Stem cell bill debated

Massachusetts State Senate President Robert Travaglini's proposed a bill Wednesday that would "take the chill off embarking on stem cell research in Massachusetts," but has been met with disapproval from Gov. Mitt Romney and incited a resurgence of debate among state legislators.

Romney criticized the bill in a New York Times interview and wrote a letter to Travaglini stating that the law should prohibit the creation of new human embryos for the purpose of research.

The crux of the debate, as well as Travaglini's bill, is whether a process called nuclear transfer -- in which the nucleus of an unfertilized egg cell is replaced by material from the nucleus of another cell and stimulated to begin dividing should be allowed. It would involve creating embryos specifically for research rather than relying on those left over from fertility clinics, Travaglini spokeswoman Ann Dufresne said.

Last week's bill sought to send biotechnology companies a message that the commonwealth supports embryonic stem cell research, particularly after researchers complained of ambiguous laws that required them to receive approval from a district attorney.

Romney's letter said current Massachusetts laws restrict embryonic stem cell research, even that which is federally funded under President George W. Bush's policy, should be amended to foster unrestricted adult and umbilical stem cell research. But he stopped at the creation of embryos for research.

"I believe that the process of cloning human embryos for reproduction crosses the boundary of ethics," Romney's letter stated. "Lofty goals do not justify the creation of life for experimentation and destruction."

But Dufresne said Romney's argument ignored progressive science.

"The argument that the Governor has indicated would basically change the whole area of research and drive the researchers to other states," Dufresne said. "For us it's an economic issue and a matter of saving lives.

"We believe that we have many safeguards in the Senate bill," Dufresne continued. "We ban human reproductive cloning and the sale of embryos. The Senate President was very disappointed that the Governor chose to send an opposing message by raising fears and unfounded doubts."

Romney's recommendations would prevent the creation of embryonic stem cell lines that are identical to patients' genes. These stem cell lines may someday allow doctors to produce genetically identical tissues that would eliminate the problem of patients' rejecting organ transplants, according to Charles Jennings, Executive Director of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute.

In the more immediate future, Jennings said, scientists need embryonic stem cells to better understand disease processes and screen drugs to combat them.

Former Speaker of the House Thomas Finneran opposed legislation similar to Travaglini's bill, but current speaker Salvatore DiMasi (D-Boston) has said he fully supports the legislation.

"This is something that the speaker has voiced support for in the past," DiMasi spokeswoman Kimberly Haberlin said. "This research presents an opportunity not only to save lives, but to but to create jobs."

Many in the medical research community have spoken out against Romney's recommendations.

"Stem cell research is viewed by leading scientists and science organizations as one of the most promising avenues for advancement in the 21st century," said Sean Tipton, spokesman for the Coalition for Advancement of Medical Research. "I think that the people and the government of Massachusetts have a choice to protect their status as one of the leading intellectual and research centers or not - and it looks like Governor Romney is coming down on the side of not."

The next step in the legislative process will occur Wednesday when members of the public and the research community along with Romney will meet before the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technology to explore the topic.

Sen. Jack Hart (D-Boston) said, "There's a general appetite in the House and Senate to do something. But the question is 'what do we do?' We have to deal with the ethical arguments. A lot of people are concerned about haphazardly creating thousands of embryos."