Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act

ALTERNATIVE PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL THERAPIES ENHANCEMENT ACT -- (House of Representatives - July 18, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to myself.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to S. 2754, the so-called Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act.

This bill may seem innocuous on its face. It just tells the Secretary of HHS to research these alternative therapies. But, in fact, it has several key problems. The first one is it sets a disturbing precedent. The bill requires the Secretary of HHS to conduct research into so-called alternative therapies. These therapies, however, do not exist. And they would shift precious resources from the NIH into this fake research that doesn't really exist.

Secondly, as a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, I am very concerned when we direct the NIH to pursue one type of research over another. Congress never directs the course of research.

Imagine if we told the NIH, Congress, I guess because we are the uber researchers now, to pursue one type of cancer research over another type of cancer research.

Thirdly, alternative methods for creating pluripotent stem cells are not a real scientific prospect at this time.

As I mentioned during the debate on the last piece of legislation, these types of research have been hypothesized from time to time, but no one has actually had any clinical application. The only promise has been shown in embryonic stem cell research.

Frankly, this bill does worse than nothing. This bill diverts attention and resources away from embryonic stem cell research, which is the research that really shows promise for diseases that affect tens of millions of people, diseases like nerve damage, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and so many others.

I support all legitimate research, but Congress and the White House should not be giving false hope to patients across America who just want to have cures for their diseases.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of our time.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Florida says this is a strange argument, and he has got that right, because this is a very strange bill. What it does is it says the Secretary shall conduct research into these so-called alternatives. But these are alternatives not specified in the legislation. But what is worse is it will take resources away from the already minuscule amount of resources that are being put in at the NIH to enforce the little stem cell research that is going on in this country.

Frankly, some of the kind of research techniques that have been discussed on the floor today, including those by my friend Mr. Bartlett from Maryland, are techniques for alternative derivation of cells and so on that would, in fact, involve destruction of embryos.

And Dr. Leon Cass, who is the President's own chairman of his bioethics committee, said that it remains to be seen, in his view, whether any of those proposals for alternate sources of stem cells will succeed, and more discussion is surely required of some of the ethical issues.

So even their own expert thinks this bill may be unethical. Why would we do this when we have so many scientific advances that are just outside of our grasp? Why would we do this when there are thousands of embryos that are thrown away as medical waste? It would be as if your child was in a car crash, and you decided that the ethical thing to do would be to donate that child's organs so that someone else could live.

Why should we not allow people who have these embryos created for in vitro fertilization to donate those embryos which are slated to be thrown away as medical waste, in order that others may live?

We have heard the President intends to veto H.R. 810 and sign this bill. No one will be fooled by this fig leaf. The patients of America, the tens of millions of people who suffer from diseases like Parkinson's, diabetes, paralysis, cancer, heart disease, they know, they know that this research holds hope and they know that 72 percent of Americans support this.

And I would urge the President to think hard about whether this is where he wants to take the stand for his first veto. I would urge this House to think very, very hard about what they will do in that tragic incidence.

Mr. Castle and I asked the President to meet with us, so that we could look him in the eye and explain the bill, and explain the ethical controls that are in the bill, and explain how we too want ethical science but that we want science that is meaningful. He refused to meet with us. I have time tonight. If the President would like to meet with me and Mr. Castle, we would be delighted to explain the tremendous potential of embryonic stem cell research.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov/