PROP. 71 WOULD STOP TOP RESEARCHERS' FLIGHT.

Byline: Deborah Ortiz 

IN 2002 I had the privilege of authoring California's landmark legislation to authorize stem-cell research in the state. I also gained passage of bills in 2003 to put in place ethical guidelines for embryonic stem-cell research and to strengthen informed-consent requirements for couples and individuals considering donating embryos to medical research. Now Californians have the opportunity to build on the legislative record I - and others - have established by enacting Proposition 71 on the November ballot.

Stem-cell research proponents and opponents have come before the Senate Health and Human Services Committee numerous times, including most recently at a hearing in San Diego on Sept. 15. The scientists and patient advocates who have testified at these hearings have presented a compelling case for the state to proceed with public funding for stem-cell research, as provided by Proposition 71.

Some 128 million Americans suffer from diseases and disorders that may one day find treatments in stem-cell research. They include 30,000 patients who suffer from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, a devastating disease that progressively destroys nerve cells in the brain and the spinal cord, eventually causing paralysis and death. They also include 4.5 million people with Alzheimer's disease, 1 million who are diagnosed with cancer each year, 18 million with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes, 61 million with heart disease, 1.5 million with Parkinson's disease and up to 400,000 people with spinal-cord injury.

The limits on federal funding for stem-cell research and the proposed ban on certain forms of stem-cell research - passed twice by the House - have driven leading researchers to other countries and slowed down the development of cures and treatments for these diseases.

According to most scientists, embryonic stem-cell research may produce highly effective treatments for diabetes, Parkinson's disease, spinal-cord injury and other conditions, but it hasn't been given a chance to show its potential due to the federal funding restrictions. Research on embryonic stem cells is at a nascent stage where government funding is critical. The private sector cannot be relied on to fund this type of research.

Stem-cell research should be conducted pursuant to strict ethical standards, and Proposition 71 ensures that it will be. The initiative requires funded research to meet standards of the National Institutes for Health for informed consent - of research donors, patients or participants - and for protection of human subjects. It also requires funded research to comply with applicable state and federal patient-privacy laws, and it limits payments for stem cells and imposes time limits for obtaining cells from embryos. Perhaps most importantly, contrary to the claims of opponents, it prohibits use of research funds for human cloning.

Three-hundred-million dollars per year over 10 years may sound like a lot of money for biomedical research, but the University of California currently receives and spends $1.6 billion annually for biomedical research. An analysis by Stanford economist Laurence Baker shows that, even using conservative assumptions, economic benefits to the state in the form of new tax revenues, research royalties and savings in health-care costs will exceed the costs of the bonds.

Finally, despite the scare tactics of opponents, Proposition 71 contains safeguards to ensure the funds are expended appropriately and for the purposes established in the initiative, including extensive auditing, clear qualifications for persons appointed to decision-making and advisory positions, strict conflict-of-interest requirements and open-meeting and public-records requirements.

Proposition 71 deserves to be passed because it will fill the gap in funding left by the federal restrictions and advance stem-cell research to the point that it may become commercially attractive, leading to clinical trials and applications. The fact that more than 20 Nobel scientists have endorsed Proposition 71 speaks highly of the critical need for this research funding.