The Senate voted to greatly expand federally funded embryonic stem cell research Tuesday, even as lawmakers prepared for President Bush to quickly veto the measure. The issued an official veto threat Monday, and lawmakers and aides say they expect the president to veto the popular bill as early as Wednesday.

That would likely be followed by a vote Wednesday night in the House on whether to override the veto. "It will be pretty swift once you have a duly passed bill," White House Press Secretary Tony Snow told reporters before the vote Tuesday.

Senators voted to repeal a policy ordered by President Bush in August 2001 that limited federal research to 77 embryonic stem cell lines already created at the time. At the time Bush said that the policy would let stem cell research proceed without promoting research that destroys human embryos for their cells.

But only about a quarter of the lines have proven viable for study. Backers of the research have lobbied ever since to broaden the research because of its potential to treat diseases including diabetes and Parkinson's disease.

The bill, which passed the senate 63-37, instead expands federal funding to an estimated 400,000 embryos formed for in vitro fertilization but no longer needed for the treatment. Scientists want to use the embryos to grow potentially thousands of cell lines that could be used to generate hundreds of kinds of human tissue.

"It is clear we either use them or destroy them," said Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), a chief sponsor of the bill.

Anti-abortion groups remain strongly opposed to using embryos for their stem cells. But in Congress the issue divided pro-life lawmakers, who were among the strongest opponents and staunchest backers of expanding research.

"I believe that by using these embryos for medical research we are in fact promoting life. In fact I believe that we are aiding the living, which is one of the most pro-life positions you can take," said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).

Sen. Sam Brownback, (R-Kan.) held a press conference featuring children whose parents adopted them as embryos frozen in fertilization clinics. Several conservative lawmakers promoted adoption as an alternative to using excess embryos for medical research.

"What we're talking about in this debate is the use of embryos, young humans, as raw materials, raw material in research, raw material to exploit," he said.

The bill was backed by dozens of medical research and patient groups, many of which pled with President Bush to alter his plans for a veto.

But those plans seemed firm Tuesday evening as the Senate voted to repeal the President's limits.

At the same time, the Senate unanimously passed two other research bills. One bans research on embryos implanted in an animal womb or grown during a woman's pregnancy, a practice sponsors dubbed "fetal farming." The second commits federal research dollars to alternative methods of extracting stem cells without destroying embryos.

Both bills were slated for quick passage in the House Tuesday night. The entire package of three bills is then scheduled to head for the White House for approval or veto on Wednesday.

House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Tuesday he expects the House to vote Wednesday evening on whether to override Bush's likely veto. The bill garnered 238 votes last May, far short of the 290 it would need to overrule the president.

The Senate would have to generate 67 votes to override a veto.

earlier related report

Adult Stem-Cell Utility Doubted

by Steve Mitchell
UPI Senior Medical Corresponden

Washington (UPI) Jul 17, 2006

As the Senate nears a vote on a bill that would expand embryonic stem cell funding, a group of scientists argue that adult stem cells have not proven as useful in treating disease as some embryonic stem cell opponents have claimed.

The embryonic opponents have said adult stem cells have been used to treat more than 60 disorders, but three scientists state in an article in Science Express, the online version of Science, that most of these claims are spurious and the cells have actually only been proven to work in nine conditions.

"It's bad science and bad ethics to misrepresent adult stem cell treatments in an effort to mislead the public about the potential benefits of research with embryonic stem cells," William Neaves, an author of the article and the president and CEO of the Stowers Institute for Medical Research, told United Press International. The Stowers Institute is a non-profit organization based in Kansas City, Missouri, focused on basic biomedical research.

Embryonic stem cell research is controversial because current techniques require the destruction of an embryo, a microscopic ball of cells. The scientific consensus is that the research could lead to insights about diseases and even treatments to replace damaged or diseased tissues.

In the Science Express article, Neaves and his co-authors take issue with a list established by David Prentice, an embryonic stem cell opponent employed by the Family Research Council and an adviser to Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., and Rep. Dave Weldon, R-Fla. Both Brownback and Weldon have led efforts in Congress opposing embryonic-stem-cell research.

Neaves and his co-authors note that Prentice has said adult stem cells have been used with at least 65 different human diseases.

"In fact, adult stem cell treatments fully tested in all required phases of clinical trials and approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration are available to treat only nine of the conditions on the Prentice list, not 65," Neaves' team wrote. "Most of his cited treatments remain unproven and await clinical validation. Other claims, such as those for Parkinson's or spinal cord injury, are simply untenable."

Prentice did not return a phone call from United Press International seeking comment.

"By promoting the falsehood that adult stem cell treatments are already in general use for 65 diseases and injuries, Prentice and those who repeat his claims mislead laypeople and cruelly deceive patients," Neaves and his co-authors conclude.

The stem cell debate has now reached a head with the Senate set to next week take up the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, which would relax restrictions imposed by President George Bush and allow federal funding to go towards surplus embryos from fertilization clinics that are destined to be destroyed.

The Senate appears to have enough votes to pass the measure, which has already been approved by the House, but Bush has said he would veto the legislation.

Another claim often made by embryonic stem cell foes is that the cells have not yet been used to treat a single patient, which indicates the research field lacks potential and should be abandoned.

"That is a fabricated excuse," Neaves said. "If that argument were accepted, it would foreclose all advances in medicine," he said, noting that penicillin was discovered in 1928 but as late as 1940 no person had been successfully treated with the antibiotic.

"People could've said in 1940 that nobody has been helped by penicillin, therefore we shouldn't pursue it," Neaves said. As it was, penicillin turned out to be a critically important treatment for infections and opened the door for the field of antibiotics.

He noted that the nine approved treatments for adult stem cells have been developed after 50 years of research with the cells. The first human embryonic stem cells were isolated only 8 years ago.

Neaves said he respects the views of those who oppose embryonic stem cell research because it involves the destruction of an embryo, but added he thinks it is inappropriate for them to impose their beliefs on the majority of Americans who support the research moving forward.

Michael Werner, president of the Werner Group, a biotech consulting firm in Washington, told UPI the impact of the bill's passage could have both direct and indirect benefits for industry.

"I think the Senate supporting passing the bill is helpful to companies, because it's sort of one more imprimatur that this research has potential and is important and should be a national priority," Werner said. This could lead to more research and work done with embryonic stem cells, which could translate into more opportunities for industry to commercialize their products, he added.

"The direct effect on industry is a little harder to judge because industry is not usually NIH grantees," which is the focus of the bill, he said.

One potential effect is that biotech companies and even Big Pharma may increasingly move towards using embryonic stem cells in the drug discovery process. "There are more and more companies getting into that and using stem cells for that purpose," Werner said.

Vistagen, a biotech company based in Burlingame, Calif., is already moving in that direction, he said. "I think you'll see Big Pharma get into this a little bit too," he added.

If the bill doesn't pass or Bush vetoes it, Werner expects the impact on industry to be minor.

The expectation is that Bush will kill the bill, so that may offset some of the disappointment industry would otherwise have, he said.

"But it's not a devastating impact," he said. "Companies will continue to make discoveries and push the field forward as best as they can."

Source: United Press International