Frequently Asked Questions

regarding current legislation that requests $100 million for New York State based stem-cell research this year

  1. In light of New York State's projected $5 billion of debt, where is the money for stem-cell research going to come from?

    We are hoping to get the money from the HIP conversion. Put simply, the Health Insurance Plan of New York, or HIP, is changing from a non-profit organization to a for-profit insurance company. When a company goes private, revenue is generated during the conversion. As a result of the Health Care Reform Act (HCRA, pronounced hik-ra), this money, approximately $1.5 billion, will go into a fund that will be spent on health-related initiatives. We are asking that $100 million of this money be allocated to embryonic stem-cell research this year. This proposal was included in Speaker Sheldon Silver's bill that is currently on the floor in the Assembly, and we are hoping this is what Senator Nick Spano will suggest in the Senate bill that he has promised to introduce.

  2. What kinds of stem-cell research will be supported?

    There are two fundamental types of stem cells. Embryonic stem cells have the potential to generate all the different tissues of the body. Tissue-specific stem cells generate the cell types found in a single tissue, such as the brain or the pancreas. This bill will support research on both types of cells, as well as on other aspects of stem-cell medicine. It is targeted at all types of stem-cell research that offer therapeutic potential, including tissue-specific stem-cell research (ie. the specimens derived from adult tissue) and research on cancer stem cells. Embryonic stem-cell research is just one part of this effort.

  3. What are embryonic stem cells?

    Embryonic stem cells are undifferentiated, meaning that they don't belong to one specific organ. They have the potential to generate any type of tissue in the body. The potential that embryonic stem cells present to scientists is immeasurable. There have already been promising findings in the field of Parkinson's research using embryonic stem cells in mice and monkeys. But without State funding, New York scientists will not be able to expand the research to help the millions of people in this state who are suffering from any number of incurable diseases and conditions.

  4. Where do embryonic stem cells come from?

    Embryonic stem cells are derived at a very early stage of development called a blastocyst. This is a simple ball of about 100 cells that is similar in all species of animals at this stage of development. Embryonic stem cells are derived from the cells in the center of this blastocyst.

    Blastocysts are obtained from in vitro fertilization clinics. These clinics have produced an estimated 500,000 healthy, much-loved children over the two decades of their existence. When a woman undergoes in vitro fertilization (IVF) it often takes several tries before an embryo implants itself successfully in the uterus, just as it does in nature. In the IVF clinic, a woman will have multiple eggs fertilized in case the first attempts at pregnancy do not work. After the procedure is successful, however, the leftover blastocysts are discarded. We believe it is more ethical to use at least some of these blastocysts to supply small numbers of embryonic stem cells for research, than to throw them away.

    What we propose can be compared to the use of tissues from organ donations. The difference is that scientists would be extracting embryonic stem cells from discarded blastocysts rather than transplanting organs. Such cells could be used to generate many billions of tissue-specific stem cells, which in turn could be used to develop treatments for people suffering from a variety of diseases and conditions, including Parkinson's, diabetes, Alzheimer's, spinal cord injury, certain cancers, and many other serious afflictions.

  5. Why not just do stem-cell research with tissue-specific stem cells from adults, instead of embryonic stem cells? Isn't that better anyway?

    The use of tissue specific stem cells derived from adults has some promise and is an area of scientific interest. For instance, there may be populations of cells in the bone marrow that can be induced to make cell types of a variety of tissues. Indeed, passage of the Silver and Spano legislation will enable this research to be conducted much more vigorously.

    At this moment in time, however, it is critical to realize that there are serious limits to the effectiveness of adult stem cells. Experiments attempting to use such cells for repair in the brain, for example, have shown low levels of brain cell production. While adult stem cells from the bone marrow seem likely to have some uses, such as the repair of damaged heart muscle, they also seem likely to have less potential utility than embryonic stem cells.

    Other adult-derived cells also have been used, such as cells from the adult pancreas to treat diabetes patients. Each year 3,000 healthy pancreases are given to science as a result of organ donation. It takes the adult stem cells of two healthy pancreases to repair the damage in the pancreas of one diabetes patient. Even if the treatment worked in 100% of diabetes cases, this means that only 1,500 people with diabetes could be helped each year. Yet in the United States alone, 1.4 million people suffer from Type 1 Diabetes. Helping 1,500 diabetics per year is a good start, but hardly sufficient. Such results demonstrate the absolute need to develop stem-cell based approaches to the generation of cells needed for repair. The best way that currently can be seen to create such cells is through research involving embryonic stem cells.

  6. What is the difference between therapeutic cloning (which we support) and reproductive cloning (which we are against)?

    Reproductive cloning is cloning with the intention of creating human beings. We do not support this, and any legislation that we endorse strictly prohibits reproductive cloning. Speaker Silver's legislation prohibits reproductive cloning, as would Senator Spano's proposed bill. Scientists are also against reproductive cloning for scientific and moral reasons. Not only is the practice unethical, but there is also a very low success rate, and animals can develop unexpected diseases.

    In therapeutic cloning by contrast, the nucleus of an adult cell is introduced into an unfertilized egg. This allows the adult cell DNA to now behave like embryonic cell DNA. In the tissue culture dish, development will proceed to the stage of a blastocyst, but no further. Indeed, unless these blastocysts are implanted in the uterine wall, there are no means to enable them to develop beyond this stage of a ball of 100 simple cells. Embryonic stem cells can then be derived from these blastocysts, and used to generate other cell types for tissue repair. There is no pregnancy involved in therapeutic cloning. Blastocysts generated by therapeutic cloning would never be implanted in a woman, and thus there is no way that a pregnancy could result. The reason therapeutic cloning holds so much promise is that this approach to cell creation enables you to use the cells from your own body to treat your own diseases. There is none of the potential for the rejection that can happen when tissue is transplanted from one human being to another.

  7. Isn't this just one more step towards human cloning?

    No. We believe that human cloning is morally and ethically reprehensible, and all legislation that we support strictly prohibits it. These laws will be in place to ensure that therapeutic cloning is used only for beneficial, ethical research, and that no reproductive cloning of humans is enabled to take place.

  8. Are people going to profit from this?

    The legislation that we support expressly prohibits the donation of embryonic tissue in exchange for financial compensation.

    The people who will "profit" from this research are the millions of patients whose lives could be saved through embryonic stem-cell research supported by the State. The state of New York will also "profit" in the sense that our scientists are likely to remain here to continue their work, if financial support were to be available locally.

  9. What will happen if these efforts are not funded?

    Considering the likely importance of stem-cell therapies in the next stage of medicine, denying financial support to these efforts would be the equivalent in previous years of denying support for research on vaccination or antibiotics. Can you imagine a medical system that does not support work on vaccination? Stem-cell medicine offers a similar potential of revolutionizing current medical practice.

    At the moment, California and New Jersey have allocated major funding to support stem-cell research. California has passed legislation that will provide $3 billion over the next ten years to support a wide range of stem-cell research. Other states are also moving to provide support for such research. Some New York State scientists have already left to go to California, and others have been approached to see if they can be lured there. Many more will leave if New York State is the only medically advanced state not to support this research.