Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
When lumi-
naries
from
the worlds of govern-
ment, business, sci-
ence, entertain-
ment, and the arts
gathered in New
York City on the
evening of May 8
to honor Time
magazine’s 100,
HSCI Scientific
Co-Director
Douglas A.
Melton, PhD,
was there—
not as a guest, but as a mem-
ber of the illustrious group of honorees.
Melton, who is widely known and highly
respected as a leader in his field, was cited by
Time as one of the 100 most influential peo-
ple in the world in the past year.
In his essay in Time in support of Melton’s
selection, Michael J. Fox—well-known actor,
Parkinson’s disease patient, and passionate
advocate of stem cell research—wrote, “Every
day, Doug is on the front lines of the war not
only against disease, but also against the
obstacles placed in the path of the science.
And he has demonstrated that he has what it
takes to advance this campaign…He has the
skill and creativity to carry out the experi-
ments that need to be done, and the vision
and com-
passion
to know
that true
humanity
lies in reliev-
ing human
suffering, not
in acquiescing
to politics or
ideology.”
Melton is the
Thomas Dudley
Cabot Professor
of the Natural
Sciences at
Harvard University
and a Howard
Hughes Medical
Institute investigator.
He is also a member
of the prestigious National
Academy of Sciences and the Institute of
Medicine, and is the author of more than
100 scientific papers.
In addition to his role as Scientific Co-
Director of HSCI, Melton leads one of HSCI’s
Diabetes Program’s main projects. His lab is
focused primarily on finding ways to direct
embryonic stem cells to become insulin-
producing pancreatic beta cells, and using
somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT, also
known as therapeutic cloning) to produce
diabetes-specific stem cells with which to
better understand, and potentially find
treatments for, this prevalent disease.
Stem CellLinesFor friends and supporters of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute
Spring-Summer / 2007
I N S I D E
Spring-Summer / 2007 1
M a j o r P r o g r e s s
T o w a r d C e l l
R e p r o g r a m m i n g
P A G E 2
H o n o r i n g a
F a t h e r ’ s M e m o r y
P A G E 3
B i o t e c h
C o n f e r e n c e
P A G E 7
E t h i c s o f
E m b r y o n i c S t e m
C e l l R e s e a r c h
P A G E 9
C a m b r i d g e
S c i e n c e F e s t i v a l
P A G E 1 2
HSCI Scientific Co-Director Honored in Time 100
Two Harvard Stem Cell Institute
researchers, along with scientists at the
Whitehead Institute for Biomedical
Research and Japan’s Kyoto University,
have independently made major strides
toward discovering ways to reprogram cells in order
to direct their development—a key goal in regener-
ative medicine.
Three of the scientists’ papers describing these
discoveries confirmed initial findings reported last
year by one of the authors about reprogramming adult
cells, while a fourth has disproved a long-held view of
developmental biologists about the use of fertilized
eggs for nuclear transfer.
In questioning some common assumptions in the
field, HSCI Principal Faculty member Kevin Eggan,
PhD, and his team demonstrated in mice that it is
possible to use previously fertilized eggs to produce
disease-specific stem cell lines using somatic cell
nuclear transfer (SCNT), a technique commonly
referred to as therapeutic cloning. This study is
featured on the cover of the latest issue of the
journal Nature.
It has long been a given in developmental biology
that only unfertilized ova, or eggs, could be used to
perform SCNT, and difficulty in obtaining fresh ova
has brought that work to a standstill. “Now we’re able
to do an experiment a week, where we hadn’t been
able to do a single experiment for a year,” says Eggan.
Eggan’s report came out simultaneously with the
exciting news that research groups led by HSCI
Principal Faculty member Konrad Hochedlinger, PhD,
of Massachusetts General Hospital; Kyoto University’s
Shinya Yamanaka, MD, PhD, and Rudolph Jaenisch,
MD, of the Whitehead Institute each independently
used four genes to transform adult cells into cells with
the properties of an embryonic stem cell, replicating
and expanding upon seminal work published last year
by Yamanaka. The Jaenisch and Yamanaka papers were
published in Nature; Hochedlinger’s appeared in the
inaugural issue of Cell Stem Cell.
HSCI Scientific Co-Director Douglas A. Melton,
PhD, calls the new work exciting, addressing “an
important issue in developmental biol-
ogy, namely how can we change, or
reprogram, a cell, turning it ‘back’ to a
more embryonic state with a greater
potential. The promise of both
approaches is the possibility that we
will be able to create embryonic stem
cells from patients, and use those cells
to study the root causes of degenera-
tive diseases.”
While all four reports have caused
enormous excitement in the scientific
and patient-advocacy worlds, the
researchers caution that, thus far, their
studies have been conducted using mice, and there is
no way to know if they will translate precisely, if at all,
to humans.
“You can really turn back the clock from adult to
embryonic” cells, says HSCI’s Hochedlinger, at the
same time warning that “the limitations are that we
don’t know whether this reprogramming would work
in humans.” Success in humans, he notes, would be
“much more difficult to achieve than in mice.”
Further, all three teams followed Yamanaka’s find-
ing by using retroviruses, which are known to ran-
domly turn on cancer genes, to introduce the neces-
sary genetic factors into the target cells. Thus not only
will scientists have to identify the factors that can
re-set the developmental clock in human cells—if,
indeed, there are such factors—but they will also need
to find a different way to get them into cells, which
may prove to be a daunting task.
Although Eggan and Melton received Harvard
approvals a year ago to proceed with experiments
using SCNT to produce stem cell lines containing the
chromosomes of patients with diabetes and Parkinson’s
disease, they were stymied for an entire year from
conducting any experiments because of a lack of ova
donors. If these results transfer to human cells, as
expected, the ability to produce disease-specific cell
lines will be greatly accelerated.
2 Spring-Summer / 2007
Volume 2Number 2
Stem CellLinesHarvard Stem Cell InstituteExecutive Director
Brock C. Reeve, MPhil, MBA Scientific Directors
Douglas A. Melton, PhDDavid T. Scadden, MD
The Harvard Stem Cell Institute is a scientificcollaborative established to fulfill the promise of stem cell biology as the basis for cure andtreatments for a wide range of chronic medicalconditions. Visit us at www.hsci.harvard.edu.
Stem Cell Lines is published three times ayear for friends and supporters of the HarvardStem Cell Institute. To be added to or removedfrom the mailing list, please contact:
Harvard Stem Cell Institute42 Church StreetCambridge, MA 02138Tel: 617.496.4050E-mail: [email protected]
Stem Cell Lines is also available on the HSCI website.
Managing EditorBrock C. Reeve, MPhil, MBA
EditorHilary F. Bennett
WritingHilary F. BennettB.D. Colen
DesignAndrade Design
Spring-Summer 2007
Stem CellLines
Researchers Make Major Progress Toward Cell Reprogramming
Chromosomes being extracted from a fertilized ova, or zygote. Question-ing the conventional wisdom, HSCI researchers recently discovered that,in mice, it is possible to use fertilized ova to create disease-specific stem cell lines.
Imag
e co
urte
sy o
f Die
ter E
gli,
PhD
Spring-Summer / 2007 3
For friends and supporters of the Harvard Stem Cell Institutes
or nearly 170 years, E.B. Horn has
been a fixture of downtown Boston’s
jewelry district, still operating out of
its original narrow, high-ceiled loca-
tion on Washington Street. For almost
one-quarter of that time—43 years, to be pre-
cise—one of the most recognizable and sought-
after salespeople in the bustling store was
George Trachtenberg, a tall, handsome man
with piercing blue eyes and a warm, gregar-
ious nature.
The son of Russian immigrants, George
Trachtenberg grew up in Chelsea, Mass. After a
stint in the Navy, he married Daurice, a local
schoolteacher, and had two children—a daugh-
ter, Randi, and a son, Ross. “My father grew up
quite poor and never had the opportunity to go
to college, but he always had a very strong
work ethic,” says Ross, a Boston-area business-
man. “He was justifiably proud of the financial
success he achieved despite his modest begin-
nings, but his greatest joy in life was always
his family.”
Shortly after his well-earned retirement
from the jewelry business in 2000, Mr.
Trachtenberg was diagnosed with Parkinson’s
disease. Last November, roughly seven
years after his diagnosis, he
passed away at the age of 71
from dementia related to
his disease.
Spared most of the typical
movement disorders associated
with this chronic, progressive
neurologic disease, Mr.
Trachtenberg instead devel-
oped the slow mental deterio-
ration that afflicts some
Parkinson’s patients. “Over
time, Parkinson’s drained my
father of his entire personality,”
says his son. “Given a choice,
we would rather have had him
in a wheelchair but with his
mind intact. There are no
words for how devastating this
disease is.”
Daurice Trachtenberg, 74,
admits that dealing with her
husband’s mental decline was
often terribly difficult,
although she did her utmost to keep him
engaged in life. “I used to take George every-
where, even when all he wanted to do was
sleep,” she says.
But even a wife’s tireless devotion and a
family’s loving support were not enough to
prevent the inevitable. “Toward the end of his
life, George had closed down mentally. He was
unable to talk and had no memory,” says his
widow, who now lives in Florida.
When planning Mr. Trachtenberg’s funeral
last fall, his family remembered a handwritten
letter sent by David T. Scadden, MD, Scientific
Co-Director of HSCI, to Mrs. Trachtenberg,
thanking her for a donation she had made to
HSCI several years earlier.
Impressed by Scadden’s gesture for what
they considered a relatively modest donation,
and committed to supporting research that
might find a cure for Parkinson’s disease, the
Trachtenberg family decided to request dona-
tions to HSCI in memory of George in lieu of
flowers. Ross’s wife, Laurie, even had donation
cards and pre-addressed envelopes printed that
made it easier for friends and family to make a
contribution to HSCI.
“We are grateful to the Trachtenberg family
and their friends for their support of our
research to find cures for diseases like
Parkinson’s,” says Brock C. Reeve, Executive
Director of HSCI. “Because of current restric-
tions on federal funding for stem cell research,
we rely to a great extent on private philanthro-
py to carry on our work, so gifts like this are
very important and greatly appreciated.”
Ross and Laurie Trachtenberg are involved
in numerous other philanthropic activities, but
are especially committed to HSCI. “We want
our donations to make a difference,” explains
Ross. “We believe that scientists at the Harvard
Stem Cell Institute will find a way to help
people like my father who are suffering from
terrible diseases. We felt the best way to honor
his memory is to provide support for this
important work.”
For information about how to make a gift to
HSCI in honor or in memory of a loved one, or
to support research of Parkinson’s disease and
other nervous system disorders, please visit the
HSCI website at www.hsci.harvard.edu or call
us at 617.496.4050.
A Beloved Husband and Father’s Memory Lives onthrough Donations to HSCI
F
The late George Trachtenberg dancing with hiswife, Daurice. Mr. Trachtenberg’s family and friendsremembered him with a donation to HSCI.
A letter from HSCI Scientific Co-Director David T. Scadden, MD, thanking DauriceTrachtenberg for her gift to HSCI.
Using embryonic stem cells
derived from mice carrying a human
gene known to cause a form of
amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS),
a team of Harvard researchers has
created an in vitro model of this
always-fatal neurodegenerative
disease.
HSCI Principal Faculty
member Kevin Eggan, PhD, and Tom
Maniatis, PhD, of Harvard’s Faculty
of Arts and Sciences, were the senior
authors of this work, which was
published in the journal Nature
Neuroscience in April.
Eggan, Maniatis, and their col-
leagues also found that substances
produced by a form of glial cells—
cells that normally support neurons—cause the damage in
motor neurons associated with ALS, which is also known as
Lou Gehrig’s disease.
These discoveries have major
implications for the field of embryon-
ic stem cell research because, Eggan
explains, if one has embryonic stem
cells that carry the genes for a dis-
ease—in this case, ALS—“you can
make limitless quantities of the cells
affected by the disease, study the
disease process, and have an in vitro
model for studying possible
treatments.”
Most public discussion about
stem cell research has focused on the
possible uses for stem cells in treating
disease, but Maniatis notes that this
advance “establishes using stem cells
to study the mechanism of disease, and…to find treatments.”
Eggan and Maniatis point out that the same techniques
they used to establish the ALS model could be used to devel-
op models for studying and screening for drug treatments in a
host of human diseases.
Eggan made the analogy that using embryonic stem cell
models for studying disease could potentially have the same
impact on increasing the understanding of human disease that
4 Spring-Summer / 2007
Stem CellLines
Li Chai, MD, Brigham and Women’s Hospital
Zheng-Yi Chen, PhD, Massachusetts General Hospital
Dieter Egli, PhD, Harvard University Faculty of Arts and Sciences
Richard Gregory, PhD, Children’s Hospital Boston
Benjamin Humphreys, MD, PhD, Brigham and Women’s Hospital
Carla Kim, PhD, Children’s Hospital Boston
Kameran Lashkari, MD, Schepens Eye Research Institute
Stuart Orkin, MD, Children’s Hospital Boston
Sridhar Rao, MD, PhD, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Ibrahim Domian, MD, PhD, Massachusetts General Hospital
Sabina Signoretti, MD, Brigham and Women’s Hospital
For the third consecutive year, HSCI awarded seed grants to scientists
throughout the Harvard community to provide critical early funding
for stem cell research. In June, ten seed grants totaling $1.8 million
were awarded to investigators from six HSCI-affiliated institutions
(see below), selected from a pool of 66 applicants.
This year’s grants will support stem cell research relating to a host of
ubiquitous medical conditions, such as cancer and diseases of the eyes, ears,
lungs, and kidneys, as well as investigations aimed at better understanding
and harnessing the potential of stem cells for therapeutic purposes.
HSCI’s Seed Grant Program provides two years of funding for projects in
areas of stem cell research that will advance HSCI’s mission. A multi-institu-
tional panel conducts a rigorous review process to select the most promising
projects. Highest priority is given to projects that are difficult to fund because
they are high risk, or that are ineligible for federal support because of restric-
tions on human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research. The grants are also
intended to support junior faculty conducting collaborative research.
In 2007, the Paul Singer Family Foundation made a generous gift of
$360,000 to the HSCI Seed Grant Program, specifically to support the work
of two investigators conducting hESC research. The recipients of the founda-
tion’s gifts are Dieter Egli, PhD, of Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences, and
Richard Gregory, PhD, of Children’s Hospital Boston.
Since the program’s inception in 2005, HSCI has awarded 35 seed grants
totaling $6.3 million.
2007 HSCI Seed Grant Recipients Announced
Singer Family Foundation Supports
Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Investigators Develop ALS Mouse Stem Cell LineHSCI-funded research provides a way to studyALS and other diseases in the lab
2007 HSCI Seed Grant Recipients
Kevin Eggan, PhD
Tom Maniatis, PhD
Just
in Id
e/Ha
rvar
d N
ews
Offi
ce
Kris
Snib
be/H
arva
rd N
ews
Offi
ce
c o n t i n u e d o n p a g e 5
Representatives of three of the world’s major religions carried on a lively
discussion about the beginning of human life, the disposal of surplus
embryos from in vitro fertilization clinics, and human embryonic stem
cell research at the second HSCI Stem Cell Public Forum, held in March
at the Harvard Divinity School.
Representing Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, the four guest speak-
ers at the well-attended event each presented their faith’s teachings
about the beginnings of human life, then embarked on a wide-ranging
discussion about diverse ethical issues relating to human embryonic
stem cell research.
The forum’s guest speakers were Eric Cohen, director of the
Bioethics and American Democracy Program at the Ethics and Public
Policy Center in Washington, D.C., who presented contrasting Judaic
points of view; Omar Sultan Haque, a Muslim theologian at Harvard
Medical School; John Davis, PhD, a Presbyterian minister and professor
of systematic theology and Christian ethics at Gordon-Conwell
Theological Seminary; and Llewellyn Smith, MDiv, DMin, of the
Andover/Newton Theological School and a minister with the United
Church of Christ.
The conservative Christian belief that human life is created at
conception contrasted with the view common among Jews that an
embryo does not achieve human status until 40 days after conception,
and the similar Muslim view that human life begins when the soul
enters the developing embryo sometime between 40 and 120 days
following conception.
The differing beliefs among these faiths as to when a developing
embryo becomes a human likely account for their varying levels
of acceptance of human embryonic stem cell research, which is widely
supported in the Jewish community and accepted by many Muslims,
yet is opposed by the Roman Catholic Church and some Protestant
denominations.
Harvard Stem Cell Institute faculty members M. William Lensch,
PhD, of Children’s Hospital Boston, and Jerome Ritz, MD, of Dana-
Farber Cancer Institute, also participated in the forum, providing clarifi-
cation on scientific matters. Philip Clayton, PhD, Visiting Professor of
Science and Religion at Harvard Divinity School, moderated the event.
Clayton pointed out that the ethical issues surrounding human
embryonic stem
cell research have
made it one of
the best-known
and highest-
stakes ethical
debates of
our times.
Supporters,
Clayton said,
insist that the
promise of stem
cell research to cure debilitating diseases means the work must go for-
ward. Opponents, however, say that the need to destroy human
embryos as a source of stem cells makes the cost of that research too
high.
“Exploring ethical matters related to stem cell research is a vital part
of the Institute’s mission,” said HSCI Executive Director Brock C. Reeve,
who introduced the event. “We are pleased so many in the community
attended and participated in this important debate.”
Spring-Summer / 2007 5
For friends and supporters of the Harvard Stem Cell Institutes
Second HSCI Public Forum Addresses ReligiousPerspectives on Stem Cell Research
Stem Cell Science 101: Third HSCI Public Forum
HSCI’s Public Forum is a series of free, quarterly educational sessions
designed for the general public. The third HSCI Public Forum, “Stem
Cell Science 101,” which was held June 26 on the Harvard campus,
provided an overview of stem cell science in easy-to-understand terms
and how this research is affecting treatments for diseases.
Guest speakers were HSCI Executive Committee member George
Q. Daley, MD, PhD, of Children’s Hospital Boston, and HSCI Principal
Faculty members Amy Wagers, PhD, of Joslin Diabetes Center, and
Chad Cowan, PhD, of Massachusetts General Hospital. An overview of
this forum will be published in the Fall issue of Stem Cell Lines.
Webcasts of the all Public Forums are available on the HSCI website
at www.hsci.harvard.edu. Also check the website for dates and informa-
tion about upcoming forums.
Omar Sultan Haque, a Muslim theologian at HarvardMedical School, was one of four guest speakers atthe second HSCI Public Forum.
installing so-called “black boxes” in airplanes has had on
understanding the causes of crashes. The installation of
black boxes, which provide data from an entire flight, “made
it possible to understand the earliest events” that might have
contributed to a crash, says Eggan.
“If all we have to study a disease is material from a
patient in whom the symptoms are already present, we may
have no way to determine what initially triggered those
symptoms,” Eggan explains. “But like the black boxes in
aviation, these embryonic stem cells allow us to study the
very earliest disease mechanisms in the lab.”
Kris
Snib
be/H
arva
rd N
ews
Offi
ce
Just
in Id
e/Ha
rvar
d N
ews
Offi
ce
Harvard Stem Cell Institute Scientific Co-Director Douglas A. Melton, PhD,
and HSCI Executive Committee member George Q. Daley, MD, PhD, appeared
on Public Broadcasting System’s Charlie Rose Show on May 16 to discuss current
successes and future applications of stem cell research.
Melton and Daley were joined by Story Landis, PhD, Director of the National
Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Lawrence Goldstein, PhD, Director of
the University of California, San Diego Stem Cell Program; and Sir Paul Nurse,
President of Rockefeller University. The program was part of the Charlie Rose Science
Series. For more information, go to www.charlierose.com.
HSCI Experts Appear on PBS Science SeriesA L S . . . c o n t i n u e d f r o m p a g e 4
6 Spring-Summer / 2007
Stem CellLines
Motor neurons from mousestem cells. Motor neurons,
which reside in the spinal cord,are nerve cells that make it possible
to control muscles.
The routine activities of daily life that so many
of us take for granted—eating a meal, taking
a walk, answering the telephone—all depend
on healthy, fully functioning motor neurons, the
nerve cells in the spinal cord that make it
possible to control our muscles.
In diseases like spinal muscular atrophy
(SMA) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS,
or Lou Gehrig’s disease), the motor neurons are
either unable to, or have lost the ability to, carry
out this vital role. Since there is no treatment or
cure for SMA, which affects infants and young
children, or ALS, which strikes adults, afflicted
patients become progressively weaker and, with
some exceptions, die prematurely.
Through its new, large-scale core facility, the
Therapeutic Screening Center (TSC), HSCI is
providing a ray of hope for patients with motor
neuron diseases. Led by Lee Rubin, PhD, the
TSC’s unique combination of specialized scientif-
ic expertise and state-of-the-art technologies is
expediting research aimed at identifying small-
molecule compounds that could potentially
be developed into drugs to treat, or perhaps
even cure, patients suffering from motor
neuron diseases.
The TSC’s work in this area is greatly
enhanced by its ability to generate billions of
motor neurons a week from embryonic stem
cells—including disease-specific embryonic stem
cells derived from mouse models—for screening.
“This allows us to screen for effective therapeu-
tics in the specific neuronal cell type affected
by these diseases. Until now, this has not been
feasible,” explains Rubin.
In recognition of HSCI’s ability to rapidly
move research from bench to bedside, the SMA
Foundation and the ALS Association recently
awarded grants to fund TSC-based work, the
ultimate goal of which is to find treatments or
cures for these diseases as quickly as possible.
The SMA Foundation grant is being used to
fund research using disease-specific motor
neurons from mouse embryonic stem
cells to identify agents that increase
the expression of a vital protein,
SMN, that is deficient in patients
with SMA, and to understand the
underlying biology of the disease.
SMN protein is produced by every
cell in the body, but only motor neurons
are uniquely dependent on critical levels of this
protein for their survival.
The ALS Association grant is part of the
organization’s TREAT ALS (Translational
Research Advancing Therapy for ALS) initiative,
a program to accelerate the discovery and testing
of new treatments for ALS. With this funding,
the TSC will develop a rapid, automated tech-
nique to screen small-molecule candidates that
might eventually be developed into drugs to
slow or halt the progression of ALS. This work
will rely, in part, on motor neurons derived from
mouse embryonic stem cells that are generated
in the lab of HSCI Principal Faculty member
Kevin Eggan, PhD.
“The support of both the SMA Foundation
and the ALS Association is helping make it pos-
sible for us to produce cell populations that are
otherwise inaccessible,” says TSC head
Rubin. “This gives us the unique
ability to identify and develop
therapeutics for patients suffering
from these and other devastating
neurodegenerative diseases.”
Foundations Support HSCI’s Search for PotentialTherapies for Motor Neuron Diseases
Fans of the National Public Radio (NPR) popular weekly science talk show “Science
Friday,” were enlightened by an hour-long discussion about the current state of stem
cell research by top experts in the field on April 27.
Broadcasting live from the Cambridge Science Festival (see page 12), Science
Friday host Ira Flatow spoke with HSCI Scientific Co-Director Douglas A. Melton,
PhD, Thomas Dudley Cabot Professor in the Natural Sciences; HSCI Executive
Committee member George Q. Daley, MD, PhD, of Children’s Hospital Boston; and
Michael Sandel, DPhil, Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of Government at
Harvard and Director of HSCI’s Ethics and Public Policy Program. Rudolf Jaenisch,
MD, of Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Whitehead Institute for
Biomedical Research, also participated in the panel.
To download an audio file of the broadcast to your computer or portable player,
go to the Science Friday website at www.sciencefriday.com.
HSCI Experts Discuss Stem Cell Research on NPR’s ‘Science Friday’
Spring-Summer / 2007 7
For friends and supporters of the Harvard Stem Cell Institutes
To some, today’s biotechnology is
a mixed blessing. On the one
hand, it raises hopes for medical
breakthroughs and enhancements
that can improve the human con-
dition. On the other, it instills a
profound uneasiness about a
world of designer children and
genetic manipulation.
For most, provocative ques-
tions abound: Should society’s
rapidly expanding prowess in
biotechnology be used only to
cure disease, as some argue, or
also to enhance our bodies and
minds? Does our growing ability
to choose the gender and “cherry
pick” the desired traits of our chil-
dren expand human choice? Or
does it raise the specter of a
new eugenics?
In March, a panel of lumin-
aries in law and ethics gathered at
Harvard Law School to explore
these and other compelling legal
and ethical issues surrounding
contemporary biotechnology. A
public panel discussion, “Re-engi-
neering Human Biology: What
Should Be the
Legal and Ethical
Limits?” was part
of a conference
sponsored by
Harvard Law
School’s Petrie-
Flom Center for
Health Law
Policy, Biotech-
nology, and
Bioethics, in
collaboration
with the Harvard
University Program in Ethics and
Health and HSCI’s Ethics and
Public Policy Program.
Moderated by Harvard Law
School Dean Elena Kagan, the
panel included legal theorist
Professor Ronald M. Dworkin, of
New York University School of
Law and University College,
London; Richard Posner, Judge of
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Seventh Circuit, and the University
of Chicago; Leon R. Kass, of the
American Enterprise Institute and
the University of Chicago, and
former chairman of the President’s
Council on Bioethics; and Michael
J. Sandel, DPhil, head of HSCI’s
Program in Ethics and Public
Policy and the Anne T. and Robert
M. Bass Professor of Government.
“The excitement over the
prospect of genetic engineering
comes from the sense that this is a
most fundamental challenge to the
chance/choice divide,” said
Dworkin, a proponent of genetic
enhancement, to the overflow
audience. “To treat the ‘given’ as
given would be to deny what’s best
in human nature.” Dworkin cited
antibiotics and public education as
examples of improvements that
eliminated former “givens.”
While Posner agreed with
Dworkin, Kass and Sandel both
argued against the use of genetic
engineering. “The tendency to
push back the frontier of the given
can actually undermine or damage
important human goods,” stated
Sandel, author of the recently pub-
lished book “The Case Against
Perfection: Ethics in the Age of
Genetic Engineering.”
“As we saw in this discussion,
stem cell research touches on
many different areas,” says HSCI
Executive Director Brock C. Reeve.
“This event at Harvard Law School
is just one example of how HSCI’s
interdisciplinary collaboration with
the other schools and institutions
of Harvard can bring the power of
leading thinkers from diverse
fields to the multiple aspects of
stem cell science.”
To view a webcast of
the panel, go to the Harvard
Law School website at
www.law.harvard.edu/news.
Interdisciplinary Conference Explores Legal and EthicalImplications of Biotechnology
Human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) are powerful tools for understanding normal human development and
what goes awry in many diseases that plague humankind, such as cancer and diabetes. This knowledge is the
first step toward the ultimate goal of stem cell research—finding effective, targeted therapies for people afflicted
with these and many other intractable diseases.
Because stem cell science is developing at warp speed, the need for disseminating up-to-date, practical
information to stem cell researchers around the globe is of paramount importance.
To address this need, three members of the HSCI faculty have compiled and edited the definitive “how-to”
book for stem cell scientists. Published recently by Wiley, “Human Embryonic Stem Cells: The Practical
Handbook” was edited by Stephen Sullivan, MSc, PhD, Chad A. Cowan, PhD, and Kevin Eggan, PhD.
Contributors include HSCI Scientific Co-Director Douglas A. Melton, PhD; George Q. Daley, MD, PhD; and
M. William Lensch, PhD.
The 400-plus page text is the definitive source of practical information for laboratory scientists working
with hESCs, as well as clinical researchers in areas for which hESC research holds considerable promise, such as
diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and neurological diseases. The book contains the first centralized collection of
methods used in hESC biology—including basic protocols for sourcing, deriving, culturing, characterizing,
and manipulating these unique cells—from the laboratories of the leading scientists in the field within HSCI
and elsewhere. For more information, go to www.humanescellbook.com.
HSCI Faculty Edit Handbook on Human Embryonic Stem Cells
8 Spring-Summer / 2007
Stem CellLines
“A teacher affects eternity; he can
never tell where his influence stops,”
wrote Henry Brooks Adams, a 19th-
century historian, journalist, and
novelist who graduated from and
later taught at Harvard.
Precisely because teachers have
such a profound and lasting impact
on their students and society at large,
the Harvard Stem Cell Institute is
actively involved in a range of initia-
tives to help educators better under-
stand all aspects of stem cell
research—from the basic science and
the implications for human health to
the legal, ethical, and public policy
issues surrounding this research.
Annual biotechnology symposium
A recent educational initiative in
which HSCI played a key role was
the 12th Annual Symposium on
Biotechnology Education, held March
26 at the Museum of Science in
Boston. Each year, the museum hosts
this daylong event, which provides a
forum for middle school, high school,
and community college educators to
learn and share ideas, classroom activ-
ities, and laboratory investigations.
Two HSCI faculty participated in
this year’s symposium. HSCI Principal
Faculty member Laurie Jackson-
Grusby, PhD, of Children’s Hospital
Boston, presented a workshop on the
“Basic Science of Stem Cell Research,”
which provided information and
resources to enable educators to
incorporate some aspect of stem cell
biology into their curriculum. HSCI
faculty member M. William Lensch,
PhD, also of Children’s Hospital
Boston, gave a workshop that
addressed the implications of stem
cell research outside of the labora-
tory, including the ethical and
social issues.
Pilot course for science teachers
Another initiative, which launches in
July, is HSCI’s pilot course for grades
6-12 science teachers and curriculum
development specialists. “Stem Cell
Science: 2007 Professional
Development for Science Teachers” is
a credit-eligible course that will focus
on the facts of stem cell science and
how educators can integrate this field
into their school’s curriculum.
Taught by Nitzan Resnick, PhD,
former Visiting Professor at Harvard
Medical School and Director of the
New Science and Math Initiative at an
independent day school in Stoughton,
Mass., with guest speakers from the
HSCI faculty, the weeklong course
will cover a range of topics, including
the current state of stem cell research,
stem cell research technologies, ethi-
cal and legal implications, and con-
necting stem cell science to the class-
room curriculum. Based at HSCI’s
headquarters in Harvard Square, the
course will also include visits to HSCI
laboratories and facilities, and provide
resources and materials for teachers’
classrooms.
For this summer’s pilot course,
HSCI will select approximately 20
participants who represent a diverse
range of grade levels and school
types. Participants will actively con-
tribute to the development of the
annual course, which in future years
will be open to all educators interest-
ed in integrating stem cell science
into their curriculum.
For more information about ways to
support these or other HSCI educa-
tion initiatives, please contact Sarah
Opitz ([email protected])
or visit the HSCI website at
www.hsci.harvard.edu.
HSCI Reaches Out to Teach Teachers
Nitzan Resnick, PhD (left), will teachHSCI’s pilot course for science teach-ers. The course for grades 6-12 edu-cators will be offered each summer.
HSCI Community Gathers forSecond Annual Retreat
Because of its potential to impact so many areas of human health, stem
cell research is, by its very nature, a collaborative enterprise that involves
scientists spanning multiple disciplines. The Harvard Stem Cell Institute
is a case in point: HSCI encompasses more than 750 scientists through-
out Boston conducting research of a broad range of diseases, from cancer
and diabetes to nervous system disorders.
For the sake of efficiency, much of this collaboration takes place vir-
tually. But there is no substitute for personal interaction, which is what
drew 300-plus members of the HSCI research community to HSCI’s
second annual retreat. The daylong event was held June 14 at the
Harvard Business School in Allston, a stone’s throw from the site of the
science complex that, when completed in several years, will be HSCI’s
new home.
“The HSCI research community is so large and diverse that it’s impor-
tant to have a chance to get to know each other, learn about each other’s
work, and become integrated into the larger HSCI community,” says
HSCI Principal Faculty member Carla Kim, PhD. “It’s equally valuable for
scientists to know about all the services and resources that are available
to them through HSCI.” Kim and fellow HSCI Principal Faculty member
Richard Gregory, PhD, both of Children’s Hospital Boston, were Faculty
Co-Chairs of this year’s retreat, which focused on a review of past and
recent achievements and new directions.
The event began with an overview by HSCI Executive Director Brock
C. Reeve of HSCI’s accomplishments over the past year; the newly estab-
lished cross-school department, which will work closely with HSCI; and
an update on the status of the Allston science complex.
Leaders of several of HSCI’s Disease Programs then presented updates
on progress in their areas of research. This was followed by presentations
by HSCI faculty about the institute’s core technology programs, which
are significant resources for the entire HSCI research community.
Also speaking at the retreat were Erik Halvorsen, PhD, of Harvard’s
Office of Technology Development, who addressed intellectual property
and opportunities for commercialization, and Jay O. Light, DBA, Dean of
Harvard Business School, who spoke on the “Business of Science.”
Among the highlights of the day were the announcement of the 2007
HSCI Seed Grant recipients (see page 4) and the very popular poster pre-
sentations, which showcased the research of 44 HSCI investigators. The
retreat concluded with an outdoor reception.
Mau
reen
Lyo
ns
SCL: What are the main arguments for and against embryonic
stem cell research?
MS: Proponents argue that embryonic stem cell research holds great
promise for understanding and curing diabetes, Parkinson’s disease,
spinal cord injury, and other debilitating conditions. Opponents argue
that the research is unethical, because deriving the stem cells destroys
the blastocyst, an unimplanted human embryo at the sixth to eighth day
of development. As Bush declared when he vetoed last year’s stem cell
bill, the federal government should not support “the taking of innocent
human life.”
It is surprising that, despite the extensive public debate—in
Congress, during the 2004 and 2006 election campaigns, and on the
Sunday morning talk shows—relatively little attention has been paid to
the moral issue at the heart of the controversy: Are the opponents of
stem cell research correct in their claim that the unimplanted human
embryo is already a human being, morally equivalent to a person?
SCL: Considering that the moral and political controversy over embryonic
stem cell research centers on this very question, why do you think there is
so little attention being paid to it?
MS: Perhaps this claim has gone unaddressed because stem cell propo-
nents and many in the media consider it obviously false—a faith-based
belief that no rational argument could possibly dislodge. If so, they are
making a mistake.
The fact that a moral belief may be rooted in religious conviction
neither exempts it from challenge nor puts it beyond the realm of public
debate. Ignoring the claim that the blastocyst is a person fails to respect
those who oppose embryonic stem cell research on principled moral
grounds. It has also led the media to miss glaring contradictions in
Bush’s stem cell policy, which does not actually live up to the principle it
invokes—that destroying an embryo is like killing a child.
SCL: What are the contradictions in Bush’s stance?
MS: Before we address that, it is important to be clear about the embryo
from which stem cells are extracted. It is not implanted and growing in a
woman’s uterus. It is not a fetus. It has no recognizable human features
or form. It is, rather, a blastocyst, a cluster of 180 to 200 cells, growing in a
petri dish, barely visible to the naked eye. Such blastocysts are either
cloned in the lab or created in fertility clinics. The bill recently passed by
Spring-Summer / 2007 9
For friends and supporters of the Harvard Stem Cell Institutes
L ast year, President Bush cast the first veto of his presidency when
Congress tried to ease the restriction on federal funding of embryonic
stem cell research.
Following the recent passage by both houses of Congress of the Stem
Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which would permit federal funding
of research using donated surplus embryonic stem cells from fertility clinics,
the president has once again threatened a veto.
Because neither the House nor the Senate had sufficient votes to over-
ride a presidential veto, it appears unlikely this new bill will be enacted into
law, further stalling the pace of this research. “This bill crosses a moral line
that I and others find troubling,” stated Bush, following the Senate’s vote.
Michael J. Sandel, DPhil, Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of
Government at Harvard, is Director of HSCI’s Ethics and Public Policy Program
and author of the recently published book, “The Case Against Perfection:
Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering” (Harvard University Press).
Drawing on arguments presented in his book, in this issue of Stem Cell
Lines Sandel examines some of the ethical issues surrounding embryonic
stem cell research.
“It is important to be clear about the embryofrom which stem cells are extracted. It is notimplanted and growing in a woman’s uterus. It is not a fetus. It has no recognizable human features or form. It is, rather, a blastocyst, acluster of 180 to 200 cells, growing in a petridish, barely visible to the naked eye.”[
c o n t i n u e d o n p a g e 1 0
Examining the Ethics of EmbryonicStem Cell Research:A Conversation with HSCI’s Michael J. Sandel, DPhil
Examining the Ethics of EmbryonicStem Cell Research:A Conversation with HSCI’s Michael J. Sandel, DPhil
10 Spring-Summer / 2007
Stem CellLines
Congress would fund stem cell research
only on excess blastocysts left over from
infertility treatments.
The blastocyst represents such an
early stage of embryonic development
that the cells it contains have not yet dif-
ferentiated, or taken on the properties of
particular organs or tissues—kidneys,
muscles, spinal cord, and so on. This is
why the stem cells that are extracted
from the blastocyst hold the promise of
developing, with proper coaxing in the
lab, into any kind of cell the researcher
wants to study or repair.
The moral and political controversy
arises from the fact that extracting the stem cells destroys the blastocyst.
It is important to grasp the full force of the claim that the embryo is
morally equivalent to a person, a fully developed human being.
For those who hold this view, extracting stem cells from a blastocyst
is as morally abhorrent as harvesting organs from
a baby to save other people’s lives. This is the
position of Senator Sam Brownback, Republican
of Kansas, a leading advocate of the right-to-life
position. In Brownback’s view, “a human embryo
. . . is a human being just like you and me; and it
deserves the same respect that our laws give
to us all.”
If Brownback is right, then embryonic stem
cell research is immoral because it amounts to
killing a person to treat other people’s diseases.
SCL: What is the basis for the belief that person-
hood begins at conception?
MS: Some base this belief on the religious
conviction that the soul enters the body at the
moment of conception. Others defend it without
recourse to religion, by the following line of reasoning: Human beings
are not things. Their lives must not be sacrificed against their will, even
for the sake of good ends, like saving other people’s lives. The reason
human beings must not be treated as things is that they are inviolable.
At what point do humans acquire this inviolability? The answer cannot
depend on the age or developmental stage of a particular human life.
Infants are inviolable, and few people would countenance harvesting
organs for transplantation even from a fetus.
Every human being—each one of us—began life as an embryo.
Unless we can point to a definitive moment in the passage from concep-
tion to birth that marks the emergence of the human person, we must
regard embryos as possessing the same inviolability as fully developed
human beings.
SCL: By this line of reasoning, human embryos are inviolable and should
not be used for research, even if that research might save many lives.
MS: Yes, but this argument can be challenged on a number of grounds.
First, it is undeniable that a human embryo is “human life” in the
biological sense that it is living rather than dead, and human rather than,
say, bovine.
But this biological fact does not establish that the blastocyst is a
human being, or a person. Any living human cell (a skin cell, for exam-
ple) is “human life” in the sense of being human rather than bovine and
living rather than dead. But no one would consider a skin cell a person,
or deem it inviolable. Showing that a blastocyst is a human being, or a
person, requires further argument.
Some try to base such an argument on the fact that human beings
develop from embryo to fetus to child. Every person was once an
embryo, the argument goes, and there is no clear, non-arbitrary line
between conception and adulthood that can tell us when personhood
begins. Given the lack of such a line, we should regard the blastocyst as
a person, as morally equivalent to a fully developed human being.
SCL: What is the flaw in this argument?
MS: Consider an analogy: although every oak tree was once an acorn, it
does not follow that acorns are oak trees, or that I should treat the loss
of an acorn eaten by a squirrel in my front yard as the same kind of loss
as the death of an oak tree felled by a storm. Despite their developmental
continuity, acorns and oak trees differ. So do
human embryos and human beings, and in the
same way. Just as acorns are potential oaks,
human embryos are potential human beings.
The distinction between a potential person
and an actual one makes a moral difference.
Sentient creatures make claims on us that non-
sentient ones do not; beings capable of experi-
ence and consciousness make higher claims
still. Human life develops by degrees.
SCL: Yet there are people who disagree that life
develops by degrees, and believe that a blastocyst is a person and, therefore, morally
equivalent to a fully developed human being.
MS: Certainly some people hold this belief.
But a reason to be skeptical of the notion that
blastocysts are persons is to notice that many who invoke it do not
embrace its full implications.
President Bush is a case in point. In 2001, he announced a policy
that restricted federal funding to already existing stem cell lines, so that
no taxpayer funds would encourage or support the destruction of
embryos. And in 2006, he vetoed a bill that would have funded new
embryonic stem cell research, saying that he did not want to support
“the taking of innocent human life.”
But it is a striking feature of the president’s position that, while
restricting the funding of embryonic stem cell research, he has made no
effort to ban it. To adapt a slogan from the Clinton administration, the
Bush policy might be summarized as “don’t fund, don’t ban.” But this
policy is at odds with the notion that embryos are human beings.
SCL: If Bush’s policy were consistent with his stated beliefs, how, in your
opinion, would it differ from his current “don’t fund, don’t ban” policy?
MS: If harvesting stem cells from a blastocyst were truly on a par with
harvesting organs from a baby, then the morally responsible policy would
. . . c o n t i n u e d f r o m p a g e 9Examining the Ethics
Alice
Che
n
A human blastocyst
Spring-Summer / 2007 11
For friends and supporters of the Harvard Stem Cell Institutes
be to ban it, not merely deny it federal funding.
If some doctors made a practice of killing children to get organs for
transplantation, no one would take the position that the infanticide
should be ineligible for federal funding but allowed to continue in the
private sector. In fact, if we were persuaded that embryonic stem cell
research were tantamount to infanticide, we would not only ban it but
treat it as a grisly form of murder and subject scientists who performed
it to criminal punishment.
SCL: Couldn’t it be argued, in defense of the president’s policy, that
Congress would be unlikely to enact an outright ban on embryonic stem
cell research?
MS: Perhaps. But this does not explain why, if the president really con-
siders embryos to be human beings, he has not at least called for such a
ban, nor even called upon scientists to stop doing stem cell research that
involves the destruction of embryos. In fact, Bush has cited the fact that
“there is no ban on embryonic stem cell research” in touting the virtues
of his “balanced approach.”
The moral oddness of the Bush “don’t fund, don’t ban” position
confused even his spokesman, Tony Snow. Last year, Snow told the
White House press corps that the president vetoed the stem cell bill
because he considered embryonic stem cell research to be “murder,”
something the federal
government should not
support. When the com-
ment drew a flurry of
critical press attention,
the White House retreat-
ed. No, the president did
not believe that destroy-
ing an embryo was mur-
der. The press secretary
retracted his statement,
and apologized for having
“overstated the president’s
position.”
How exactly the
spokesman had over-
stated the president’s
position is unclear. If
embryonic stem cell research does constitute the deliberate taking of
innocent human life, it is hard to see how it differs from murder. The
chastened press secretary made no attempt to parse the distinction. His
errant statement that the president considered embryo destruction to be
“murder” simply followed the moral logic of the notion that embryos are
human beings. It was a gaffe only because the Bush policy does not fol-
low that logic.
SCL: You have stated that the president’s refusal to ban privately funded
embryonic stem cell research is not the only way in which his policies
betray the principle that embryos are persons. How so?
MS: In the course of treating infertility, American fertility clinics routine-
ly discard thousands of human embryos. The bill that recently passed in
the Senate would fund stem cell research only on these excess embryos,
which are already bound for destruction. (This is also the position taken
by former governor Mitt Romney, who supports stem cell research on
embryos left over from fertility clinics.) Although Bush would ban the
use of such embryos in federally funded research, he has not called
for legislation to ban the creation and destruction of embryos by
fertility clinics.
SCL: If embryos are morally equivalent to fully developed human beings,
doesn’t it then follow that allowing fertility clinics to discard thousands of
embryos is condoning mass murder?
MS: It does. If embryos are human beings, to allow fertility clinics to
discard them is to countenance, in effect, the widespread creation and
destruction of surplus children. Those who believe that a blastocyst is
morally equivalent to a baby must believe that the 400,000 excess
embryos languishing in freezers in U.S. fertility clinics are like newborns
left to die by exposure on a mountainside. But those who view embryos
in this way should not only be opposing embryonic stem cell research;
they should also be leading a campaign to shut down what they must
regard as rampant infanticide in fertility clinics.
Some principled right-to-life opponents of stem cell research meet
this test of moral consistency. Bush’s “don’t fund, don’t ban” policy does
not. Those who fail to take seriously the belief that embryos are persons
miss this point. Rather than simply complain that the president’s stem
cell policy allows religion to trump science, critics should ask why the
president does not pursue the full implications of the principle he
invokes.
If he does not want to ban embryonic stem cell research, or prose-
cute stem cell scientists for murder, or ban fertility clinics from creating
and discarding excess embryos, this must mean that he does not really
consider human embryos as morally equivalent to fully developed
human beings after all.
But if he doesn’t believe that embryos are persons, then why ban
federally funded embryonic stem cell research that holds promise for
curing diseases and saving lives?
“The distinction between a potential personand an actual one makes a moral difference.Sentient creatures make claims on us that non-sentient ones do not; beings capable of experi-ence and consciousness make higher claims still.Human life develops by degrees.”[
Bush has threatened to veto the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which was passed by both houses of Congress.
Stem CellLines
42 Church Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
Upcoming HSCI Events
For details about these and other
upcoming events, visit the HSCI
website at www.hsci.harvard.edu
or call us at 617.496.4050.
August 15 HSCI Summer Undergraduate
Research Internship Program
Symposium
Harvard University, Cambridge
October 2-3Second Annual Stem Cell Summit
Hynes Convention Center, Boston
November 2Fourth Annual Tony & Shelly
Malkin Symposium
Harvard Club of Boston
Fall Fourth HSCI Stem Cell Public Forum
Details about this free event for the
general public will be available
soon on the HSCI website.
HSCI Takes Part in Local ScienceFestival
In keeping with its mission to provide the general public with a better
understanding of the many dimensions of stem cell research, HSCI
recently teamed up with the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study to
present a town meeting on stem cell science.
Held April 25 at the Radcliffe Gymnasium in Cambridge, the free program was part of the
first Cambridge Science Festival, a nine-day public event that showcased the city’s contribu-
tions to science and technology. Geared to all ages, the festival featured more than 150 events
held throughout the city, including interactive exhibits, workshops, plays, debates, demonstra-
tions, and lectures.
Presented by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Museum in collaboration
with Harvard University, MIT, and other local educational and civic organizations, the
Cambridge Science Festival was, in the words of John Durant, Director of the MIT Museum
and the Festival’s Executive Director, “designed to demystify science and pique the interest of
young people, and inspire them to pursue an education in the science, technology, or engineer-
ing fields.”
The HSCI and Radcliffe Institute town meeting was divided into three consecutive sessions
so that participants could choose their areas of interest. Each session included a presentation
by an expert followed by an interactive discussion between attendees and a panel of experts.
The first session, “The significance of stem cell science,” included a discussion of how
degenerative diseases affect people, what stem cell research can accomplish, and current thera-
pies involving stem cells. Experts were HSCI Principal Faculty member Jerome Ritz, MD, of
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; HSCI affiliate Paul Lerou, MD, of Children’s Hospital Boston;
and HSCI affiliated faculty member Keith Orford, MD, PhD, of Massachusetts General
Hospital.
The second session, presented by HSCI Principal Faculty members Amy Wagers, PhD,
Kevin Eggan, PhD, and Lee Rubin, PhD, addressed “The science of stem cells,” which focused
on adult and embryonic stem cells, as well as stem cell technologies.
The final session, “The ethical and social implications of stem cell
research,” touched on the controversies surrounding this research and pub-
lic policy issues at the state, federal, and international level. This session
featured HSCI faculty member M. William Lensch, PhD; Kevin Casey, of
Harvard’s Office of Government, Community and Public Affairs; and Patrick
Taylor, JD, of Children’s Hospital Boston.
For more information about the Cambridge Science Festival, visit the website
at www.cambridgesciencefestival.org.
Kismet, an expressive humanoid robot, is the unofficialmascot of the Cambridge Science Festival.
Sam
Ogd
en
