Funding for Stem Cell Research

Can ample funding for stem cell research lead to dramatic improvements in our world’s medical and biological technology? The editorial from Nature magazine “A law in time?” reported the recent news that the United States government is placing a halt on the National Institutes of Health stem cell research funding. The NIH funding allows scientists in the area of stem cell research to further their experiments and new findings with a sufficient amount of financial help. Without the aid of the NIH these scientists will not be able afford the equipment and research materials they are looking for to make life changing discoveries. The second article also from Nature magazine “Stem cell work thrown into loop” focuses on the actual effect that this new change in government has on the particular scientists, the ambiguity of the temporary nature of this halt, and the unsure feelings these researchers have about their employment. While both articles seem to overlap in the sense that they are dealing with the sudden loss of NIH funding, “ A law in time?” attempts to comprehend the ambiguity of the government’s decision while the “Stem cell work thrown into loop” notes the confusion of the new law, the consequences of loss of funding, and the dim future it has for scientific research in the field of human embryonic stem cells.

“A law in time?” recognizes the distressing news that the United States gave to the future of stem cell research. Instead of seeing the personal portion, this editorial focuses on the legal and financial aspect of the controversial issue of ceasing NIH funding In “A law in time?” the author’s thesis is that indeed human embryonic stem cell research doesn’t have much hope for the future because their primary source of funding will no longer be available. What makes this all so controversial? The US government is confident that the injunction will not be overturned because “the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, where the NIH's appeal injunction…(A law in time?).” But then again, “A law in time?” issues statements that would have scientists believing that it will all turn around. The Dickey-Wicker bill has been attached to the NIH funds for many years, and while the bill came out years before stem cell research was well known, congress has reapproved it repeated times. The article also stated that the change in presidency from George W. Bush to Barak Obama allowed for better funding from the NIH. These reasons give scientists the false hope that the economic aspect of their research still has a fighting chance. “A law in time?” truly emphasizes the ambiguity and reality of what NIH funding will be and creates even more controversy when it comes to the support for stem cell research.

On the other hand “Stem cell work thrown into loop” reveals the personal aspect of the controversy. While the first editorial speaks of the legal and economic facet, this article shows the effect on individuals. Scientist Candace Kerr is used as an example of one of the many people affected by the loss of federal funding. Many of her experiments that she has spent ample time and money on will all be set aside because of the sudden loss of funding. For a thesis, a temporary stop in financial support for the research has caused hundreds of scientist’s inquiry and put them in legal and financial jeopardy. Not only would they lose the ability to work on their particular experiments, they lose the potential of the end results and the security of their job.

The uncertainties of funding in the world of human embryonic stem cell research defeats the purpose of the excitement in discovery and experiment. While the two articles might not necessarily have opposing viewpoints they don’t share the hardships of either’s side. Right now the ambiguity of the government’s decision is creating more conflict; scientists are compromising their jobs, their work, and the potential of what stem cell research can bring to the modern world. The vagueness of what will eventually happen to the scientists funding stops any progress or discovery of what they could have made. Who would want to become a scientist where even the chance to experiment and test isn’t possible?

“A law in time?” Nature (2010). Article: Nature. 02 Sept.2010. Web. 06 Sept. 2010
“Stem-cell work thrown into limbo” Nature (2010). Article: Nature. 31 Aug. 2010. Web.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v467/n7311/full/467007a.html
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100831/full/467012a.html