In the latest chapter of a debate over the controversial issue of human embryonic stem cell research, Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Sam Brownback (R-KS) squared off at an often-emotional hearing on April 26. The hearing, which also featured actor Christopher Reeve, was held by the Labor-HHS Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, chaired by Specter.

Research on stem cells derived from human embryos is a relatively new area of biomedical science that offers significant potential for curing disease. However, obtaining such stem cells necessitates the destruction of human embryos, raising serious ethical questions. The National Institutes of Health (NIH), which is funded by the Labor-HHS panel, has proposed guidelines that would allow federal funding of this research, but they are not expected to take effect until later this year. Specter has introduced the Stem Cell Research Act of 2000 (S. 2015), which would give NIH legislative authority to move forward.

Drs. Allan M. Spiegel and Gerald D. Fischbach, both scientists at NIH, opened the hearing with testimony on the science behind embryonic stem cell research. They described the field as holding great potential for major breakthroughs in the treatment of many diseases, from juvenile diabetes to rheumatoid arthritis. However, Dr. Frank E. Young, a former commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, advocated restricting research to adult stem cells only, which are obtained without the destruction of an embryo. His testimony was echoed by Brownback and Mary Jane Owen, executive director of the National Catholic Office for Persons with Disabilities.

According to written testimony submitted by Spiegel and Fischbach, however, adult cells have not shown as much promise as embryonic cells. "[Embryonic] and adult stem cells are not qualitatively alike," they wrote. "[Embryonic] stem cells have truly amazing abilities to self-renew and to form many different cell types, even complex tissues, but in contrast the full potential of adult stem cells is uncertain, and, in fact, there is evidence to suggest they may be more limited." Outlawing research on embryonic cells, Spiegel said, "would be tying one hand behind our back."

Specter emphasized that the embryos scientists propose using are excess embryos discarded by fertility clinics that have long been routinely destroyed. His bill requires that only these embryos be used and only if the parents who produced the embryos give their consent. However, this argument did not sway his critics, and the debate at times seemed to boil down to the definition of human life. Owen, who is blind and confined to a wheelchair, described the current pursuit of medical treatments as "frenzied." She said, "I am deeply opposed to any gain in my sight, mobility, or even my hearing if it was purchased at the cost of a single human life." In response, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) emphasized that an embryo is no larger than a pencil dot and is not a sentient being.

In the most dramatic exchange of the morning, Brownback likened embryonic stem cell research to experiments the Nazis performed on prisoners in concentration camps during World War II. "You are taking live human embryos in this case, and … stem cells [will be extracted] from them. You had the Nazis in World War II saying, now these people are going to be killed. Why don't we experiment on them and find out what happens …? They're going to die anyway."

"They were living people," Specter interjected.

"These are living embryos," replied Brownback.

Though the debate had similarities to the abortion debate, the two issues are not entirely parallel. Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), who describes himself as pro-life, strongly supports embryonic stem cell research, saying we should go "no holds barred." And Specter argued that unlike a fetus, a discarded embryo such as one that could be donated for research is not "on its way to life."

S. 2015 also prohibits the sale of such embryos for profit. This is analogous to a ban on the for-profit sale of fetal tissue used in federally funded research. Specter and his supporters contend that profiteering from the sale of human embryos would be less likely to occur in private sector research if the federal government enters the field. If federal funding is approved, they argue, the resulting NIH guidelines will be followed voluntarily by many private organizations.

Also testifying at the hearing, were Reeve, who was paralyzed in a horse-riding accident, and Jennifer Estess, an actress who suffers from Lou Gehrig's Disease. Both hailed embryonic stem cell research and the potential it shows for treatments of their diseases. "Is it more ethical for a woman to donate unused embryos that will never become human beings," Reeve asked, "or to let them be tossed away as so much garbage when they could help save thousands of lives?"

Specter plans to hold more hearings on embryonic stem cell research in the coming months as he works to pass S. 2015. Although Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS) pledged as part of a compromise to bring the bill to the floor during the current session, he and several key senators signed a letter to NIH opposing this research and will likely work to defeat the bill. Should the bill pass the Senate, its prospects in the House are unknown.