First let me say as always that I respect you both and appreciate all your
hard work you accomplish every day.

John Kerry's stance on stem cells was purely for votes from those the
technology may help one day. I was worried that many in the community would
vote on that one issue but it is evident now that the country has seen
through Kerry's promises and plans for what they were--true hype.

I am glad you find my points to be correct, although one sided. However keep
in mind that your position is most always one sided as well. To be an
effective force we have to understand and respect both sides of the issue.

Did you ever see the episode of Law & Order (I belive it was Law & Order) in
which a wealthy Parkinsonian pays a woman to become pregnant by him in order
for him to abort it and use it for stem cells for his own use?

While I do support and advocate FOR embryonic stem cell as well as SCNT I
undertand the ethical concerns involved and the potential for this important
research to go to far if left unchecked.

South Korean scientists have cloned 30 human embryos to obtain cells they
hope could one day be used to treat disease.  This to a degree scares me.
This technology was the same that was used to clone Dolly.  But still I
support it as I see the good that potentially be derived from embryonic stem
cells.

It is my hope that the community will focus on what we have vice what do
have not. Awareness and support for the work such as Dr Levesque is doing in
my opinion is something we need to rally behind. But at the same time
continue to press for further raising of funds from the private sector for
embryonic stem cell research. Both are vital to our futures.

In closing please let me say that "I am sorry" if I have let the community
down. But I could not go on "trying" to believe the positions that were not
entirely truthful and were/are misleading the public. You don't know how
many people who I have spoke to who "belive" that Bush has a total ban on
all stem cell research.

Best Regards,


-----Original Message-----
From: Murray Charters [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: Celebrities Mislead & Confuse The Stem Cell Issue

Dear Murray, thank you for alerting us to  this article of Tom's.

November 1, 2004 -- Like you, Michael J Fox, and tens of thousands
of others in the United States, I too am a young onset Parkinson's
disease patient. Like you, I do not have star power to influence voters.
I am not a star, like Michael J.Fox, or Mel Gibson, or a prize-fighter,
or a famous televangelist, or the President, all of whom use their
power to influence the debate on the stem cell issue. I am simply a
citizen with ten years of Parkinson's behind me, and an uncertain
future ahead of me. I receive a small SSDI disability check,
which allows me to call myself "retired" on forms if I don't want
to write "disabled" in the occupation box.

While we do not have star power, we have something we share
with millions of others, including Michael J Fox: we each have
one vote tomorrow and while Michael J Fox might walk in and out
of the voting booth in the light of the cameras, my vote-God willing--
will be counted the same as his.

And I do have the power to influence voters, as do you, which is why
I am writing this response. I am afraid voters will read your opinion
and be swayed by its arguments, which I find one-sided when not
actually incorrect.

You write: "There is no total restriction on stem cell research in the
United States. The restrictions imposed are for "embryonic stem cell
research" and the policy restricts utilizing federal funds (tax dollars)
for embryonic stem cell research. It does not ban all stem cell
research"

That is true, and you will not find a proponent of furthering embryonic
stem cell research with serious public funding who would dispute this.
But it is also true that the federal government under the administration
of George Bush has severely restricted public funding for embryonic
stem cell research. The provision of $25 million in total grants for
embryonic stem cell research last year is pathetic, and anti-embryonic
stem cell research rhetoric can only claim that it is a record high
for such funding because it was the first year in which the federal
government actually funded any embryonic stem cell research.
The consensus among scientists is that $25 million in public funding
is not a serious commitment by the government to embryonic
stem cell research. So the claims of those opposed to this research
are consciously misleading and anyone with a familiarity with the issue
would know that. Those opposed to real government funding for
embryonic stem cell research and use these  arguments are cynically
playing on the ignorance of the general public with regard to a
complex issue of science.

"Researchers in the United States are free to use pre-existing lines
using federal money and new lines using private funding to pursue
embryonic stem cell research."

What isn't said here again takes some close listening to comprehend.
The pre-existing embryonic stem cell lines number a mere fraction
of what President Bush claimed in his August 2001 address
to the nation which established the current policy. And those lines
that did exist are seriously flawed. They were nourished with
"mouse feeder cells," which makes them unfit for any human research
application because of the possibility that animal viruses could
contaminate human subjects in clinical trials.

Even if they were not contaminated, they are too few in number
to provide a genetic base for any widespread applications.

Despite these limitations, their scarcity has made them proportionately
expensive to other research needs, i.e., they cost a lot.

"Embryonic stem cell research in fact is flourishing at Universities
as well as through private grants across the United States.
Not to mention the work being accomplished worldwide.
Adult stem cells have brought us treatments and cures for over 140
conditions. Embryonic stem cells have yielded none. The policy
imposed by President Bush is a fair policy and it is working.
Yes it was made using values and ethics, but those are two values
that this country is supposed to represent."

The first statement is an opinion. I am of the opinion that embryonic
stem cell research is NOT flourishing, but, rather floundering
in the US. And to say "through universities as well as through
private grants" as if university research did not depend
overwhelmingly on private endowments and contributions is plainly
misleading

Yes, embryonic stem cell research is being done across the world
(as is adult stem cell research), with almost daily breakthroughs
being reported in Singapore, Norway, South Korea, the UK
and many other countries. In my opinion, that is all the more reason
why the US should aggressively fund embryonic stem cell research.
The US has by far the greatest resources to put into this research,
so far beyond that of other countries that it is embarrassing to rely
on them to pay for work that will benefit everyone. More importantly,
it has started a "brain drain" from the US as our scientists leave
to conduct research without unreasonable restrictions in other
countries. This damages our leadership in science and will deprive
the US of the revenues that come from advances generated
by US scientists in foreign countries.

How can we safeguard this research against abuse if we leave it
in the hands of foreign countries or the private sector of our own
country? By leading the world in this research we have the power
to shape the ethical standards applied worldwide to embryonic
stem cell research. It is by this means that we can influence
other nations to apply the values and ethical standards held
by the mainstream of the American public. And I submit to you
that the values and ethics of the current president are alarmingly
out of step with those held by the average American citizen.

The statement that adult stem cells stem cells have been effective
in treating many (perhaps 140, I hear many different figures but the
point is made) illnesses and embryonic stem cell research has
yielded nothing is true only in the most reductive sense, and you
of all people should know how intentionally misleading
that statement is. Adult stem cell research has been actively
pursued in the decades since they were first isolated almost
30 years ago, and have been effective in mainly diseases
of the blood such as leukemia. Embryonic stem cells were
isolated by James Thomson at the University of Wisconsin
at Madison in 1998---just six years ago. The comparison is
completely unfair and purposely misleading, because of the length
of time the two types of stem cells have been available for research.

Furthermore, research on adult stem cells has benefited precisely
because it has received the kind of public funding that has been
denied to embryonic stem cell research.

Embryonic stem cell research has shown great promise in its
"infancy," or early stages of development. At the aforementioned
universities, such as Harvard and University of California-Irvine,
Parkinson's disease and spinal cord injuries have been
successfully treated in animal models. Wouldn't that inspire most
governments to actively support such work instead of treating it
like a bastard child?

Frankly, I am sick and tired of answering these diatribes.
People are capable of making up their own minds once they have
researched the issue themselves. So go read the material - from
both sides (surf http://www.yeson71.com for a pro discussion).
Keep an open mind. If you believe this is a pro-life/choice question,
let's discuss it on that level. If you think this is a scientific
battle, well, let's go there. But don't disguise a hidden pro-life
agenda in the guise of misleading and incomplete scientific
arguments. You know better, and as a person dealing with a chronic
illness and having looked at the issue of stem cell research closely,
you owe it to those who are less informed to be honest and
straightforward in your arguments and your intentions.

Tomorrow is an important day, for me, for all Californians,
for the US, for the world. I hope that I can wake up Wednesday
morning with a sense of pride in being an American in a world
where America is trying to do the right thing.

Sincerely.

Ann Campbell Wasson

Greg Wasson

______________________________________________

I have changed my name:
from Ann Jeanette Campbell to Ann Campbell Wasson,
from Ann Campbell to Ann Wasson,
from ajc (AJC) to aWc or ACW

but you can still call me aj
______________________________________________


SOURCE: Ann & Greg Wasson

* * *

This initiative may impact the lives of everyone of us.

If you know one voter in California please contact that person and
influence their vote on our behalf.

It's time to start - with Proposition 71

cheers ... murray

Murray Charters <[log in to unmask]>
Please place this address in your address book
Please purge all others

Web site: Parkinsons Resources on the WWWeb
http://www.geocities.com/murraycharters

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn