Human embryonic stem cell research and Proposition 71:<i>Reflections on California's response to federal policy</i>

On August 9th, 2001, the federal government of the United States announced a policy restricting federal funds available for research on human embryonic stem cell (hESCs) out of concern for the “vast ethical mine fields” associated with the creation of embryos for research purposes. Until the policy was repealed on March 9th, 2009, no U.S. federal funds were available for research on hESCs extracted after August 9, 2001, and only limited federal funds were available for research on a subset of hESC lines that had previously been extracted. This paper analyzes how the 2001 U.S. federal funding restrictions influenced the quantity and geography of peer-reviewed journal publications on hESC. The primary finding is that the 2001 policy did not have a significant aggregate effect on hESC research in the U.S. After a brief lag in early 2000s, U.S. hESC research maintained pace with other areas of stem cell and genetic research. The policy had several other consequences. First, it was tied to increased hESC research funding within the U.S. at the state level, leading to concentration of related activities in a relatively small number of states. Second, it stimulated increased collaborative research between US-based scientists and those in countries with flexible policies toward hESC research (including Canada, the U.K., Israel, China, Spain, and South Korea). Third, it encouraged independent hESC research in countries without restrictions.

show abstract

“…Total state-level support was extensive. In 2007, for example, U.S. states provided $250 million for hESC research [ 5 ]. Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Progress in Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research in the United States between 2001 and 2010

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To ensure the availability of an educated workforce, the promise of stable funding has been found to be successful in the past for states like California (Burgin ). States have also sought to entice industry by creating specialized associate’s degree programs or by making significant curricular changes in their higher education systems (Bagchi‐Sen, Smith, and Hall ).…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…California made a $3 billion investment in the Institute for Regenerative Medicine to fund embryonic stem cell research, with states like New Jersey, Illinois, and Maryland following suit. California claimed that the initiative created thousands of jobs and millions in tax revenue, and solidified California’s position as a biotechnology leader (Burgin ).…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

State Biotechnology and Genomic Development: Critical Resources and Barriers

Chao

Myers

2018

Politics & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes the development of an index of state biotechnology and genomic development and the cluster analysis used to group U.S. states based on their level of development in each area. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) is then used to test hypotheses regarding statistically significant differences between the biotechnology/ genomic development clusters and variables related to states' workforce, investment in research and development (R&D), and policy environment. The authors find statistically significant results in the areas of workforce education, migration of knowledge workers, industrial and nonindustrial R&D, and policy to promote the development of the biotechnology industry. While the MANOVA for policies placing limits on the development of biotechnology policy did not yield statistical significance, the authors argue that the finding deserves further study as it may indicate some states' willingness to strike a more sustainable balance between support and regulation.

show abstract

“…A handful of states have devised policies to address aspects of these broader concerns, and California in particular is a leader in these efforts. 44 The majority of policies dealing with compensation and informed consent, however, pertain only to the donation of materials for research purposes. While there is some diversity among the states, the primary focus of much of this state regulation concerns stem cell research.…”

Section: Regulating Oocyte Donationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Federalism and bioethics: Women's health and the regulation of oocyte donation

Hagel¹

2014

Politics and the Life Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The absence of comprehensive federal oversight of human biotechnologies in the United States continues to stimulate academic discourse on the relative merits of European-style regulatory agencies as compared to the current, decentralized approach. Many American bioethicists support the latter, maintaining that the key features of federalism--policy experimentation and moral pluralism--allows for the efficient regulation of these complex and contentious issues. This paper examines state-level regulation of oocyte donation to assess claims regarding the superiority of this decentralized regulatory approach. Further, this paper introduces an additional element to this examination of state law, which concerns the degree to which the health and safety of key participants is addressed at the state level. This inquiry assesses one facet of fertility medicine and biomedical research law, oocyte donation, an analysis that can be used to inform the broader discourse regarding the regulation of human biotechnologies and bioethical issues by the states.

show abstract

Human embryonic stem cell research and Proposition 71:Reflections on California's response to federal policy

Cited by 4 publications

References 26 publications

Progress in Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research in the United States between 2001 and 2010

Progress in Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research in the United States between 2001 and 2010

State Biotechnology and Genomic Development: Critical Resources and Barriers

Federalism and bioethics: Women's health and the regulation of oocyte donation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About