 |
 |
Can't tell if Tom even subscribes to this list as his message was forwarded, but I don't think his sentiment is helping PD at all. The details about contaminated lines, the amount of funding coming from outside the NIH, and the differences between adult and embryonic stem cells have all been mentioned earlier in this thread. Most of that has been covered here in the past months, but there are always new subscribers that don't yet know it. Why not just let scientists do what they want with embryonic stem cells for a while? If nothing comes of it, as some suggest, the work will slow to a trickle. If something comes of it a lot of people will benefit. At that point, scientists can see if whether is possible to accomplish the same results with adult stem (or somatic) cells. This is a common path in reseach -- take the most likely path to a solution, and once it is a found adjust it to optimize in different directions (efficiency, environmental friendliness, etc). Cars are a good example, today's cars pollute a less and are safer than cars produced a hundred years ago. The drug industry is always looking for more potent drugs with fewer side effects. It's been three years that the ban has been on. Long enough! On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:54:47 -0800, Murray Charters <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Celebrities Mislead & Confuse The Stem Cell Issue > Embryonic and adult stem cells. The media, celebs, and politics are > misleading the public. > > Distribution Source : PRWeb > > Date : Sunday - October 31, 2004 > > (PRWEB) October 31, 2004 -- Like Michael J Fox I am a young onset > Parkinson's disease patient, one of thousands in the United States. > However I do not have the star power to influence voters. > > I was diagnosed four years ago at the age of 33 while serving in the > US Air Force. The disease ended my marriage and my carreer but also > gave me new direction in life. My days are like a roller coaster ride > as medication swings me back and forth between "on" and "off" stages. > I work full time now for the Department of Energy as a computer > specialist, which is no easy task, but I fight my way through each > and every day determined not to lose the battle. > > With the pending election the topic of stem cells has found itself > pushed into the spotlight. This is both good and bad. Good for the > awareness and bad for the misleading statements, articles, and other > media released on the subject. It is my hope that this article will > help set the record straight. > > 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 as the public is often lead to believe. 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. 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. > > Unfortunately celebrities fall prey to the pressures of politics. > Displaying public support for a candidate, making unfair and > unresearched statements about current stem cell policies, and > creating misleading stem cell commercials is not the answer. We must > educate the public on the issues and get away from the politics. > > Embryonic stem cells (source: NIH) > > Embryonic stem cells, as their name suggests, are derived from > embryos. Specifically, embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos > that develop from eggs that have been fertilized in vitro—in an in > vitro fertilization clinic—and then donated for research purposes > with informed consent of the donors. They are not derived from eggs > fertilized in a woman's body. The embryos from which human embryonic > stem cells are derived are typically four or five days old and are a > hollow microscopic ball of cells called the blastocyst. > > Adult Stem Cells (source: NIH) > > An adult stem cell is an undifferentiated cell found among > differentiated cells in a tissue or organ, can renew itself, and can > differentiate to yield the major specialized cell types of the tissue > or organ. The primary roles of adult stem cells in a living organism > are to maintain and repair the tissue in which they are found. Some > scientists now use the term somatic stem cell instead of adult stem > cell. Unlike embryonic stem cells, which are defined by their origin > (the inner cell mass of the blastocyst), the origin of adult stem > cells in mature tissues is unknown. > > While I am for embryonic stem cell research (excluding the fetal > tissue stem cells they avoid talking about) I am very happy with the > current policy. It would be morally wrong for our government to use > tax payers money to do research on embryos from IVF clinics or other > sources. > > The study of embryonic stem cells is important.and should continue. > We do not need to rely on federal funds. In 2003 an estimated $120 > million of private funds was given to various researchers and > universities to pursue embryonic research. > > Researchers recently revealed research in which adult stem cells have > been converted to long-lasting, dopamine-producing brain cells that > could eventually be used to treat diseases such as Parkinson's. Dr > Michel Levesque of Cedars Sinai has also shown the potential of adult > stem cells for Parkinson"s disease. > > So What Is The Truth? > > The report "Monitoring Stem Cell Research" by The President's Council > on Bioethics released in January 2004 does a great job of separating > the fact from fiction in regards to current policy regarding stem > cell research in the United States. This report can be viewed in its > entirety at: http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/stemcell/fulldoc.html > > Here are a few of the facts that the report brings to light: > > •This law effectively prohibits the use of federal funds to support > any research that destroys human embryos or puts them at serious risk > of destruction. It does not, however, prohibit the conduct of such > research using private funding. Thus, it addresses itself not to what > may or may not be lawfully done, but only to what may or may not be > supported by taxpayer dollars. At the federal level, research that > involves the destruction of embryos is neither prohibited nor > supported and encouraged. > > •Scientists may receive federal funding for using or deriving new > animal embryonic stem cell lines, to assess the potential of these > cells for treatment of animal models of human disease. > > •Researchers can use federal funds for work involving human embryonic > germ cells, obtained from aborted fetuses. > > •Researchers can receive federal funds for work conducted on human > adult (non-embryonic) stem cells. > > •There are no restrictions regarding what American scientists can do > with regard to adult stem cells using taxpayer funds, other than > those requiring them to honor the usual human subject protections and > clinical research requirements (if they are to be transplanted into > human patients). The NIH has devoted substantial resources to the > study of human adult stem cells, allocating over $170 million to the > field in fiscal year 2002, and approximately $181.5 million in fiscal > year 2003 (approximately ten times the amount devoted to human > embryonic stem cell work). > > •Researchers remain free to pursue work (including the derivation of > new lines of embryonic stem cells) in the private sector, without > government funding. > > •Under present law, work supported by private funds can proceed > without restriction. > > Stem cells, embryonic or adult, can possibly one day cure Parkinson's > and many other diseases. Being very much pro-embryonic stem cell > research I can see both sides of the coin on this complex issue and > am very comfortable with the decision made by President Bush. > > Thomas N. Berdine > Albuquerque, NM > http://www.youngparkinsons.com > > # # # > > http://www.YoungParkinsons.com > Thomas Berdine > 505-293-5612 > E-mail Information > http://www.prweb.com/emailmember.php?prid=173517 > > SOURCE: PRWeb / Arrive.net Top Stories, Oct 31, 2004 > http://press.arrivenet.com/pol/article.php/494681.html > > Comment: > > Tom, at your youthful age, given the longevity of Parkinson's, you > may have the requisite 30 years to wait this out... > > Others, like myself, have already endured more than 20 years and for > us time is definitely of the essence! > > cheers ... murray > > PS: Feel free to lambaste or embrace Tom's position... > > * * * > 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