magine running a company in the small-cap space and experiencing all the hardships that go along with it. Things like complying with Sarbanes Oxley on a limited budget, constantly lobbying investors for more money and fulfilling your fiduciary duty to the shareholders. Toss in a worldwide debate over your business practice and U.S. government restrictions on federal funding and you’d be the CEO of a small-cap company focused on stem cell research.Sound like a dream job? More like being one of the Spartans from “300” fighting an overwhelming force of a million Persians. This is an everyday reality for all the CEOs of stem-cell companies in the small-cap space. A widespread controversy exists over stem-cell research that derives from the techniques used in the creation and usage of stem cells throughout the world. Embryonic stem-cell research is particularly controversial because, with the present state of technology, starting a stem-cell line requires the destruction of a human embryo and/or therapeutic cloning.
Opponents of the research argue that this practice is a slippery slope to reproductive cloning which is said to be synonymous to the instrumentalization of a potential human being. Small-cap CEOs and medical researchers in the field argue that it is necessary to pursue embryonic stem-cell research because the resulting technologies are expected to open many doors in the medical field.
Shares of companies developing therapies involving stem cells were down Friday, a day after the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives on Thursday by a vote of 247-176 passed the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Voting yes were 210 Democrats and 37 Republicans. Voting no were 16 Democrats and 160 Republicans.
Voting no by using his veto pen for only the third time in his presidency will also be President Bush, who has said he will not sign any legislation ending the ban he imposed on the use of federal funds to create new stem cell lines in August of 2001. The House vote fell well shy of a veto-proof majority, leaving certain that the President’s ban will remain in place for at least another year.
Now let’s take a look at some of the stem-cell companies with a market capitalization below $300 million. Two of these companies are StemCells Inc. (Nasdaq: STEM) and Cord Blood America Inc. (OTCBB: CBAI). The other company we will touch on is Cytori Therapeutics Inc. (Nasdaq: CYTX), which was one of the only stem cell companies trading up today.
STEM engages in the discovery and development of adult stem cell therapeutics to treat damage to, or degeneration of, major organ systems such as the central nervous system, liver and pancreas.
CBAI engages in the collection, testing, processing and preservation of umbilical cord blood in the U.S. This blood enables families to preserve cord blood at the birth of a child for use in future stem-cell therapy.
CYTX engages in developing and commercializing stem and regenerative cell therapies for cardiovascular disease, reconstructive surgery and serious, chronic, and life-threatening conditions.
Other stem cell companies with a market cap below $300 million include the following: NeoStem Inc. (OTCBB: NEOI); Aastrom Biosciences Inc. (Nasdaq: ASTM); MultiCell Technologies Inc. (OTCBB: MCET); Endovasc Inc. (OTCBB: EVSC); BioStem Inc. (OTCBB: BTEM); ViaCell Inc. (Nasdaq: VIAC); and Opexa Therapeutics Inc. (Nasdaq: OPXA).
So which side of the fence do you choose? It’s either one team or the other in the stem-cell debate because there really isn’t any middle ground. Take the medical advancement side of the argument and join these small company CEOs who believe that eventually stem cells can be used to treat Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, heart disease, stroke, arthritis, diabetes, burns and spinal cord damage. Or take the moral side of the argument and join President Bush who believes that embryonic stem-cell research crosses a moral line he finds “troubling.” Only one thing is for sure and without debate in the stem cell saga… CEOs don’t get a lot of sleep.
