To the best of my knowledge, no one has more consistently tracked public opinion on the use of embryonic stem cells (and alternative sources of stem cells) than the Virginia Commonwealth University Life Sciences Department and the VCU College of Humanities and Sciences. The results of their Sixth Annual nationwide survey is headlined (in the press release accompanying the actual results) "Americans' Support For Embryonic Stem Cell Research Declines, VCU Life Sciences Survey Shows."

According to the nationwide survey of 1,000 adults, 54% now strongly or somewhat favor embryonic stem cell research. In 2005 it was 58%.

But this is only one of several intriguing results. Actually, there are tons of interesting findings.

The one overriding generalization that helps explain a lot that follows is that while 59% think they are clear or very clear on the difference among VCU's three-part stem cell categorization--stem cells from human embryos, stem cells from adults, and stem cells "from such sources as umbilical cord [blood]"--that number has actually gone down from 2005!

[It is worth mentioning that by creating a third category-- by differentiating between "adult" sources and other than adult sources such as umbilical cord blood--the only possible result is to confuse people. Ordinarily, the question is phrased as embryonic stem cell versus adult--that is to say, ALL non-embryonic sources.]

So, let's go through just a few of the results. [You can read the full survey at www.vcu.edu/lifesci/images2/ls_survey_2006_report.pdf]

As noted at the beginning, the percentage of Americans who support embryonic stem cell research declined from 58% in 2005 to 54% percent in the November survey. That's unambiguously good news.

What is clearly the most interesting piece of news is the comparative level of optimism about which source would be most likely to be productive in treating diseases. What must not be lost is that in addition to a (declining) majority who still supports embryonic stem cell research, almost twice as many respondents believe non-embryonic sources offer the "greatest promise for discovering new treatments for disease."

It is true that in 2006 the percentage of Americans who said that research using embryonic stem cells held the greatest promise jumped by a little over half--from 14% to 22%.

But unless you pay careful attention, you might think that this came at the expense of those who said "adult stem cells" or "stem cells from other sources." That's not true. Combined that figure was 44% in 2005 and 42% in 2006.

Put another way, more people (22%) chose embryonic cells this time around as offering the "greatest promise" than did in 2005, but (as was also the case last year) even more chose "other sources, such as umbilical cord" (25%).

The greatest percentage increase was among those who said that adult stem cells "offered the greatest promise." That figure more than doubled--from 7% in 2005 to 17% in 2006.

What explains that latter increase? It likely came from people who might have chosen "other sources" (which declined from 37% to 25%).

Almost the same percentage (70% in 2006, 68% in 2005) said they "support the use of embryonic stem cells in order to pursue a treatment" for "Parkinson's or a spinal cord injury." No surprise there.  Ditto for opposition to human cloning, which declined every so slightly, according to the survey. That's not surprising either. Some 70% confessed they were either not very clear or not at all clear "on the difference between human reproductive cloning and human therapeutic cloning."

Well, sure.

Cloning proponents differentiate between the two, but in so doing they not only do violence to the biological facts, they also confuse the public. The truth is, cloning is cloning. The same technical process is used whether the child is brought to term (human reproductive cloning) or picked apart for stem cells (human therapeutic cloning).

One other dimension: As you would expect, there is a correlation, although imperfect, between people's positions on abortion and stem cell research.

The greatest change from 2005 to 2006 was among those who believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. Last year 64% of those respondents opposed stem cell research using embryos. That jumped to 77% in 2006.

As I mentioned above, you can read the survey for yourself--and compare the results with past years.

It's intriguing reading.
[www.vcu.edu/lifesci/images2/ls_survey_2006_report.pdf]