Penn researchers tried to sell Democratic leaders from the Pennsylvania legislature on embryonic stem-cell research yesterday, but some politicians walked away unconvinced -- and maybe with a bitter taste in their mouths.
The presentation, which took place in the auditorium of the Biomedical Research Building, was made before members of the state's House Democratic Policy Committee as they sought to inform their party's position on the controversial issue.
Arthur Caplan, chairman of the Department of Bioethics at the School of Medicine, made an impassioned presentation on the ethics of stem-cell research.
Caplan said that there is a danger that Pennsylvania will be left trailing other states, such as California, in stem-cell technology. Earlier this month, a state-funded California agency began distributing $3 billion in grants for stem-cell research.
As a prominent Pennsylvania-based research scientist, Caplan stressed the pitfalls of falling behind, both financially and morally."If people find a remedy for Parkinson's," he argued, "are we going to ban this treatment? Force people to go elsewhere?"
Caplan was followed by Stephen Emerson, professor of Medicine and chief of Hematology-Oncology at Penn, who was equally passionate. "We are undergoing a paradigm shift," Emerson said. "Stem-cell research is not just a slice of medicine, it is the future."
But the committee of legislators approached the speakers' enthusiasm with some trepidation, a reminder that stem-cell research remains a controversial issue.
Representative Richard Grucela (D-Northampton) took particular exception to an analogy Caplan made that seemed to conflate the destruction of embryos with that of store inventory.
After the hearing, Caplan was nonetheless optimistic about the committee's attitude toward stem-cell research, expressing hope that the state may move to allow some funding.
"From the point of view of national policy ... stem-cell research is a winner for the Democrats. It's going to be tough for [U.S. Sen.] Santorum (R-Pa.) to be against it."
The bulk of the audience was very receptive toward the speakers' ideas. "The evidence seems to overwhelmingly point to the benefits of stem-cell research," said Michal Raucher, a Bioethics doctoral student. "I hope the representatives can see past their preconceived notions."
The hearing was a significant event for the University to host, and this was reflected in the mix of undergraduate and graduate students in attendance.
Jim Dawes, a spokesman for the Democratic Policy Committee, said that such hearings play a significant role in shaping the party platform. "The information we collect is really the basis for legislation," he added.
Many scientists believe that stem-cell research may yield treatments for common human afflictions, such as Parkinson's disease.
The Bush administration restricted the further expansion of embryonic stem-cell research, which requires the harvesting of undeveloped human embryos. It is also possible to obtain stem cells from adults, but many scientists believe that the cells taken from embryos have more scientific potential.
Adult stem-cell research receives federal funding and has resulted in treatments for several diseases.
The conference at Penn follows one held Aug. 3 at the University of Pittsburgh.
