Ruling Could Stop Euro Stem Cell Research – Scientists

Stem-cell scientists in Europe are reeling from a ruling on Wednesday banning patents on stem cells obtained through the destruction of human embryos.

The decision by the European Court of Justice means that no European patents will be given for research based on stem cells extracted from anything capable of developing into a human being.

According to the complex ruling, any process that involves removal of a stem cell from a human embryo at the "blastocyst" (five days after fertilization) stage that leads to the destruction of the embryo cannot be patented.

However, the ruling adds that the use of human embryos for developing therapeutic or diagnostic inventions for humans is patentable, even if their use for scientific research is not.

The decision is the culmination of a long-running legal battle, which came down to the European Patent Convention of 1973, which banned patents that were "contrary to public order and morality".

Researchers are furious with the ruling, the result of a challenge in 1999 by environmental lobby group Greenpeace to a patent on neural precursor cells obtained two years earlier by Oliver Brüstle, now at the University of Bonn in Germany.

A statement today from the environmental campaign group said: "Greenpeace is against the patenting of human life. Greenpeace is not anti-stem cell research. Europe has outlawed patents on uses of human embryos for industrial or commercial purpose and this case aims to clarify the law. This decision of the court clearly set clear limits to the commercialization of human life and we welcome it."

According to eurostemcell.org, scientists are concerned that the verdict, which is legally binding for all EU states, will drive development of stem cell therapies outside Europe.

Professor Brüstle said: "With this unfortunate decision, the fruits of years of translational research by European scientists will be wiped away and left to the non-European countries.

"European researchers may conduct basic research, which is then implemented elsewhere in medical procedures, which will eventually be re-imported to Europe. How do I explain that to the young scientists in my lab?”

Professor Austin Smith of the Wellcome Trust Centre for Stem Cell Research at the University of Cambridge, said decision by the Court leaves scientists in a "ridiculous position".

"We are funded to do research for the public good, yet prevented from taking our discoveries to the market place where they could be developed into new medicines. One consequence is that the benefits of our research will be reaped in America and Asia”

Despite his disappointment about the Court’s verdict, Professor Bruestle said he was optimistic that stem cell technology would continue to progress on an international level.

(DW/CD)