2 On Jul 19, 05:41 pm, Walter Richards wrote:

I think he did the right thing, for the wrong reason.

Last I heard, there have been no breakthroughs due to embryonic stem cell research. I’ve read that all the breakthroughs with stem cells, are coming from adult stem cells.

Doesn’t it make more sense to fund research that’s actually contributing to medical advances, rather than throwing more money into a “failing” endeavor? I mean, I know that’s contrary to government’s usual attitude of “if it didn’t work the first time, spend more money on it” – but it seems to me, it should be common sense.

IMO, this is just another instance of politicians trying to coerce science to fit a political agenda, rather than actually trying to help anybody.

4 On Jul 19, 11:16 pm, lee wrote:

The difference between progressive evolved minds and the pro-lifers.

California is jumping the hurdles-Gray Davis signed the bill a while back, while making human cloning illegal. Paralyzed rats have hade their walking ability restored. That’s why Christopher Reeves was so hopeful.

Missouri has actually tried to make it illegal for anyone to go to another state to acquire stem cell treatment.
——————
Stem-cell research on the rise, even lacking government funds
Arnold Kriegstein, Keith Yamamoto

Friday, February 3, 2006

SF Chronicle Submissions

The delays in Proposition 71 funding brought on by lawsuits have led some to suggest that stem-cell research in California is dead. In fact, even though Prop. 71 has not yet contributed a penny to research, its passage has galvanized the field.

Within universities throughout the state, scientists representing a broad array of disciplines have joined forces to move the science forward. They are developing strategic plans, organizing programs and recruiting pre-eminent scientists to their faculties. They are exploring partnerships with other universities, biotech companies and pharmaceutical companies, and are investing in lab space and equipment.

We are confident the funding from the newly established California Institute for Regenerative Medicine will ultimately become available. But even if it does not, UCSF and other institutions in California are moving forward. The potential of stem-cell research to reveal fundamental processes of human development and provide treatments for incurable diseases is simply too great to ignore or defer. Prop. 71 funding would be a tremendous boon, providing a fertile environment for carrying out this research. Even without that money, however, scientists are pressing on.

At UCSF, clinician-scientists and basic researchers are devising an infrastructure aimed at moving discoveries made in cell culture and animal models toward clinical trials, through an array of “pipelines” representing nearly every organ system of the body. They are developing research proposals; forming new research groups to work on problems of common interest; and streamlining the process by which discoveries at the bench become therapies at the bedside. Similar work is underway at universities throughout the state.

Likewise, newly recruited stem-cell scientists are arriving on campuses. At UCSF, their salaries are secured and they are hiring postdocs and technicians. Prop. 71 funding would accelerate their progress, and private funding will be key to some of their projects in the meantime, but work will commence regardless. Moreover, further recruitment continues, despite the uncertainty of Prop. 71 funding.

In the same vein, the science itself is moving forward. At UCSF, investigators in some 60 laboratories are studying stem cells and related cells of humans, mice, zebra fish and worms, exploring their role in nearly every organ of the body. Studies are under way of human embryonic stem-cell lines that were derived at UCSF in 2001 and are on the National Institutes of Health Stem Cell Registry. In labs throughout the state, similar work is proceeding.

UCSF scientists have also derived 11 new human embryonic stem-cell lines, using a combination of state and private funds in spaces not federally funded. Our scientists have also submitted a proposal to UCSF’s internal review boards to resume somatic-cell nuclear transfer, or “therapeutic cloning,” studies pioneered at UCSF in 1999. This work would be supported by private funds.

Even plans for constructing a building that would allow non-federally funded human embryonic stem-cell research on campus are being pursued. Presumably, similar plans continue at other UC campuses as well. We are hopeful that Prop. 71 funding will ultimately be available to pay for part of our proposed building, but we are also pursuing fundraising from those who care deeply about the potential of stem-cell research and who are eager to accelerate our advances in this field.

In the meantime, we are renovating space—with internal funds—that will allow human embryonic stem-cell research to proceed on campus. We are committed to this work whether or not Prop. 71 funding is available.

In this interim, private donations to universities from individuals and foundations will be especially important in terms of recruiting faculty and building facilities throughout California. Should Prop. 71 funding not come through, new partnerships with industry and grants from philanthropic foundations will also be critical for supporting the research itself. Currently, a competitive UC discovery grant (which includes matching funds from a biotech company) and funding from private donors and foundations support part of UCSF’s human embryonic stem-cell program.

Research progress at universities will help map the path toward cell therapies that can mature into deliverable remedies through the support of venture capitalists, biotech and pharmaceutical companies. The field of stem-cell research, particularly human embryonic stem-cell research, is in its infancy, and building the foundations alone will require years of exploration in labs throughout the world.

The budgetary restrictions on biomedical research recently instituted by the National Institutes of Health, coupled with the ongoing restrictions on federal funding of human embryonic stem-cell research, make the challenge particularly great. But the groundwork is already proceeding—in labs from San Diego, Irvine and Los Angeles to Palo Alto, San Francisco, Berkeley, Davis—and beyond.

Dr. Arnold Kriegstein is director of UCSF’s Institute for Stem Cell and Tissue Biology. Keith Yamamoto is executive vice dean of UCSF’s School of Medicine.

6 On Jul 20, 12:10 am, lee wrote:

electric car 1 cent per mile-250 miles per charge

http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

8 On Jul 20, 08:52 am, Tryan Hartill wrote:

I agree with Walter. If this technology had so much promise, private companies would be all over it.
But of all the things that Bush could have vetoed because of “morals”, he uses his first on this.

10 On Jul 20, 11:48 am, lee wrote:

Yeah Tryan-Get back in line.