Private vs. Federal Funding for Stem Cell Research

This post is for InternetJunkie and the roomie (see last thread).

Stem cell research, as well as other academic biomedical research, is primarily supported by federal funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Legal restrictions prohibit federal funds from being used to create new human embryonic stem cell lines. As a result of this federal ban, many US stem cell researchers are turning to private funding sources in order to carry out their research.

A research lab that receives both federal and private funds needs to build an entirely separate lab with private funding in order to carry out human embryonic stem cell research. They need two microscopes, one bought with federal money for non-stem cell research and the second microscope bought with private foundation money for stem cell work. Everything, incuding lab notebooks, computers, and pens have to be kept separate for human embryonic stem cell work. Consider this duplication of equipment for an entire lab and the cost becomes prohibitive for all but the most well-funded labs.

A lot of innovative research in our country occurs in publicly funded academic labs, where intellectual freedom is given free reign. My own research program has benefited from both federal and private funding. Private funds given to academic labs often mean the difference between survival and ruin. At the same time, private funds often have strings attached, such as how the money can be used (eg. no salary support for personnel, no equipment, etc.). That said, I think there is a place for both public and private funding for biomedical research. Each has its benefits and drawbacks. But I beg to differ with anyone who would suggest that private funding is enough to make up for the lack of public funds for biomedical research, and stem cell research specifically.

Biomedical research in the US has been hurt badly by inadequate funding. The success rate for federal research grants from the National Institute of Health is sinking to below 9% this year. My own NIH grant application scored within the top 14% and was not funded. These federal grants are critical for the success of this research. Are there strings attached to federal money? Sure. Namely, that you are expected to share your discoveries with other academic laboratories in a cooperative way, unlike private companies that can keep proprietary secrets for years, only releasing the product when it's a probable money-maker. Meanwhile, if the information had been shared publicly at an earlier state, so much more progress could have been made using that freely-available information.

As a result of the lack of federal research dollars, we see the following:

Labs are being shut down for lack of funds.

Many bright American scientists are leaving the US and moving to countries where they can accomplish their work without so many restrictions.

Other countries, such as Australia, UK, Israel, etc. are getting ahead of us in the stem cell field.

The delay in research, due to lack of adequate funding, leaves many people waiting all that much longer before potential treatments can be made available. How much longer do we keep them waiting?