YOU could be forgiven for thinking that the stem-cell debate is over in the US. President Barack Obama has made good on his campaign promise to lift his predecessor’s restrictions on federal funding for research on human embryonic stem cells (ESCs). Advocates of stem cell research are celebrating (see page 6).

New Scientist hates to spoil the party, but the stem-cell debate is not closed – it is about to enter a new and more subtle phase. If US biologists and those who fund their work are to retain popular support, they may need to keep a close eye on the nuances of public opinion.

Obama’s executive order is sparsely worded and leaves the details to be worked out by the National Institutes of Health . The NIH now has 120 days to come up with new guidelines on human ESC research, and is then expected to back this work “to the extent permitted by law”.

This key phrase is a veiled reference to a law known as the Dickey-Wicker amendment . Every year since 1996 it has been attached to the bills approving the NIH’s budget, and it prohibits funding research that involves the creation, destruction or injury of a human

US stem-cell debate is far from over

EDITORIAL

embryo. This means that the NIH can give grants to biologists to work with human ESCs created using other funding sources, but it cannot pay them to isolate new cell lines.

Not only does the NIH have to work within this constraint, but it must also weigh the issue of whether its money can be used for research on lines derived from embryos created specifically for the purpose of making stem cells, or whether to restrict funding to cell lines extracted from “spare” embryos left over from IVF clinics.

New Scientist quizzed US stem cell biologists on these points this week, in the immediate wake of Obama’s announcement,

and found divergent views. Some were content to work with ESCs isolated from spare IVF embryos, but a few wanted the NIH to fund research on ESCs taken from embryos created expressly to make stem cells, combined with action by Congress to overturn the Dickey-Wicker amendment.

We urge caution. Some nations, such as the UK, have taken a liberal approach to ESCs, even allowing government funds to be used in attempts to create stem cells by cloning. But US sensibilities are different, and it is not clear whether the widespread public backing for Obama’s move would persist if the research involved anything other than cell lines taken from spare IVF embryos. Having won a significant expansion of this research, it will now be important to retain public goodwill. ■

Obama has kept his campaign promise, but US biologists must not get carried away

What’s hot on NewScientist.com

SHOULD scientists ever put a gloss on their data to bolster support for a “good cause”? Growing unhappiness about the Red List – the Oscars of extinction risk – underline why this is bad idea (see page 8). Through the list, the International Union for Conservation of Nature has done an admirable job in alerting us to the threat of species loss, but in doing so it omitted to highlight the uncertainty in its findings. As a result, valuable resources may be going into saving the wrong species, and the list itself stands to lose credibility.

Those attending the climate conference in Copenhagen this week should take heed. Even in a good cause, science should strive to rise above politics. Spinning data will always be counterproductive in the long run. ■

The whole truth, and nothing but the truth

The toaster did it

YOUR toaster burns and the freezer spoils your food, all at the whim of a malevolent foreign power. A new kind of domestic warfare could become a reality when everyday gizmos acquire their own internet addresses so they can in theory be turned against us by cyber-attacks, aided perhaps by sabotaged microchips (see page 18). It is reassuring that the US plans to study these and other bizarre possibilities in the world’s first cyberwar “shooting gallery”. Alas, domestic gadgets will never again seem quite so friendly and helpful. ■

“ If biologists are to retain popular support, they’ll need to keep a close eye on the nuances of public opinion”

14 March 2009 | NewScientist | 5

SPACE The evolution of

the spacesuit Engineers

are always improving designs to

protect astronauts from the vacuum

and temperatures of space, while

also enabling astronauts to move

as freely as possible. See a fashion

show of spacesuits

MATHEMATICS Tetris algorithm

helps environment Research

on how to arrange a collection of

2D shapes into the smallest space

could lead to methods that package

goods into fewer, smaller deliveries

SPACE TRAVEL Living in

long-term isolation An upcoming

study will confine six people for

105 days to simulate a long space

trip – planetary scientist Pascal Lee

describes his 402-day stay in an

Antarctic research station

ENVIRONMENT Earth may be

entering climate change danger

zone Climate experts have found

that the planet is changing faster

than expected and so have updated

the “burning embers” diagram

of climate-change threats

ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR Chimps

know geometry A study of spatial

orientation in wild chimps suggests

they use Euclidian maps to reach

food sources and are aware of the

distances they need to walk

TECH Avatar’s eyes are the

windows to your virtual soul

The development of a new animation

technique means that virtual eyes

that closely mimic real eyes can be

created in minutes. Watch our video

detailing the process

GREEN TECH Gadgets to

green our lives See our gallery

of the best tech-based proposals to

cut our environmental impact, from

window blinds that collect solar

energy to a hand-powered printer

Find these articles and more at www.

newscientist.com/article/dn16730