 |
 |
Economic Impact Of Calif. Stem Cell Plan Debated By Deena Beasley and Leonard Anderson, Reuters Posted 10/3/2004 9:01 PM LOS ANGELES/SAN FRANCISCO — A proposal to spend $3 billion in California state funds on stem-cell research is likely to attract scientists and create jobs, but some critics question whether the investment will pay off. "This is a very progressive measure ... it would give an immediate boost and acceleration to the field," said Carl Feldbaum, president of trade group Biotechnology Industry Organization. The November ballot initiative would authorize $3 billion in tax-exempt bonds to set up the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine and fund 10 years of stem-cell research. The funds would dwarf other U.S. public money for the controversial research. The Bush administration, citing ethical concerns, in 2001 sharply limited federal spending on research involving stem cells taken from human embryos. Stem cells are unprogrammed master cells that can give rise to various cells and tissues. Backers of the initiative, including Hollywood celebrities and Silicon Valley billionaires, argue that the research could potentially lead to cures for diseases such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and diabetes. Opponents, however, say costs to the state are too high since the bonds could lead to further deterioration of California's credit rating, higher taxes to pay them off and diversion of funds from other projects. "You're asking taxpayers to foot the bill for something that well-heeled venture capitalists are unwilling to put their own funds into," said Tim Rosales, a spokesman for Doctors, Patients and Taxpayers for Fiscal Responsibility. "If this holds such great promise, why aren't they investing?" Total payback cost for the bonds would be about $5.4 billion, according to a study prepared for the campaign. But the measure would have the secondary effect of boosting California's economy, Feldbaum said. "It would result in a new cluster of brand-new innovative companies," he said. Bruce Deal, managing principal at Analysis Group and co-author of the economic analysis study, said the state would have a share in patents and licenses for products developed in the program and take a percentage of future sales revenue. The study also said thousands of new jobs could be created, but critics say that $3 billion of government spending in any sector would boost payrolls. "I'm concerned that the public is really not well informed," said Denis Rodgerson, chief executive of stem cell storage firm NeoStem. "This is a huge amount of money for a state that is already financially strapped." Rodgerson, whose firm collects and stores adult stem cells harvested from blood, said adult stem cell research — a field eligible for more generous federal funding — is far more likely to yield near term medical breakthroughs. "We can't wait for the federal government. It's better to have California take the initiative and support good solid research," said George Rathmann, who co-founded biotechnology pioneer Amgen in 1980. Rathmann likened the stem cell controversy to the early days of biotechnology research. "Back in the 1970s, recombinant DNA technology was very controversial, a slippery slope. But it turned out to be a very benign technology. If we put roadblocks in the way of stem cells, we are missing the benefits," said Rathmann, who has donated $50,000 to the Proposition 71 campaign. Worcester, Massachusetts-based Advanced Cell Technology, the first company to clone a human embryo, plans to establish a presence in California, said scientific director Dr. Robert Lanza. "The climate for this type of research is very favorable in California," he said. "There's going to be a massive movement of stem cell talent." SOURCE: USA Today, United States http://tinyurl.com/4h9r3 * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn