AT THE HEART OF CALIFORNIA'S multibillion-dollar experiment in public stem cell research are two promises. One is that such research will save lives. The other is that the scientists conducting it, and the agency funding it, will be accountable. The first is as magnificent as it is exaggerated; the second is more practical but as yet unfulfilled.
That's the bad news. The good news is that there's still time for the state agency set up by Proposition 71, which created a $3-billion bond to fund such research, to make good on its promise. All it will take is compromise, common sense -- and maybe a little litigation. The last of these, at least, is starting to have an effect.
For The Record
Los Angeles Times Wednesday January 18, 2006 Home Edition California Part B Page 12 Editorial Pages Desk 1 inches; 49 words Type of Material: Correction
Stem cell research: An editorial Tuesday said that the chairman of the oversight committee for California's Institute for Regenerative Medicine had not met with a state legislator who proposed a constitutional amendment to make the agency more accountable. The chairman, Robert Klein, has met with the legislator several times.
Research in the public interest
Any undertaking this big was bound to have early stumbles, but the first year under the stem cell initiative was especially disappointing. To start, the initiative itself has multiple flaws, most of them related to accountability.
The California Institute of Regenerative Medicine was created by Proposition 71, which also freed it from most public oversight and basic rules guarding against conflict of interest.
The agency's governing board is filled with researchers, industry representatives and patient-advocates. These people have passion and expertise, but also an inherent conflict of interest because they all represent groups likely to seek stem cell funding. The board also needs elected officials and watchdogs to vouch for the public interest.
Proposition 71 forbids any alteration to the structure of the regenerative medicine institute by the Legislature for the first three years, and after that requires an almost impossible 70% approval for any changes. The lack of accountability prompted a lawsuit that has kept the state from issuing any bonds to pay for research. It goes to trial Feb. 27 and, with appeals, is expected to last for more than a year.
As it turns out, that may be a good thing. The opening bumbles of the institute's oversight committee, and recent reports of a South Korean stem cell researcher who falsified his results, show that shocking things can happen in the headlong race for stem cell discoveries. California must be sure its program is both accountable and ethical before it starts handing out grants.
