EU funding of stem-cell research to be allowed under strict conditions

November 5, 2003

Brussels, 04 Nov 2003

In a highly charged and emotional vote today, the Industry Committee voted by 28 votes to 22 with 2 abstentions in favour of amending a Commission proposal on a set of strict ethical guidelines for deciding on and monitoring EU funding of research involving the derivation of embryonic stem cells from human supernumerary embryos. Most MEPs in the committee supported allowing research to be financed from the EU's sixth framework programme budget (2002-2006), albeit under tight ethical conditions. The majority of the amendments by the rapporteur Peter LIESE (EPP-ED, D) seeking to impose even stricter conditions on the use of stem cell research were rejected. Speaking after the vote, Mr Liese stated that he would not stand down as rapporteur since some of his amendments had been adopted, and that further discussion would be needed before plenary. Parliament is being consulted on this legislative proposal but the Council of Ministers has the final say.

Stem cell research raises ethical questions, particularly when it involves the use of embryonic stem cells derived from human supernumerary embryos (see News Report 25-04-2003) There is a great diversity of views among EU Member States concerning the ethical acceptability of various research fields Scientists are hopeful that stem cell research will provide essential progress in the development of therapies in several fields of medicine. This is particularly the case for the treatment of degenerative diseases like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's but also for more common diseases like diabetes.

The committee's suggested amendments focus on a number of areas. First, it calls for the scrapping of any cut-off date for the procurement of human embryos used for the procurement of stem cells. The Commission had proposed that EU funded research may only use existing human supernumerary embryos that were created before June 2002, the date of adoption by Parliament and Council of the sixth framework programme. MEPs also say that whether or not to allow funding of research on the use of human stem cells should depend both on the contents of the scientific proposal and the legal framework of the Member States involved. Research using adult stem cells and reprogrammed adult cells should get priority for financing. In addition, research on embryo or foetal stem cells deriving from spontaneous or therapeutic abortion may be funded. On parental consent, MEPs insist that where embryos are to be destroyed in order to produce human embryonic stem cell lines, the prior agreement of the parents must be secured and that no monetary compensation or any other consideration may be granted or promised for the donation of embryos used for the recovery of stem cells.

In order to ensure transparency in EU funding of research activities involving human adult or embryonic stem cells, the Commission will publish yearly a list of research projects involving the use of human embryonic stem cells funded under the sixth framework programme. The committee adds that in the case of research projects with embryonic stem cells, such publication must include a justification stating why other procedures were not usable.

04.11.2003 Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy
In the chair: Luis BERENGUER FUSTER (PES, E)
Procedure: Legislative consultation
Plenary vote: November, Strasbourg

Press enquiries:Richard Freedman - tel. (32-2) 28 41448e-mail:

European Parliament News Report 2003-11-04

Please login or register to read this article.

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most commented

Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October


Featured jobs

Occupational Health Manager

University Of The West Of Scotland

Senior Veterinary Epidemiologist

Scotland's Rural College (sruc)

Architecture Manager

University Of Leeds

Research Associate

Kings College London