned federal funding for all Stem Cell research but allowed private funding for limited Stem Cell research, the kind you are referring to, the watered down Stem Cell research, "UMBILICAL STEM CELLS" with strict rules, where many Scientist preferred not to go there at all. In the context of Government involvement and funding, I think I win this point.

[cbsantispin]

Unfortunately, the question over when life begins will never be answered on earth. I believe it begins with conception, but others do not.

Posted by holy-joe-722 at 5:15 AM : Mar 11, 2009

I disagree, the question of when life begins has been answered on earth, legally in the United States life begins when a child is born and takes its first breath, that's when the child is legally recognized and becomes an official human, any human status you are trying to imply prior to birth is a personal or religious view, not an official legal view. A fetus does not have the same rights as a living, breathing human, a fetus can be aborted or destroyed without penalty, the same is not true with humans. Claiming a fetus at conception is the same as a human has been legally rejected.

[holy-joe-722]

Unfortunately, the question over when life begins will never be answered on earth. I believe it begins with conception, but others do not. (I would argue that it cannot begin BEFORE conception).

That being said, this will be another Roe v. Wade cases that will be in the courts, news, and textbooks for many years to come.

I would like to point out an interesting thought: Why do we subsidize green energy, reduction of greenhouse gasses, and enact other climate change laws? Because it's believed that they have an effect on the earth and it's survival. So, why don't we spend the money on Umbilical and Adult Stem Cell Research, which has proven again and again to yield positive results while embryonic stem cell research has only yielded dead ends?

Kind of like trying to fill a sieve with water and expecting it to fill up.

[holy-joe-722]

[ Check out this new story just Posted here at CBS! China like other nations interested in Stem Cell Research with an 8 year jump on the U.S. doing things like this!

Shaun Boyd of CBS4 Denver reports on a blind Colorado girl who went to China for experimental stem cell treatments which have radically improved her vision -- she's now taking driving lessons.

Case closed.
Posted by cbsantispin ]


You failed to mention that it was UMBILICAL STEM CELLS that gave her sight back. The ban in the US was only on embryonic stem cells, NOT umbilical or adult stem cells.

Sorry, the case wasn't closed after all...

[cbsantispin]

Check out this new story just Posted here at CBS! China like other nations interested in Stem Cell Research with an 8 year jump on the U.S. doing things like this!

Shaun Boyd of CBS4 Denver reports on a blind Colorado girl who went to China for experimental stem cell treatments which have radically improved her vision -- she's now taking driving lessons.

Case closed.

[cbsantispin]

In purely technical terms, I believe life begins when a human takes their first breath, not before! In purely practical terms I don't believe in abortions. Those who support abortions or perform abortions need to tune into God. The only credible people in regards to protecting "life" and not destroying "life" in my view are "Vegetarians", if you are a meat eater, life was destroyed and you are consuming that carcass. If you are "pro life" and confining your views to humans "only", there may be a little hypocrisy there, but still, human life begins at first breath! In fact, legally as recognized by our government human life begins at first breath, like someone pointed out, try and get a Social Security number for an unborn for a mother 8 months pregnant, it won't be issued! The real question on this issue, where the rubber meets the road is, does God consider an unborn a human, does God consider abortion murder? I don't think anyone can successfully answer that. Personally I think its a close call and I would not want to find out! But its very possible God may not consider it murder.

[ladypirate2]

formru smcsgt: Just because a unborn baby doesn't yet resemble a baby doesn't mean that it isn't a baby! It is human life even if it's just a few cells! In fact I believe that it becomes human life the moment the sperm fertilizes the egg! From that point on it is a living organism and, therefore, an unformed baby. i refuse to call them anything other than what they are. They are not fetuses and they are not embryos. They are babies who just aren't formed yet!

[holy-joe-722]

Say what you want, but this is a slippery slope. Once the door is wide open for embryonic stem cell research, the next logical step is to harvest "high-quality specimens" from suitable donors.

Big news in the stem cell research world today was that a girl who gained her sight through stem cells is now taking driver's training in Colorado. What many people will fail to mention is that she received UMBILICAL cells, not embryonic cells. All the advances seem to be in adult and umbilical cell research with no progress in embryonic.

This law that was reversed did not restrict research on all stem cell research, only embryonic cell. Why do we need to pump money into something that is not yielding results. Wouldn't it be better spent on adult or umbilical stem cell research?

It's about time. I'm so glad that we've got Obama. All he has to do is string together more than two grammatically correct complete sentences and he's doing better than we've had in the last 8 years.

Thank God that logic and compassion are winning out over stark, hateful dogma finally!!!

[fideoo]

jejejejeje formrusmcsgt you are hilarious!!! but realistic.

[hetup-2009]

Sounds like separation of church and state to me.

Thank you President Obama for giving hope to the sick.

[msmabuse]

Obama's Grandma Fighting Tsetse Fly Scourge

she needs cahs to do this!

[a_nother2002]

A couple can't have kids regularly, and take fertility drugs to up their chances. Many eggs result, and the doctors fertilize them. But they can't go gung-ho and implant all 14 that they've made or else you end up with octomom. So, being responsible, they pace themselves. When an embryo takes root, the couple is happy that their dream has finally come true through the miracle of science. They count their blessings as they don't need to use the other 13 embryos. However they're fertilized - and you're telling me you'd rather they just threw them away instead of trying to EXPONENTIALLY reduce the waiting list for organ donors? If you have one, you can make thousands of copies, for many organs. They can produce a nearly unexhaustable supply of the rarest bloodtype. And all it would cost is not throwing away what is naturally produced and thrown in LITERAL trashbins all across the country every month! Forget the clinic, this occurrence happens in American households every day - and suddenly now you want to play the moral card. Get real.
Stem cells might be a hidden blessing in that it gets you crazy pharm-heads off the pills for a minute to regain some sense. No wonder we have a war on drugs, pill poppers get the good stuff already.

BUMPITY BUMP! this guy is hitting the nail on the head. My 2 cents is a human being comes into existenc when it has sentience and can breathe for itself. Basically 100 or less cells that WILL BE DESTROYED ANYWAY do not count as human beings. They never will get the cahnce beacause they are thrown out. So why waste what can help us?

[formrusmcsgt]

More and more Americans are figuring out that being a dogma drone turns you into a blathering idiot.

Amen.
Posted by eightsigma at 4:36 AM : Mar 10, 2009

If these fundamentalists would only stop and listen to themselves for a moment, they would see why most of us think them daft:

"It's fine to let unused zygotes rot in a dumpster but it's a "sin" to use them to benefit mankind".

I mean.

Do they really have no clue how absurd that position sounds to a rational individual?

Apparently not....

[eightsigma]

Posted by formrusmcsgt
More and more Americans are figuring out that being a dogma drone turns you into a blathering idiot.

Amen.

[formrusmcsgt]

Cause:

I don't want stem cell research used to search for a cure for my diabetes.
Posted by toooldtovote at 11:17 PM : Mar 9, 2009



And effect:

(CNN) -- America is a less Christian nation than it was 20 years ago, and Christianity is not losing out to other religions, but primarily to a rejection of religion altogether, a survey published Monday found.


More and more Americans are figuring out that being a dogma drone turns you into a blathering idiot.

[formrusmcsgt]

hungry1968-15: My question is would he have wanted innnocent unborn babies to destroyed to save his life? I doubt it!
Posted by ladypirate2 at 10:54 PM : Mar 9, 2009

The "canned" obfuscation of the fundamental.

Calling a frozen clump of cells an "unborn" baby.

A baby isn't a baby UNTIL it's born, until then it's a zygote, embryo, or fetus, depending on it's stage of development.

Try getting a SSN for your "baby" before it's born......

[formrusmcsgt]

It's clear all they're seeking is attention to their religious agenda, and not the benefit of humanity.
Posted by PhilistineTheArtLover at 1:17 AM : Mar 10, 2009

Sure you're right.

Fundamentalists don't protest the disposal of these unused IVF embryos...they only protest something gg\ood coming from them.

Shows you how much they use their gourd....

[cbsantispin]

The United States is always shooting itself in the foot, creating advanced technology and then passing Laws preventing its use. Then foreign nations step in and pick up the technology, implement it and sell it back to us! That is the dumbest thing I ever heard of, its just plain stupid. The U.S. is not operating in a vacuum, other nations will implement our ideas if we won't and Americans will travel overseas to take advantage of it making others rich and advancing their technology, or our abandoned technology! The U.S. is 8 years behind, time to catch up, good job Pres. Obama, banning this technology was stupid to begin with. I understand the arguments, I believe life begins at a humans first breath of air, not before! Life began for Adam when God breathed life into Adam, not before, not while Adam was created and still lying there on the ground, life began when Adam took his first breath from Gods, its an important distinction and the arguments are rooted in when life begins.