 |
 |
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