 |
 |
I think this one of Don's best and certainly most useful strategies to use. Please read it. If we fail to win politically, we will not win at all, Ray # 133 Tuesday, April 25, 2006 - STRENGTHENING THE STRESS POINT: THE CHIMERIC CHALLENGE Olympic weightlifter Russell Knipp, a friend, died just a little while ago, age 63, massive heart attack; I just heard the sad news from another lifter, Kim Goss, editor of Bigger, Stronger, Faster Magazine. Russ Knipp was a stocky ball of muscle and good spirits, full of energy. He was a tad on the short side, claiming a height of 5'2". I am not sure he was quite that tall-but he was very nearly that wide across the shoulders-and he weighed between 165 and 200 pounds. Solid? In contest condition, you could bounce bullets off him; he had legs like redwood trees, muscles in places most people don't even have places. Once he had his shirt off and somebody said, "Make the toilet seat". He laughed, turned around, and pulled his elbows back, flexing the trapezius muscles (connecting neck and shoulders) into a surprising resemblance to the bathroom fixture. Look at the sequence photo. This is Russell Knipp's step into the history of sport: a double-bodyweight World Record 336 ½ pound Olympic press. How he did it has relevance to us; to see why, examine the mechanics of the lift. The athlete stood in a crouching position, hips thrust forward, bar across his chest. Then he straightened suddenly, driving the bar up-to instantly sink again while the bar went to arms' length. See that? He starts in a bend, straightens, then bends again: all done very fast. Once the bar is overhead, the athlete recovers his balance, the judge claps his hands, and the lift is complete. Russell Knipp figured out the stress point, the place where the attempt was won or lost: right in the middle of the lift, when the body was bowed inward. Then he strengthened the stress point. By doing special exercises (strict presses with no body motion) in that middle position-he developed muscles exactly where the strength had to be. And became the greatest presser in the world. This is the most important law in politics: find the stress points, and strengthen them. So who cares about politics? Anybody that wants stem cell research to be more than a promising possibility; if we want cures instead of dreams, we must win politically. As in weightlifting, politics has sticking points, places where everything is won or lost. For example, in the 2004 Presidential campaign, George Bush's military record was at first considered a weakness. He could not prove he had shown up for duty during one year of National Guard service. Was it just bad record-keeping on the military's part? Possibly. But during my three years in the Army, everybody knew exactly where I was. I lived in a barracks, sharing a room with about 30 other men; we all knew each other. Anyone absent for a day would have been instantly noticed. Official roll call was taken every weekday morning; records were kept on file in the company office. Anybody who was even late for inspection duly noted, and was in trouble. For a soldier to not show up for duty for an entire year, to be Absent Without Leave-AWOL-- in time of war? That's pretty close to desertion, which can get you shot. This single issue alone could have swung the election. But somebody (I suspect Karl Rove, Republican political super-guru) came up with an idea: the Swift Boat Veterans for (alleged) Truth. These soldiers attacked the military credibility of-- John Kerry. When I first heard this, I could not believe my ears. Kerry not only had shown up for duty, but was a decorated war hero in Viet Nam, wounded in action, credited with saving lives under fire. The allegations were never proved. The claims of heroism (made by the military when they gave Kerry his medals) were solid. The soldiers who served beside him testified that he had done exactly what the Army said he had done. Mr. Bush, on the other hand, never did prove that he had show up for duty. Even the offer of a financial reward did not provide creditable evidence for his claim of service. But the attacks on Kerry had done their job. People thought, oh, there are questions about both of them-it must be just politics. By focusing on and strengthening the stress point, the issue was removed, and George Bush kept the Presidency. Are Mr. Rove's political tactics worth knowing? Well, the man was once asked, how many Republican office holders in Texas had he helped? He thought for a moment, and then said, "All of them." And Texas redistricting gave Republicans control of Congress. In the stem cell research battle before us, there is a stress point I suggest we strengthen: not by lies or slanderous attacks, but the simple gathering of facts. The issue is chimeric research. A chimera is a mythical monster, half-man, half-animal, all nonsense. Remember the bull-man Minotaur in Greek legend, Jason fought him/it in the labyrinth? That was a chimera. In scientific terms, a chimera is a mix of two species. Why does this matter? The Stem Cell Research Act (HR 810, Castle-Degette, a loosening of NIH stem cell funding restrictions) will shortly come up for a hearing in the Senate: probably mid-May. It will not come alone. Along with it will be bills from the anti-research king, Senator Sam Brownback. One proposed law is the same anti-SCNT legislation he has been trying to pass for about five years, the Cloning Prohibition Act. The other is an anti-chimera law. With the inevitable horse-trading, the following offer seems almost certain. Research Opponent Senator: "Look, I have a whole bunch of conservative voters to keep happy. So we'll accept HR 810-- you can even shoot down the Brownback anti-cloning bill-but we have to at least pass the Anti-Chimera Act." At first glance, it does not sound too bad. Human/animal research? Who cares? Except it may be the single most important issue in stem cell research today. Consider: what is unquestionably the greatest barrier to public acceptance of embryonic stem cell research? The need for human eggs. Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT) offers hope to make personalized medicine, as well as disease-specific stem cells. But SCNT requires donations of women's eggs, at least for the foreseeable future. We may at some point be able to make egg-like structures from a patient's own cells, but that time is not now. But what if we could remove the egg issue from the discussion completely? What if we never had to use a woman's eggs at all? If we could use microscopic rabbit eggs-just the shell, not the contents-and a skin tab from a person, we could have SCNT with limitless supplies, and never an ethical squawk. But that would be chimeric research, which the Brownback bill would criminalize. We need to strengthen this sticking point. So, I have a favor to ask. Could our science writers, people like Shane Smith, Mike Claes, Lawrence Goldstein, Wise Young-put together arguments for keeping chimeric research legal? If you yourself are an advocate "explainer", please use the web to research chimeras, and try to put together a 1-2 page explanation on why it should be allowed. Then share it widely as you can; consider sending it to me. I promise to at least read it, try to learn from it, and possibly print some in this column. We only have about six weeks to get our arguments ready. Chances are, the bills will be introduced on or about mid-May, near the anniversary of HR 810's passage in the House. The opposition is of course ready with their attacks. It is easier to scare, than to educate. But are we ready to defend? I recently heard a one-hour lecture from an internationally respected scientist on why chimeric research should stay legal. I agreed with him-but I could not understand him. At the end of the hour, I felt I knew less than when I began. On most issues of stem cell research, we are in good shape with language; we have good plain honest words to explain what the research is for, and why we must protect it. Are we ready to defend SCNT? Absolutely. We have quotes from politicians on both sides of the aisle (Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford, for example) and statements of support from all the major medical, scientific, and educational groups. Our polls are super strong. Supporting embryonic stem cell research-no problem. But when it comes to having the right words to defend chimeric research, we are just plain not ready. We need to strengthen the sticking point of chimeric research. Or watch it be criminalized, lost before we even have the chance to find out what it could do. P.S. Here is a quote from Wikipedia on chimeras in research. In biological research, chimeras are artificially produced by mixing cells from two different organisms. which may be of different species - for example, in 1984 a chimeric geep was produced by combining embryos from a goat and a sheep. A chicken with a quail's brain has been produced by grafting portions of a quail embryo into a chicken embryo. Interspecies chimeras are made in the laboratory. In addition to the famous geep, there are rat/mouse chimeras and a rabbit/human chimera that was not allowed to develop beyond a few days...In August 2003, researchers at the Shanghai Second Medical University in China reported that they had successfully fused human skin cells and rabbit eggs to create the first human chimeric embryos. The embryos were allowed to develop for several days in a laboratory setting, then destroyed to harvest the resulting stem cells. By Don Reed, www.stemcellbattles.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn