 |
 |
Sad. Fanatics don't stop. Kathleen 2009/4/5 [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> > These news articles are very discouraging. We lobbied for 8 years, trying > to get Congress to overide Pres. Bush's veto of the stem cell bills passed > by Congress. The number of votes fell short. Hope was renewed with the > election of Pres. Obama and his executive order lifting Bush's limits on > federal funding for ESCR. Obama has said he would like to ohave positive > stem cell legislation passsed as well . Scientists felt their hands were > finally untied to move the research forward. Some talked for the first time > about how much time had been lost during the Bush years. > But new state bills are once again limiting funding and the ability of > scientists to use ESCs in their research. They build new roadblocks to > medical progress. > If federal bills are passed allowing ESCR,can state bills override them? It > may depend on the wording of each. > On the Michael J Fox interview on Oprah last week, I was surprised to hear > Dr. Oz state "The stem cell debate is over." Seems like it is far from > over..... > > > Linda > ---------- Original Message ---------- > From: rayilynlee <[log in to unmask]> > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: States move to ban ESCR > Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 12:26:35 -0700 > > Update on what states are doing. I read somewhere that for the past couple > of decades, religioius conservatives have made big strides in getting > control of state legislatures, local school boards, etc. > > Ray > > States Move to Restrict Stem Cell Research After Obama lifts Federal > Restriction > > Last month, President Barack Obama lifted 8-year-old restrictions on > federal > funding for most embryonic stem cell research. > > But researchers in Texas, Oklahoma and other states may not be able to take > part in what many expect to be a boom in stem cell science, as several > state > legislatures have moved to ban or restrict the research on the heels of the > policy shift. > > This week, the Texas senate passed a budget bill that included an amendment > to ban the use of state funds for embryonic stem cell research. Earlier in > March, the Oklahoma House passed a more restrictive bill -- one that would > make it a criminal misdemeanor for scientists to work with embryonic stem > cells in the state. > > "I absolutely believe that if the federal government messes things up, > states have a right to straighten it out," Oklahoma Rep. Mike Reynolds, who > introduced that bill, told Reuters. "My motivation is to protect unborn > children." > > The Texas House and the Oklahoma Senate have yet to vote on the bills. If > the legislation passes, Texas and Oklahoma will join several other states, > including South Dakota, Louisiana and Arizona, that already have laws > restricting or banning embryonic stem cell research. > > "Certainly these bills send a statement," says Erin Heath, a senior program > associate at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's > Center for Science, Technology and Congress, who has been tracking the > bills. "It's hard to tell right now what kind of broad impact they'll have. > And it's hard to even tell which bills will go all the way." > > Indeed, the Georgia Senate passed similar legislation in mid-March -- it > would have banned therapeutic cloning in the state and the creation of > embryos for any purpose other than procreation. But on Tuesday, state Rep. > Amos Amerson, the Republican chairman of the House Science and Technology > Committee, said that he was going to table any discussion of the bill and > that the House would not vote on it this session. > > The efforts have pitted religious conservatives against scientists as well > as business leaders who worry that the restrictions could drive away > scientific investment. > > Former presidential science advisor Neal Lane, now a professor at Rice > University in Houston, joined 17 other Texas scientists in writing a letter > to the legislature opposing the bill. > > "Going down this road puts Texas, which ought to continue to be a world > center for medical research, well behind the curve," Lane says. > In Georgia, Rep. Amerson cited economic concerns as part of his reason for > tabling that state's legislation, telling the Gainesville Times that he > didn't want to hurt the state economically by angering participants in a > national bioscience conference that will bring 20,000 people to Atlanta in > May. > > Irving Weissman, the director of Stanford University's Institute for Stem > Cell Science and Regenerative Medicine, says the states that ban stem cell > research will hurt themselves economically and scientifically. When > California decided to fund stem cell research during the eight years of > federal funding restrictions, he was able to attract more money and > researchers to Stanford's institute. > > "The new industries that spring up from successful research will be in > California," he says. "[States] may choose to opt out of this kind of > research because they have some moral or religious sense guiding them > rather > than scientific merit, and it will hurt them." > > Even Texas's less restrictive bill, which bans using state funds for the > research but does not prohibit it altogether, will have a "dramatic > chilling > effect," according to Sean Tipton, director of public affairs for the > American Society of Reproductive Medicine. That's because "state funds" can > be interpreted very broadly -- perhaps even cutting out federally- or > privately-funded research done in buildings owned by state universities, > for > example. > > "Research institutions just don't want to risk being on the wrong side of > the legislation," Tipton says, "So they tend to make the most broad > interpretation possible of these kinds of restrictions." > > Conservative groups, meanwhile, say they plan to continue supporting > state-level legislation. > > "I don't know that we'll have a very big voice [on the federal level]," > David Prentice, the senior fellow for life sciences at the conservative > Family Research Council, told the New York Times. "The states tend to be a > little more fluid." > > ---- By Lea Winerman, Online NewsHour > > Rayilyn 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 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn