Criticism of California Stem Cell Initiative Growing

By Liz Townsend

As California officials begin the process of spending billions of dollars on embryonic stem cell research and cloning approved by voters in November, the reality of the financial and ethical aspects of the initiative are causing growing concern.

"The initiative created a state constitutional right to human cloning and pays for this highly speculative and morally controversial research by borrowing $6 billion, including interest," Wesley J. Smith, author of Consumer's Guide to a Brave New World, told NRL News. "This at a time when California is broke, hospital emergency rooms are closing, and services to seniors and the developmentally disabled are being cut."

A new oversight panel and the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine will evaluate proposals to use embryos in medical research and distribute about $300 million a year for 10 years, according to the New York Times. "It's this century's gold rush," Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante said at a November 16 ceremony appointing members of the panel, the Times reported.

Even some supporters of the research are questioning whether the policies and procedures of distributing the funds, which are still being formulated, will be sufficient to protect the taxpayers' interest. "We have committed an elaborate public mechanism to this research," Miriam Piven Cotler, a medical ethicist at California State University, Northridge, told the Times. "Who safeguards it? What interests will be represented, how public will their deliberations be, and how much power will they have?"

The view of potential embryonic stem cell therapy as the next great money-making gold mine for investors, and California as the state that will now attract the biotech industry dollars, rests more on theory than any proven results.

"This is a huge grant from the people of California to a very specific biotech business, and it's only because of stem cells' notoriety that it's this and not something else," syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer told the Times. "If taxpayers were to spend $3 billion, the logical thing would be to devote the money to the most promising areas of research, but that was never discussed because of the sexiness of stem cells."

Smith agreed: "Why should cloning and embryonic stem cell research take such high priority over AIDS or cancer research?"

During the campaign to pass the initiative, supporters painted a picture of the amazing treatments that they believe would follow from embryonic stem cell research, even though it has not progressed enough to begin clinical trials anywhere.

Their campaign completely ignored the ethical controversy of embryo research - - the knowledge of millions of Americans that embryos are human beings who should not be destroyed in medical experiments. "There were depictions of children in wheel-chairs and movie stars with illnesses," said Smith. "They never mentioned it permitted cloning. Indeed, the initiative doesn't even use the word embryo."

The initiative was backed by venture capitalists, wealthy individuals, and disease advocacy groups who spent more than $25 million during the campaign, according to the Times. In contrast, opponents raised only $400,000, which made it difficult to spread their message to the voters.

California is only one of several states that are attempting to attract the embryonic stem cell research industry and reap the financial benefits they believe will follow. Wisconsin was the site of the first embryonic stem cell line extraction six years ago, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported. Soon after the California initiative passed, Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle promised an additional $750 million in state funding for embryonic stem cell research, principally at the University of Wisconsin.

The new funding is meant in part to keep potential profits from the research in the state, and not lose scientists to the "gold rush" in California. "I think clearly everyone is afraid of getting raided," Wisconsin scientist Dr. Michael Sussman told the Post-Gazette.

"An 'Oklahoma Land Race' mentality seems to be sinking in, in which states are tripping over themselves to appear the most biotech friendly," said Smith. "This comes in the form of promising to underwrite research or creating laws (as in New Jersey and almost in Illinois), that permit cloning, implantation, and gestation through the ninth month. It is clear that in the drive for companies to locate in states, some state legislatures are willing to throw all moral caution to the wind."