Michigan’s embryonic stem cell research laws are restricting science that could lead to treatment for Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis and spinal cord injuries, said Rep. Mark Meadows, D-East Lansing.

“Rather than discarding these embryos, we believe that we could be using them in research to save human lives and make human lives better,” said Meadows, who introduced one of the proposals. “The important part of the bills is that we make sure the research is done ethically.”

While 70 percent of the public supports the bills, they will likely face stiff opposition from groups such as the Michigan Catholic Conference and the Right to Life of Michigan, Meadows said.

Ed Rivet, legislative director of the Right to Life of Michigan, said the bills would take Michigan in the wrong direction.

“The legislation would allow research that allows the killing of live human embryos,” Rivet said. “We would simply say that crosses ethical lines.”

Marcia Baum, executive director of Michigan Citizens for Stem Cell Research & Cures, said Michigan law allows adult stem cell research but bans most embryonic stem cell research.

Embryonic stem cells are more versatile than adult stem cells and have the possibility of leading to more disease cures, Baum said.

Michigan’s ban places it among the states with the strictest stem cell research laws in the nation, Baum said. Other states with strict laws include South Dakota, North Dakota, Louisiana and Arkansas.

The legislation is unnecessary because effective research is being conducted with adult stem cells, Rivet said.

Meadows, however, said that embryonic stem cell research is needed, a move that won’t occur unless the state’s ban is lifted.

Until that happens, university researchers can’t do their job, Meadows said.

That includes James Trosko, a professor in MSU’s Department of Pediatrics and Human Development, who said the ban is stopping him from researching how genes function in embryonic stem cells.

Trosko said he is studying how genes function in adult stem cells. Without comparing the results to embryonic stem cells, he won’t know how the two cell types differ and which would work better for regenerating skin or muscle tissue, Trosko said.

“It’s holding back science,” he said. “Having knowledge versus having ignorance is the fundamental question.”