I just received a call from Joe Pierly in Sen. Bond's Washington DC office. He had received a fax of a letter to Sen. Bond that I had given to Ben Jones of Bond's KC office who was in Trenton, MO Monday, June 29, 1998 for a Republican Women's Meeting. Mr. Pierly said that Sen. Bond was one of the original sponsors of the Udall bill and he continues to ask for increased NIH funding for five diseases in particular: Parkinson's, Cancer, Heart Disease Alzheimer's and a rare disease-- I didn't catch the name. I was napping when he called, so may not have been as clear spoken as I would have liked, but I explained that I felt a responsibility to ask if Bond or his office received the petitions signed by MO constituents supporting full funding of the Udall bill from PAN attendees. Mr. Pierly said he thought the petitions had been delivered and read a thank you letter from a Sharon ??? of O'Fallen, MO that he thought may have been who delivered the petitions. He assured me that Parkinson's research was a high priority of Sen. Bond and said he thought a member of Bond's own family, perhaps his grandparent, had Parkinson's. I thanked Mr. Pierly for calling me to advise me of Bond's support. He said I could call him again at the DC office or call Bond's KC office and they would pass along any concerns. I also mentioned that before my Nov. diagnosis of PD, I had thought PD was a disease of the elderly, but at 47 I found out that was not so and I now knew of others my age and younger with PD. I expressed my concern that research find cure/cause of PD since long term drug therapy can have negative side effects. I will keep abreast of how the Senate subcommittee of which Bond is a member continue to support this effort. I never heard a $$$ amt from Mr. Pierly. He did say that earmarking of funds had not been popular with NIH in the past, but that it was now felt that it was necessary. I replied that earmarking and accountability of the research results was a good idea, in my opinion. Jeanette Fuhr 47/7mos <[log in to unmask]>