Gold Dome Live is moving!
Our new spot will allow us to get the news to you even faster and make commenting easier. Please bookmark the new site and sign up for our rss feed:
http://blogs.ajc.com/gold-dome-live/
AJC.com > Legislature > Blog > Archives > 2007 > March > 20 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USStem cell bill passes Senate
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Georgia women would be encouraged to donate post-natal tissue and fluids for non-embryonic stem cell research under a bill that passed the Senate this morning.
Senate Bill 148, sponsored by Sen. David Shafer (R-Duluth), gained approval by a vote of 39 to 15. The bill establishes a Newborn Umbilical Cord Blood Bank, or a network of banks, overseen by a 15-member state commission. All state hospitals would be required by June 30, 2009, to inform pregnant women that they can donate placenta, umbilical cords, and amniotic fluid to the bank.
Typically, post-natal tissue is simply discarded as medical waste. Those fluids and tissues contain non-embryonic stem cells that can be used to treat several diseases.
Shafer named his bill in honor of Keone Penn, a sickle-cell anemia survivor from Snellville treated with non-embryonic stem cells.
“My bill is designed to do one thing: promote non-destructive stem cell research,” Shafer said. “It does not prohibit any kind of research. It does not discourage any kind of research.”
Several lawmakers, however, expressed concern about the bill’s language. The measure does not ban or prohibit embryonic stem cell research, but states that the public policy of Georgia will be to encourage the donation, collection and storage of non-embryonic stem cells for scientific treatment and medical research.
The bill also states that embryonic stem cell research has been “hampered by difficulties” and that embryonic stem cells have a tendency to “to form tumors.”
Sen.David Adelman (D-Atlanta), a strong supporter of both embryonic and non-embryonic stem cell research, asked lawmakers to remove the language in the bill that “discourages promising research and steals hope.”
“What I’m asking you to do is to remove the language that will take away some of the hope held out by many Georgians who are suffering some of the worse debilitating and degenerative diseases known to mankind,”Adelman said.
Shafer, who is opposed to embryonic stem cell research, declined to remove any of the bill’s language. Embryonic stem cell research requires the destruction of a human embryo at an early stage of development- a process that some people believe destroys a human life, and is therefore, unethical.
Several groups such as Georgia Right to Life and the Georgia Christian Alliance said they supported Shafer’s bill earlier this year during lengthy committee hearings on the issue.
The Georgia Biomedical Partnership, a private non-profit association representing the life sciences industry in Georgia, opposed the measure.
“We wholeheartedly support the efforts of SB 148 to establish a newborn umbilical cord blood bank and provide access to this tissue and blood for research and medical treatment,” wrote Charles Craig, the association’s president.
“We oppose references in the bill to embryonic stem cell research as unnecessary to the bill’s purpose and in some cases unscientific.”
Embryonic stem cells - despite the controversy around the issue - have not cured any disease yet. However, many scientists believe the regenerative abilities of such cells eventually will yield cures to diseases such as cancer, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s.
Nonembryonic stem cells have effectively treated diseases such as anemia, leukemia, lymphoma and sickle-cell disease. But some scientists say such cells are limited in their ability to treat a wide-range of diseases. A scientific panel recently determined that a 2002 study that found adult stem cells might be as useful as embryonic ones was flawed.
Shafer introduced a similar bill last year that created considerable controversy. The parts of the bill that established an umbilical cord blood bank received near universal support from Republican and Democratic lawmakers, Georgia’s scientific community, advocates for patients with degenerative and chronic diseases, and conservative Christian groups.
A ban on human cloning - a process not yet achieved and widely denounced by scientists and religious leaders alike - also won wide support.
But a section of the measure that would have banned therapeutic cloning —- a process that many scientists argue may someday hold the cure for degenerative diseases and spinal cord injuries —- concerned many individuals and patient advocacy groups. Shafer eventually removed the controversial language, and the bill passed the Senate and then the House on the final day of the session.
The measure needed to come before the Senate for a final rubber-stamp of approval - but the clock ran out.
Gov. Sonny Perdue issued an executive order that resurrected some parts of the bill, but that order will sunset at the end of the year.
Senate Bill 148 now heads to the House for approval.
Permalink | Comments (6) | Categories: Health Care
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By The World Isn't Flat
March 20, 2007 3:35 PM | Link to this
This bill has some positive qualities, but this bill isn’t about science it’s about pandering to fringe ideologues who oppose using left over embryonic stem cells that would otherwise go in the dumpster for research. If you’re so oppposed to embryonic stem cell research why don’t you ban in-vitro fertilization. That leads to left over embryos. I guess you all would rather THROW EMBRYOS IN THE TRASHCAN in the name of religious dogma than allow for promising research that could save you lives in the future. Most scientists believe(except those paid to say so by fringe right groups)that embryonic stem cell research has the most potential. Does that mean the the bill our Senate passed is all bad? No, but we should pursue both types of stem cell research. Many of the people who oppose embroyonic stem cell research think the world is 6,000 years and that Terry Sciavo would be doing Calculus with proper treatment.(Thank You Phil Gingrey) Evangelical Christians are the flat Earthers of the 21st century, so when they speak on issues concerning science they deserve to be tuned out. They, not scientists are the ones with the agenda. Scientists are not held back by religious dogma be it Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Wiccan, Judaism, Buddism or Heavens Gateism. They do their job with an open mind and PEER SCRUTINY. Evangelical Christians have an agenda when it comes to the sonogram bill, this stem cell research bill and in making the rogue science known as creationism part of our states science standards. I wonder how evangelical Christians would react if their local school board fell under scientologist and christian scientist control. How would they feel if Scientologists put ideological disclaimer stickers in science and psychology books. How would they feel if the Christian Scientists removed nurses from all the schools and let kids did on school property rather than give them health care. Science is reason and religon often defies reason. This bill was driven by Fringe Right lobbyists not science.
By Sharie
March 20, 2007 3:54 PM | Link to this
Religious beliefs have NOTHING to do with science. You politicos need to remember what you are in office to do: serve the people who support you. That means everyone - even people who do not share your particular religious beliefs. Science is pure and has nothing to do with faith, ethics and God. Please remember that.
By newkid
March 20, 2007 4:58 PM | Link to this
The current bill may not reach the heights some of us would prefer, but I agree with a previous poster who said “…bill has some positive qualities…” I’ll take those positive qualities here in Georgia in 2007, then seek to build upon them in future. Rather than attempting to sort of ‘force democracy at the point of a gun’, let’s build (over time) toward a more substantive state stem cell policy one mind at a time. Let’s take this hill today, then redouble our efforts to take another hill tomorrow. Surely we’ll save SOME lives - that would have otherwise been lost - along the journey.
By Bill
March 20, 2007 5:07 PM | Link to this
Sharie,
I am on your side on this, but I have to disagree with your last statement. I think Science has everything to do with faith ethics and God.
Scientific research often takes years to accomplish, and there is no promise of success. Faith is what scientist have to go on.
Science has the utmost concern for ethics (not dogma). Scientist wrestle with difficult moral and ethical issues all the time.
Science is how we as human beings can expand our understanding of God and his creation. We can’t do it through preaching and moralizing. That is just emotional rehashing of old ideas.
Respectfully Bill
By Faye
March 20, 2007 5:19 PM | Link to this
Sonji, I have a problem with the concept expressed here: “Embryonic stem cell research requires the “destruction” of a human embryo at an early stage of development- a process that some people believe destroys a human life, and is therefore, unethical.”
I think it is far more appropriate to refer to embryonic stem cell research in the same way you refer to umbilical cord blood stem cells. Using your text: “Typically, post-natal tissue/EMBRYONIC TISSUE is simply discarded as medical waste.”
In both cases tissue is being recycled that would otherwise be thrown away.
Is it better to let embryonic tissue perish in the trash, than it is to recycle it for life-saving research?
These cells were never implanted in a woman and thus none of embryonic stem cell research can be equated to abortion.
Just today tens of thousands of embryonic tissue cells were thrown out at in vitro fertilization clinics across the USA.
Let’s turn this medical waste into life’s treasure for the 100 million americans who are suffering debilitating and deadly medical conditions.
Like Keone, my son Jason also suffered a stroke when he was 7 years old. But Jason wasn’t as lucky as Keone,……Jason became paralyzed from the nose down.
We all know that umbilical cord blood stem cells were able to prevent Keone from suffering the same fate that Jason suffered, by curing the sickle cell disease that caused Keone’s stroke.
But had Keone become paralyzed from his first stroke,……the umbilical cord blood stem cells would have been unable to restore any muscle function to him, because neurological conditions are much more amenable to embryonic stem cell treatments as animal studies are pointing out.
I am hopeful Senator David Adelman will reintroduce the embryonic stem cell research bill to help others, who do not have the blood-related conditions that can be helped with umbilical cord blood stem cells.
Jason too wants his life restored to “normal”. He continues to feel terribly left behind while he watches his four sisters lives move forward.
It’s the most horrific experience to be trapped in a body that does not work for you.
By JIM
March 21, 2007 9:14 PM | Link to this
stem cell research is unacceptable