As this is being written, George W. Bush is trying to decide whether federal funds should be used for stem cell research. It could prove to be the thorniest issue of his presidency.

Stem cells were an unknown quantity to most medical researchers until a report by Eliot Marshall in the Nov. 6, 1998, issue of Science stated that James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin and John Gearhart of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine had been able to grow cultures of human stem cells in the laboratory. This created a wave of excitement in medical research because stem cells, writes Gretchen Vogel in the Dec. 10, 1999, issue of Science, “can become almost any cell in the body and hold great promise for treating a range of diseases.”

Dr. Thomas Okarma, of California’s Geron Corp., which funded Thomson and Gearhart, graphically illustrated this point to a Senate subcommittee in 1999 when he described experiments that successfully caused human embryonic stem (hES) cells to differentiate into a wide range of specialized cells including gut, cartilage, bone, smooth and striated muscle, and nerve cells. In short, said Okarma, hES cells have the capability to change into virtually any type of cell tissue in the body.

In a subsequent article in the March 2 issue of Science, Vogel states that 80 Nobel laureates sent a letter to President Bush on Feb. 22 urging him to allow government-funded research on hES cells. One might wonder, given this type of support, why there is any hesitation on the part of the administration to give the go-ahead for funding.

The reason is that the source of hES cells is the blastocyst, an early embryonic stage resembling a tiny hollow ball. The embryonic stem (ES) cells make up the interior surface of the ball, so the embryo must be destroyed in order to collect them. So far ES cells have been obtained from surplus embryos in fertility clinics; however, even this limited use has outraged many in the pro-life community and caused a sense of uneasiness in a large segment of the population.

A USA Today/CNN Gallup Poll published in USA Today on July 18 shows an overwhelming 82 percent of those polled believe it is very important that cures for such conditions as Alzheimer’s and spinal cord injuries be found. These are the very kinds of ailments that ES cell research might help, yet 54 percent find ES cell research morally wrong even if it proves necessary to cure the diseases.

Ethicist Gilbert Meilander, writing in the January-February issue of the Hastings Center Report, likens the dilemma facing President Bush to that of wartime leaders who make the decision to bomb civilian populations in order to end a just war. In other words, the decision to allow ES cell research, while offensive to many, should go forward for the greater good.

The Clinton administration asked the National Institute of Health to issue guidelines for funding ES cell research and Vogel commented on these in the Sept. 1, 2000, issue of Science. One NIH guideline was that ES cell research on embryos created specifically for such research was prohibited. This has already been disregarded by a Virginia fertility clinic that, according to a report in the July 12 issue of The Globe and Mail in Toronto, is growing human embryos specifically to harvest their ES cells. This action, given the availability of stem cells from surplus embryos donated by fertility clinics, is seen as a direct challenge to the administration.

This challenge was foreseen by a group of prominent researchers who, in a letter appearing in the May 18 issue of Science, listed three reasons that federally funded research must go forward. First, withholding of support will not slow or halt ES cell research. Second, failure to fund ES cell research will not prevent destruction of embryos that are already routinely thrown away by the thousands each year. The relevant ethical question, say the authors, is whether these embryos will be wasted or used to benefit humanity. Third, the authors note that the United States is a culturally and religiously diverse nation and the government must not make its decision based on pressure from groups whose views are not shared by other citizens.

The Bush administration has little hard data to help it make its agonizing decision. While ES cells are certain to play a major role in curing neurological diseases, their first test in treating Parkinson’s disease in humans, as reported in the March 16 issue of Science, was disappointing, with some brief remission of symptoms but accompanied by adverse side effects.

An earlier report in the March 2 issue of Science was more encouraging with hES cells implanted in mice showing some regeneration of brain tissue. These ambiguous results simply show that ES cell research is in its infancy and the decision will have to be made as an act of faith balancing greater social good against the belief, held by many, that the process itself is morally suspect.

Clair Wood taught chemistry and physics for more than 10 years at Eastern Maine Technical Center in Bangor.