This is really starting to piss me off.  How dare these legislators and
bureaucratic left-overs impose their own definitions and morality on the
whole of the United States?  Their position is constitutionally,
scientifically, and morally questionable and quite possibly dangerous to
society. And at the same time they are upholding the "sanctity of life",
they are flushing down the toilet my life and those of countless others who
could potentially be helped if ESCR research were robustly funded.  Should
our lives not be sanctified?  Were they somehow de-sanctified?  How did this
happen?  What about my goddamn right to life?

Let the worry-warts have their say, their oversight, but please, let the
research proceed in earnest.  Our cures our going to come anyway, some day.
Our government should use our taxes to work hard to bring us to that day.
Anything less is just wrong.

Grrrr...
Rick McGirr

-----Original Message-----
From: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of rayilynlee
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 3:15 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: New NIH Guidelines thwart SCNT

Proposed NIH Stem Cell Guidelines Dismay Leading Stanford Researcher
  a.. Friday April 17, 2009, 6:39 pm EDT 
STANFORD, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The director of stem cell research at the
Stanford University School of Medicine says he is troubled by draft
guidelines issued today by the National Institutes of Health that would
prohibit federal funding for research on stem cell lines created through a
technique sometimes referred to as "therapeutic cloning" or somatic cell
nuclear transfer.

Irving Weissman, MD, director of Stanford's Institute for Stem Cell Biology
and Regenerative Medicine, said the SCNT technique is one way to create
disease-specific human embryonic stem cell lines on which to conduct
research and test therapies. He also took issue with the assertion that the
NIH consulted existing guidelines from the National Academy of Sciences and
the International Society for Stem Cell Research-both of which sanction the
use of SCNT-derived cell lines-in coming up with its draft recommendations.

"Instead of facts, the NIH placed its own version of ethics in place of the
president's clear proclamation," said Weissman, the Virginia & D.K. Ludwig
Professor for Clinical Investigation in Cancer Research. "As head of the
National Academy of Sciences' panel that unanimously endorsed research using
SCNT, and as a drafter of the guidelines for the International Society for
Stem Cell Research, I know that this suggested ban on federal funding of
SCNT-derived human embryonic stem cell lines is against our policies and
against President Obama's March 9 comments. The NIH has not served its
president well."

On March 9, President Barack Obama signed an executive order removing
previous restrictions on the use of federal funds for research on any human
embryonic stem cell line derived after Aug. 9, 2001. He used the ceremony to
remark that it is important to ensure "that scientific data is never
distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda-and that we make
scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology."

In announcing the draft guidelines, acting NIH director Raynard Kington, MD,
PhD, justified the restriction in part by saying that there is a lack of
scientific consensus as to the necessity of funding lines derived by SCNT
and that, although the technique has been used to create many embryonic stem
cell lines in animals, such human embryonic stem cell lines have not yet
been documented.

"We believe there is strong, broad public and scientific support for the use
of federal funds for research on cell lines from embryos derived through in
vitro fertilization for reproductive purposes that would not otherwise be
used," said Kington, noting that similar legislation had twice passed both
the House and Senate only to be vetoed by former President George W. Bush.
"We do not see similar broad support for using federal funding for research
on cell lines from other sources."

The somatic cell nuclear transfer technique involves removing the nucleus
from an egg cell and replacing it with a nucleus from a different cell in
order to create an embryonic stem cell line genetically identical to the
donor nucleus. In the case of a donor who suffers from a condition like
Parkinson's disease, the SCNT process would yield an embryonic stem cell
line that could be used to test specific therapies for that patient.

If the draft guidelines are adopted, they would underscore the continued
need for the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, which has
funded grants to several scientists working to create specific human
embryonic stem cell lines for research purposes. The institute was
established in 2005 by Proposition 71 to counteract the effect of President
Bush's limits on federal funding of such research.

"Methods like SCNT were specifically sanctioned by Prop. 71," said Geoff
Lomax, PhD, the senior officer to the state institute's Standards Working
Group, which was instituted to develop ethical guidelines for the use of
embryos in CIRM-funded research. "These potential restrictions on the range
of research materials available for federal funding ensure that CIRM will
continue to play a unique role in the world of stem cell research."

"For certain types of research, CIRM could remain very important," concurred
Renee Reijo Pera, PhD, director of Stanford's Center for Human Embryonic
Stem Cell Research and Education. Reijo Pera said she had expected the NIH
guidelines to be somewhat conservative, particularly where SCNT is
concerned.

"I am happy that these are draft guidelines," said Weissman, who noted that
the NIH did not solicit input from either the National Academy of Sciences
or the International Society for Stem Cell Research during the consensus
process. "I'd like to remind the NIH of the principles enunciated by the
president on March 9. Research in this area is moving very fast, and it's
not possible to say whether advances will come from work on adult-derived
iPS cells or from embryonic stem cells created by nuclear transfer. Policy
needs to be developed as the field develops, rather than precluding
something based on ideology."

The proposed NIH guidelines will be available for public comment for 30
days, and the final guidelines will be released by the agency on or before
July 7. They can be viewed at http://stemcells.nih.gov/policy/2009draft.
Comments can be mailed, or submitted electronically after the guidelines are
published in the Federal Register by April 24.

The Stanford University School of Medicine consistently ranks among the
nation's top 10 medical schools, integrating research, medical education,
patient care and community service. For more news about the school, please
visit http://mednews.stanford.edu. The medical school is part of Stanford
Medicine, which includes Stanford Hospital & Clinics and Lucile Packard
Children's Hospital. For information about all three, please visit
http://stanfordmedicine.org/about/news.html.


Contact:
Stanford University Medical Center
PRINT MEDIA:
Krista Conger, 650-725-5371
[log in to unmask]
or
BROADCAST MEDIA:
M.A. Malone, 650-723-6912
[log in to unmask] Brown
Director AZNPF
Arizona Chapter National Parkinson Foundation
[log in to unmask]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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