President Bush took the middle road in a controversial issue Thursday, announcing his decision to fund research on existing embryonic stem cell lines but denying funds for research on embryonic stem cells that have not already been cultured.

"As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist. They were created from embryos that have already been destroyed, and they have the ability to regenerate themselves indefinitely, creating ongoing opportunities for research," Bush said in the televised address. "I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cell lines, where the life and death decision has already been made."

Bush"s decision pleased and disappointed the scientific community, where stem cells are believed to have the potential to cure many degenerative diseases. His words inspired the same mixed feelings in the religious community, where stem cell research is considered the death of a human life and the first step of human cloning.

"I wish that he had gone a little bit further but I think we have to be tremendously grateful that we got what we did," said University Assistant Professor Sue O"Shea, who is currently doing research with animal stem cells but hopes to progress to human embryonic stem cells in the near future.

Currently O"Shea is the only University-affiliated scientist hoping to use the human embryonic stem cell lines for research purposes. But Bush"s announcement leaves the opportunity for others.

Sally Pobojewski, spokeswoman for the University Health System, said Bush"s speech gave a clear understanding of stem cell research and the issues surrounding it.

"I don"t know who wrote his speech, but it was a great speech," she said.

Pobojewski said Bush"s decision and speech left out one concern: whether the cell lines that are being funded for research will have the same potential as the original stem cells.

In theory, stem cells divide to produce replicas of themselves. The replicas can then divide, creating a cell line. But, as in most copying processes, scientists are worried that some details and some information might be lost.

"Every time the cell divides and you freeze them and thaw them and use them, you look at the possibility of change," O"Shea said.

Bush"s speech centered around the moral and scientific implications of stem cell research.

"Based on preliminary work that has been privately funded, scientists believe further research using stem cells offers great promise that could help improve the lives of those who suffer from many terrible diseases. and while scientists admit they are not yet certain, they believe stem cells derived from embryos have unique potential," Bush said.

According to O"Shea, the medical possibilities are endless. Stem cell line research could yield cures for many disabilitating diseases, including heart disease, Parkinson"s disease, Alzheimer"s disease, diabetes and even some cancers.

"You could conceivably create layers and layers of skin for burn victims," she said. "Name me a disease and I could tell you how a stem cell could help."

Bush explained the important difference between human embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells in his address. Embryonic stem cells are cells that have yet to differentiate into specialized tissue types, meaning that they have the potential to become any type of tissue. Adult stem cells have already differentiated and are limited in what they can do.

He also said it was necessary to limit the research done on the embryonic stem cells but encouraged research on adult stem cells and stem cells derived from animals and umbilical cords.

"Research on embryonic stem cells raises profound ethical questions, because extracting the stem cell destroys the embryo, and thus destroys its potential for life," Bush said.

However, O"Shea said that she does not believe it is ethically wrong to use embryonic stem cells for research.

"They kept saying that it was a matter of ethics verses science and honestly I am offended by that. I think it is just as wrong to have a cell line and not use it therapeutically. I think that would be morally wrong of medicine, but people will disagree and that is their right," she said. "Lots of people disagree with animal research and yet they reap the benefits every day."