[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 61 (Wednesday, May 11, 2005)]
[House]
[Page H3167]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  SCIENTIFIC MODEL FOR DECISION-MAKING

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to 
address the House this evening and talk about an issue that is not 
Republican; it is not Democrat. It is an issue that may potentially 
affect every single citizen in our Nation.
  When I ran for office as a physician, many folks in my district and 
in my family and in my practice asked me why? What on Earth do you want 
do that for? Why would a physician run for office?
  Well, in addition to the feelings that most of us had, I suspect, 
about making a real difference, one of the things that attracted me to 
being a public servant, running for office, was the opportunity to 
bring the scientific model to decision-making in the world of public 
policy. As a physician, I was trained in the scientific model.
  And what is that? That means that when you have a problem before you, 
like a patient who has a disease that you do not know about, that you 
work as hard as you can to identify that problem, and then you gain as 
much information about that problem as possible. And then you define 
specific solutions for the problem, and then you enact one of those 
solutions. You enact one of those treatment plans, if you will, and you 
measure the result, see where you are; and if you are not where you 
need to be, then you change what you are doing and move on so that you 
make modifications that are necessary so that you work toward that end 
goal.
  Now, this is a classic model for doing all that is necessary and not 
more. It also allows for the greatest amount of critical thinking about 
any issue, not just scientific issues, but any issue; and if it is 
followed, it will result in the best outcome.
  Now, the opportunity to bring this type of decision-making, what I 
call solution-making, to Congress is truly a great privilege. For if we 
do not address problems in this manner, then we are left with political 
battles where the argument that carries the day goes to the group with 
the most and greatest number of troops on their side, or with the side 
that has the most passion or the most emotion in their argument.
  Now, there is nothing wrong with numbers, and there is nothing wrong 
with passion, and there is nothing wrong with emotion. It is just that 
they may not get you to the right solution.
  And such is the case, I believe, with the issue of stem cell 
research. What is the problem? What is the problem that we are trying 
to address with stem cell research? Well, it is diseases. Patients have 
diseases and stem cells may be able to cure some of those diseases.
  Stem cells are cells that when they are stimulated or encouraged, 
they may become other kinds of cells, many of which may be beneficial 
in the treatment of diseases.
  And there are basically three types of stem cells. There are 
embryonic stem cells, those cells that come from an embryo, a human 
before it is born. There are cord or placental cells, those cells that 
are left over after the birth of a baby. And then there adult stem 
cells; and those cells, in spite of the fact that they are called 
adult, come from anybody that has been born.
  Now, regardless of where you come down on this matter, which cells 
ought to be used, I think it can be said that no one can state that 
this issue is not full of ethical dilemmas. The beauty of this issue is 
that science, if you follow the science, we can avoid those ethical 
challenges. And the bonus is that they work.
  If you take a peek at this poster here, what we have are adult stem 
cells. And there are all sorts of different adult stem cells. There are 
bone marrow and peripheral blood and hair and cells from your stomach 
or your GI tract or the placenta or the brain. All of those can result 
in a different kind of cell. You can get tendon from bone marrow. You 
can get nerves from peripheral blood cells. You can get heart cells 
from skeletal muscle cells. All of these kind of cells are available.
  In addition to that, the adult stem cells that have been used and 
studied have actually shown great benefit in many different diseases, 
unlike embryonic cells to date. Adult stem cells have treated 43 
different types of diseases from brain cancer to myasthenia gravis to 
stroke. So they work. A couple of examples, Parkinson's patient treated 
with his own adult stem cell continues to exhibit relief from 80 
percent of his symptoms more than 6 years after his surgery. A phase 1 
human clinical trial using this therapy is currently under way.

                              {time}  1830

  Umbilical cord cells were used to treat a South Korean woman who had 
been paralyzed, a spinal cord injury. She now is able to walk.
  Dr. Denise Faustman, a leading diabetes researcher from Harvard has 
completely reversed end-stage juvenile diabetes in mice and has FDA 
approval to begin human clinical trials.
  As we go through this discussion over the next number of weeks and 
months and years, frankly, I urge my colleagues to look anew, to look 
objectively at the issue of stem cell research. If we do, I believe 
that we can then all determine that we will work in a reasoned manner 
together to allow scientists and researchers to help the patients of 
our Nation.

                          ____________________