Researchers may abandon stem cell lines

Leading US research institutions may stop studying several federally-fundable linkurl:embryonic stem cell;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/54749/ lines due to potential ethical problems surrounding the creation of the lines. As linkurl:reported;http://chronicle.com/daily/2008/07/3996n.htm by __The Chronicle of Higher Education__ today (July 28), Stanford and Johns Hopkins Universities, and the linkurl:California Institute for Regenerative Medicine;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/disp

Bob Grant
Bob Grant

Bob Grant is Editor in Chief of The Scientist, where he started in 2007 as a Staff Writer.

View full profile.


Learn about our editorial policies.

Jul 27, 2008
Leading US research institutions may stop studying several federally-fundable linkurl:embryonic stem cell;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/54749/ lines due to potential ethical problems surrounding the creation of the lines. As linkurl:reported;http://chronicle.com/daily/2008/07/3996n.htm by __The Chronicle of Higher Education__ today (July 28), Stanford and Johns Hopkins Universities, and the linkurl:California Institute for Regenerative Medicine;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/52856/ (CIRM) are considering halting or have halted research on five of the 21 human stem cell lines linkurl:approved;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/12948/ to receive federal funding. University of Wisconsin bioethicist linkurl:Robert Streiffer;http://philosophy.wisc.edu/streiffer/ called the five lines into question in an linkurl:article;http://philosophy.wisc.edu/streiffer/PapersFolder/Streiffer%20-%202008%20Informed%20Consent%20and%20Federal%20Funding%20of%20SC%20Research.pdf he wrote in the May-June issue of the __Hastings Center Report__. In the article, Streiffer wrote that some embryonic stem cell donors were improperly informed before donating their cells. For example, Streiffer wrote that in at least one case, the consent forms that donors signed "states that the project in which the embryo donors were participating was limited to developing a technique for longer-term cultivation of...
749/ lines due to potential ethical problems surrounding the creation of the lines. As linkurl:reported;http://chronicle.com/daily/2008/07/3996n.htm by __The Chronicle of Higher Education__ today (July 28), Stanford and Johns Hopkins Universities, and the linkurl:California Institute for Regenerative Medicine;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/52856/ (CIRM) are considering halting or have halted research on five of the 21 human stem cell lines linkurl:approved;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/12948/ to receive federal funding. University of Wisconsin bioethicist linkurl:Robert Streiffer;http://philosophy.wisc.edu/streiffer/ called the five lines into question in an linkurl:article;http://philosophy.wisc.edu/streiffer/PapersFolder/Streiffer%20-%202008%20Informed%20Consent%20and%20Federal%20Funding%20of%20SC%20Research.pdf he wrote in the May-June issue of the __Hastings Center Report__. In the article, Streiffer wrote that some embryonic stem cell donors were improperly informed before donating their cells. For example, Streiffer wrote that in at least one case, the consent forms that donors signed "states that the project in which the embryo donors were participating was limited to developing a technique for longer-term cultivation of embryonic cells, and that after the study was completed all the cells would be destroyed." In light of the ethical problems, Strieffer called for the Bush Administration's restrictions on stem cell research funding to be overturned. According to __The Chronicle__ story, citing a report by the Center for American Progress, expert panels at Johns Hopkins and Stanford have already decided to stop research on the five contested cell lines, but officials at Stanford told __The Chronicle__ that the report was "inaccurate" and that the no final decision has yet been made. A spokesman from CIRM told __The Chronicle__ that the institute is deciding whether or not to refer the issue to its ethics board.

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member?