Destroying life to improve life—this was the argument used by the previous ad­ministration justifying their conservative stance on the issue of embryonic stem cell research. Staring with a ball of cells, how­ever, I had a hard time convincing myself that this was in fact the issue that prevented an entire field of research from substantial progression for the past eight years.

In human stem cell research, an em­bryonic stem cell line must be established from the inner cell population of a blas­tocyst—an early human embryo made of 70 to 100 cells. Most stem cell extraction techniques destroy the blasotocyst in order to retrieve stem cells. In light of this, the Bush administration took a strong stance against stem cell line creation, barring the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from funding embryonic stem cell research on novel lines.

For research purposes, however, the cell lines in existence were far less diverse than publicized. As an August 8th Los Angeles Times articles noted, “though the Bush administration said the [National Stem Cell] bank maintained 21 cell lines eligi­ble for NIH funding, three of those lines have never been available to researchers, and a fourth line just became usable this year.” Additionally, scientists argued that the Bush administration actively de-em­phasized progress made in the field, mak­ing the policy extremely pro-life and not pro-research. Because of this lack of gov­ernment aid, scientists were forced to turn to private funding, which in turn put pres­sure on corporate board members to take a stance on the issue allowing religious and personal views to factor in more substan­tially.

Immediately after being sworn into of­fice, President Barack Obama followed through on his campaign promises and is­sued an executive order on March 9, 2009 entitled, “Removing Barriers to Responsi­ble Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells,” overturning strict Bush-era regulations. This executive order allowed NIH funding for embryonic stem cell line creation and research with a clear thera­peutic purpose. The administration also worked alongside NIH directors to review current regulations on stem cell research and—with feedback from leading experts in the field—reform government policies. This cooperative approach actively sepa­rated the religious viewpoints that signifi­cantly reduced scientific initiatives in this field. While the policies focus mostly on cell line creation and funding expansion, the administration stresses the importance of clear objectives in this field that work to­ward therapeutic developments and regen­erative methods. In March, Obama stated that “no scientific data will be distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda,” and that he was attempting to “restore scientific integrity to government decision making.” This statement is reflective of the shift of influence in the current administration, and the recognition of scientific discovery amidst the ethical debate.

The administration acknowledged that once this research required human testing, pro-life activists will make a stronger ar­gument against the field requiring further regulations. Due to the exponential growth of this field as of recent, this issue demand­ed an executive decision much earlier than expected.

A biotechnology company known as Geron is attempting to become the first company to conduct human trials using embryonic stem cells. The Food and Drug Administration delayed its decision after the initial approval because some of the animals treated with the injection developed microscopic spinal cysts. To date, embryonic stem cells have not been used in any successful human therapy. Adult stem cells, however, obtained mainly from umbilical cord blood and the placenta, have been successfully used in disease therapies. The interest in embryonic stem cells research comes from their increased pluripotency, as well as the immortality of the stem cell line once established.

The Student Society for Stem Cell Re­search (SSSCR) is an international net­work established for the purpose of pro­moting stem cell research initiatives and facilitating communication between the leaders of the field and the general public. Stanford started the thirty-third SSSCR chapter last year, with the hope of high­lighting the predominant scientific, politi­cal, and ethical perspectives in the debate. Although Stanford is one of the foremost universities in stem cell research, attention to the political and ethical issues at the aca­demic level has been minimal compared toon the national scene. This forum is one of the first attempts to give the issue more consideration from all viewpoints. This increase in youth activism on the issue of stem cell research is reflective of Obama-era changes, and sets a positive trend of early alignment between patient interests and scientific inquiry.

The debate over stem cell research is far from resolved, and it is the public discus­sion by researchers, ethicists, and political leaders that will determine the next stage of this field and the regenerative medical therapies that our generation will benefit from.

(Editor's Note: The article was updated to include more specifics concerning ongoing clinical trials.)