Stem Cell Act deadly Trojan Horse
by diverdonreed
Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 03:38:32 AM PDT
Senate Bill 30 should be called the "Death of Hope" Act.
diverdonreed's diary :: ::

CHAMPIONS SPEAK OUT! Senate Bill 30 a "Stem Cell Trojan Horse"
Remember the Trojan Horse? In Greek mythology a giant horse (full of
soldiers) was left outside the walls of Troy. The people inside the city,
thinking this was a gift, brought it in-and the soldiers jumped out and
killed everybody.
Senate Bill 30, the so-called "Hope Act" by Republicans Norm Coleman of
Minnesota and John Isakson of Georgia,  is the Stem Cell Trojan Horse.
S 30 pretends to be a moderate middle ground-but it contains provisions
which would permanently block federal funding for new stem cell lines by
either embryonic methods (IVF) or by SCNT.
Developed with the cooperation of the Bush White House, Senate Bill 30
should be called the "Death of Hope" Act.
It is vital that we let our Senators know we are not fooled.
Here are some of our champions, speaking out.
Bob Klein spoke against it at the Sacramento Press Club:
"Bob Klein, who led the campaign for California's $3 billion stem cell bond
measure in 2004, scrapped a prepared speech... and instead argued against
the bill (S. 30)... "You can only use what are effectively dead cells" under
the bill's rules, he said."-Jim Downing, Sacramento Bee, April 9, 2007
Bernie Siegel, great stem cell warrior of the Genetics Policy Institute,
said the following:
Stem Cell Folly - the Coleman-Isakson 'No Hope for Patients Act'
WASHINGTON, April 9 PRNewswire-USNewswire -- The following is a statement by
Bernard Siegel, executive director of the Genetics Policy Institute:
Senators Norm Coleman and Johnny Isakson of Georgia filed S.30, an alleged
compromise stem cell research bill they have euphemistically titled the
"Hope Offered through Principled and Ethical Stem Cell Research" Act or
"Hope Act" for short.
In reality, it offers scant hope to patients. Utilizing insidious language
directly taken from the talking point playbook of the research foes, the
bill would drive the National Institute of Health to push dubious research
alternatives to embryonic stem cell research.
The bill directs the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human
Services to prioritize the alternative methods of securing embryonic stem
cells utilizing the methods described in a White Paper of the President's
Council on Bioethics, "Alternative Sources of Pluripotent Stem Cells." That
report was widely criticized for touting dubious "false alternatives" to
embryonic stem cell research. Indeed, Council member Dr. Michael Gazzaniga,
expressed his disgust describing the report as a "diversion from the simple
task at hand which is to move forward with the established laboratory
techniques, that are already grounded on a clear ethical basis, for studying
embryonic stem cell research and biomedical cloning."
The Coleman-Isakson "No Hope Act" would restrict the cloning of stem cell
lines through SCNT, a method involving no pregnancy, but using only
microscopic cells in a petri dish. SCNT offers promise for creating stem
lines burdened with a disease for study of the root causes of birth defects
and other medical conditions and for personalized treatments using
genetically matched tissues. The bill sets in place impossible hurdles by
disallowing the use of embryos to be donated for this potentially lifesaving
medical research.
Coleman-Isakson endorses research upon naturally dead embryos, even though
the hope of producing a living cell line from dead cells, is speculative at
best and ethically questionable.
What is the true purpose of this bill? It is nothing more than political
cover so politicians can go back to their constituents and boast that they
are supporting "ethical" stem cell research. The bill fails to address the
urgent, unmet need for funding new cell lines.
Coleman-Isakson also provides cover to the White House in its unyielding
efforts to undermine embryonic stem cell research. Though the bill is
offered as a so-called compromise, it is actually a Trojan Horse, filled
with hooks to entangle legitimate embryonic stem cell research for years.
Millions of patients, their caregivers and loved ones are looking to the
Senate this week to "unlock the cells" and lift the restrictions on stem
cell research. Senators that unwisely support the Coleman-Isakson, as an
alternative, are voting to place roadblocks to desperately needed research,
thereby depriving real hope to suffering children and adults.
SOURCE Genetics Policy Institute
Here is a public letter from the world-renowned medical authority, Dr.
George Daley, of Children's Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts.
It is long, and I am only quoting a little bit of it-basically, he is
disputing the "science" on which S 30 is based.
April 4, 2007
To Senator Tom Harkin, United States Senate
Dear Senator Harkin:
I am responding to your request to provide my views on the feasibility of
deriving human embryonic stem cells from embryos that have been called
"naturally dead." This concept is articulated in bill S 30 pending before
the U.S. Senate that states: "It is the purpose of this act...to promote the
derivation of pluripotent stem cell lines without the creation of human
embryos for research purposes and without the destruction or discarding of,
or risk of injury to, a human embryo or embryos other than those that are
naturally dead."...
Some senators might be persuaded to vote for expanded funding for human
embryonic stem cells derived from "naturally dead" embryos at the expense of
voting for expanded research support under S.5. This would be a step
backwards for embryonic stem cell research. The definition of a "naturally
dead" embryo, as required in the alternative bill, is highly problematic,
and S.5 remains the greatest hope for advancing human embryonic stem cell
research in this country...
Sincerely,
George Q. Daley, MD, PhD
Associate Professor, Biological Chemistry and
Molecular Pharmacology
Finally, here is the winner of the Nobel Prize for Medicine, Dr. Harold
Varmus, speaking on five premier scientific organizations, the American
Society for Cell Biology, The American Society for Clinical Investigation,
The Genetics Society of America, Science Service, and the Society for
Neuroscience.
April 9, 2007
The Honorable Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Reid:
On behalf of the Joint Steering Committee for Public Policy (JSCPP), I would
like to express our support for S.5, the "Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act
of 2007." S.5 would expand the current federal policy regarding federally
funded embryonic stem cell research to allow the use of cells derived since
August, 2001, from embryos originally generated for reproductive purposes
that would otherwise be destroyed.
I would also like to express the JSCPP's opposition to S.30, the "Hope
Offered through Principled and Ethical Stem Cell Research Act." The purpose
of S.30 is to "promote the derivation of pluripotent stem cell lines without
the creation of human embryos for research purposes and without the
destruction, discarding of, or risk of injury to a human embryo or embryos
other than those that are naturally dead."
S.5 represents an important step forward for human embryonic stem cell
research, a new field that offers great promise for the replacement of
damaged cells, the understanding of the mechanics of disease, and the
development and testing of new drugs. Unfortunately, current federal policy,
in place since 2001, has not kept pace with the speed of scientific
discovery and is today of limited value to the scientific community, a
position endorsed by the Director of the National Institutes of Health,
Elias Zerhouni,, at a recent Senate appropriations hearing.
While the JSCPP is supportive of S.5, we strongly oppose S.30. S.30 is
proposed as an alternative to S.5, but contains no substantial measure to
reverse current limitations on embryonic stem cell research and simply
endorses research avenues that are already open under current law. We oppose
the bill because it contains unnecessary provisions and places confusing and
short-sighted restrictions on biomedical research....
We are also concerned about the provision in S.30 that requires a priority
to be placed on research "with the greatest potential for near-term clinical
benefit." Not only is it impossible to know the benefits of research in
advance, but limiting the scope of research in this way places a muzzle on
the scientific process, placing short-term incremental advances ahead of the
more challenging goals of preventing or curing diseases such as diabetes.
For these reasons, we believe that passage of S.30 would be a significant
step backwards for human embryonic stem cell research and for biomedical
research in America. Therefore, we urge a "yea" vote on S.5 and a "no" vote
on S.30.
Sincerely,
Harold Varmus, MD
Chair, Joint Steering Committee for Public Policy
President, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
Former Director, National Institutes of Health (1993-1999)
Nobel Laureate in Medicine or Physiology (1989)
The Joint Steering Committee for Public Policy is a coalition of five
non-profit science-based societies including the American Society for Cell
Biology, the American Society for Clinical Investigation, the Genetics
Society of America, the Society for Neuroscience, and Science Service, and
represents over 75,000 research scientists and advocates for science
education."
Senate Bill 30 must be defeated.
Its authors, Norm Coleman, Republican of Minnesota, and John Isakson,
Republican of Georgia, have done a disservice to their constituents, and a
suffering world.

 It always amuses me that the christian right (2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
sxwarren, Sharon in MD
will defend the unborn and yet help KILL the Iraqi's or the Iranians, or
other peoples of color.  Killing is killing is killing. We need stem cells
to work with. How we get them should be up to the people, all peoples, and
not the christian right.   I have seen too many people suffer and die from
disease during my 16 years of Hospital Nursing and its a crime. People who
had such severe pain that it didn't matter what you gave them, they still
suffered. ENOUGH!
"Though the Mills of the Gods grind slowly,Yet they grind exceeding small."
by Owllwoman on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 03:49:06 AM PDT
 I thought that these kinds of bills (2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
sxwarren, Owllwoman
weren't going to ever come up for a vote with the democrats in charge.
Imagine my shock to find out that was bullshit?
Actually I am not surprised at all.  I knew that was nonsense told to me to
get me to vote for Casey.  Well guess what, I am not ever going to vote for
another anti-choice social conservative.  I've had enough of them to last a
life time and I am not going to vote for them just because they are
democrats.  The democratic party needs to make this go away and it should
never get to the floor to be voted on. Period.
by TeresaInPa on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 03:50:31 AM PDT
 Hmmmmm ... (2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
Sharon in MD, Owllwoman
So according to the Republicans, using an embryo for research is worse than
throwing it in the garbage, but on the other hand it's ok to bring the dead
to life?
by Biologist on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 04:16:31 AM PDT

Davinci, MissAnneThrope, sxwarren, scoff0165

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