|
|
The
Bio Rush Is On
Staking
its claim in the biotech turf, California will issue $3
billion in bonds to invest in stem cell research. The
initiative leaves Virginia -- and
everyone else -- flat footed.
November
brings more welcome news on the biotech front in
Virginia, but also a big reality check. George
Mason University says it is seeking $25 million in
federal funds to build a bio-defense lab and
facility at its Prince William County campus.
Virginia Tech is working in a new research
partnership with the cutting-edge Institute for
Genomic Research in Maryland. But California
voters just decided to send their biotechnology
research and development programs into hyper-drive
by approving $3 billion of investments over the
next decade. Virginia is making progress, but the
competition gap just got wider.
California history, of course, includes the gold
rush that brought rivers of prospectors to
Sutter's Mill and hundreds of thousands of new
residents bringing skills, hopes and dreams. So,
it isn't out of character for the Golden State to
find a way to stick its own bio-nuggets in the
ground, then use the shine to attract new
prospectors and their teams. In this case, the
prospectors are the world's best researchers and
research non-profits looking for the most
supportive environment in which to work. That's a
new, higher bar for Virginia and everyone else.
California has created a magnet environment.
First, so-called Proposition 71 establishes the
California Institute for Regenerative Medicine to
regulate stem cell research and provide grants and
loans for research and facilities. Second, the
proposition establishes a constitutional right to
conduct stem cell research and at the same time,
prohibits funding of human reproductive cloning
research. Third, the proposition provides a state
loan of up to $3 million to get started and
authorizes state bonds of up to $3 billion over
ten years. And fourth, California voters approved
the initiative by a 59 percent to 41 percent
margin. In California in November 2004, 59 percent
equaled 5,640,623 voters, a very public
commitment.
Before getting to the questions surrounding stem
cell research, it is worth looking at the
financial, economic development and cost-saving
arguments. Over 30 years, $3 billion in interest
payments might be added to the $3 billion in bond
principal. Total payback could be $6 billion, but
over 30 years of payback, that would be about $200
million a year. The Institute created would sign
agreements for a share of patent, royalty and
licensing revenue produced by the research it
funds. The Institute would keep the revenues from
the repayment of loans it makes. The University of
California system would use the loans and grants
it receives from Institute funds to leverage new
federal and private research dollars.
Furthermore, the investment of up to $3 billion
inevitably will spark new economic development
activity that produces jobs and taxable income. In
the longer term, research breakthroughs are
expected to put a big dent in health care costs in
California, which already totals more than $110
billion annually. Many of those costs are related
to diseases (heart disease, diabetes, cancer,
Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, spinal cord, MS, etc.)
that scientists suggest could be treated with stem
cell therapies. Effective treatments that lower
health care costs could relieve the exploding
demand for tax dollars to meet costs of public
employee health insurance and state health care
service programs.
Now, move to the questions surrounding stem cells,
which were first isolated only in 1998. Adult stem
cells are available from any part of the human
body, but generally are limited to becoming cells
of the organs and tissues from which they are
gathered. Embryonic stem cells, on the other hand,
have the potential to develop into all types of
specialized cells, such as bone, muscle, brain and
other organs. Embryonic stem cells ordinarily are
extracted from extra embryos donated by parents
attempting to conceive a child through fertility
clinic procedures. Extracting the embryonic stem
cell destroys the embryo.
Therapeutic stem cell research refers to efforts
to learn more about how healthy cells replace
damaged ones and to put that knowledge to work in
developing new treatments of disease. By some
estimate, 128 million Americans could benefit from
such treatments. Human reproductive cloning, on
the other hand, refers to efforts to create a
human that is an exact genetic copy of another.
That human cloning should be banned is an almost
universal opinion.
Interestingly, Virginia will be home to some of
the core decisions about therapeutic stem cell
research. A National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
panel of experts, co-chaired by University of
Virginia bio-ethicist Dr. Jonathon Moreno, is
scheduled to report late in 2004 or early in 2005
on voluntary guidelines for research on human
embryonic stem cells. Biologist Richard Hymes of
MIT's Center for Cancer Research and an
investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical
Institute is the co-chair. Arlington-based NAS
advises the federal government on a wide range of
scientific issues, which in the case of stem cells
could include recruitment of donated cells,
appropriate uses, limits of study or therapy, safe
storage, handling of cells and privacy. President
Bush in 2001 limited the use of federal dollars to
research on embryonic stem cell lines that existed
then, but privately funded research has continued.
It is not certain, of course, whether any or all
of the initiatives approved by Californians
actually will take place. It is not even clear
that Virginia should attempt to compete in stem
cell research, given other strengths in
bioinformatics and genomics. But Virginians can
apply a number of lessons from the initiative
Californians developed and approved -- that
progress is driven by fact-based initiatives; that
leadership involves taking risks and sustaining
investment even in difficult budget years; that
higher education and research can conquer
ignorance, correct false starts and provide new
options; and that citizens can force a decision on
a complex and controversial set of issues, not
remain content to stumble around in what Thomas
Jefferson called "blindfolded fear."
Let's hope that Virginians helping guide and shape
embryonic stem cell research policy today could
lead to Virginians in the future staking a claim
to the bio-future in as dramatic a fashion as
Californians have done. Virginia has more than a
few nuggets of its own.
--
November 15, 2004
|
