[paula_w]

Science and Society
Friday, April 27, 2007
Keep the Focus on the Feds
BY SAM BERGER

With Congress set to reprise last year’s failure to override a presidential veto of stem cell legislation, there have been rumblings that stem cell activity is shifting to the states. It would be a mistake, however, to think state initiatives can replace robust research support from the federal government.

States lack the revenue, infrastructure, and incentives to properly promote stem cell research on their own, especially with federal policies that limit collaboration, impede their funding, and fail to provide regulatory guidelines. And the new political landscape means there is plenty of work to be done at the federal level. Our stem cell policy remains a national problem requiring a national solution.

There appears to be little chance of overturning President Bush’s expected veto of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. While the bill passed with broad, bipartisan support, it is still one vote short of a veto override in the Senate and thirty-seven votes short in the House. The chances of picking up the necessary votes are at best slim.

Meanwhile, states continue to be active in their support for stem cell research, particularly embryonic stem cell research. Research restrictions have been lifted in Iowa, California continues to work out legal problems holding up funding, and New York has dedicated $600 million to stem cell research.

These efforts have not been lost on opponents of embryonic stem cell research who have argued that federal funding is not needed. In the recent Senate debate about the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, Sen. Grassley (R-IA) was quick to point out that an overhaul of the federal funding policy was not needed because “the private sector and state governments are doing a lot of embryonic stem cell research.”

The argument that states are now the primary drivers of research has also been echoed by some supporters of the research. Jim Fossett, co-director of the State and Bioethics program at the Alden March Bioethics Institute, recently declared that “states, not the federal government, matter” when it comes to stem cell research. But this reasoning ignores the incredible importance of federal funding and regulation to advancing stem cell research.

Despite the tremendous efforts by states to support the research, the federal government vastly outspends the states on all types of stem cell research. The National Institutes of Health provides 79.4 percent of public stem cell funding to date, and will contribute 70.8 percent through the duration of the state initiatives. NIH also outspends the states on embryonic stem cell research, providing 88 percent of funding for this research to date and 55 percent of funding through 2018.

Compounding the problem, the current federal policy forces states to waste money on new buildings and equipment because they cannot use federally funded infrastructure for federally ineligible research. California will spend $297.8 million to build “NIH-free” build­ings and New Jersey will be spending $275.5 million on new research centers across the state. States have spent only 15 percent of their funding on actual research, and will spend at least 29 percent of funding on non-research expenditures through 2018.

But lack of funding is not the only issue with allowing states to take the lead in stem cell research. Separate state initiatives will mean separate state regulations, potentially leading to divergent research standards that could slow collaboration between states. Research that is legal in one state may be illegal in another, and scientists will be further burdened with unnecessary bureaucracy.
States will also have difficulty coordinating research with each other, which could lead to overlap and waste. This problem will likely be exacerbated by competition between states, not only over researchers, but also over scientific breakthroughs. Eager to make good on promises of economic and medical benefits, states will likely look to research considered low-hanging fruit, and not the long-term basic research needed to move the field forward.

To truly advance embryonic stem cell research, we need greater federal investment and support. Even with all of the states’ efforts, public funding for embryonic stem cell research is only 20.6 percent of total public spending on the research, and only 29.4 percent of projected spending through 2018. State officials recognize the need as well, which is why Governors from Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, New Mexico, New York, Michigan, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin recently called on the Senate to pass the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act.

But, as with embryonic stem cells, the potential of the federal government to advance the science means little if it is not realized. Why should people remain concerned with the federal government when it seems to be as deadlocked as ever in the face of President Bush’s opposition?

The answer is that while it appears as if nothing has changed since last year, the facts on the ground are actually quite different. Embryonic stem cell research proved an important issue in the last election; 58 percent of the races in which it was an issue were won by the supporter of the research, including all the Senate races. Although still not enough to override a veto, the bill picked up 15 votes in the House and three votes in the Senate.

Stem cell supporters’ increased power in Congress gives them other means of passing legislation. The research has strong support in the Senate Appropriations Committee, where Sens. Specter (R-PA) and Harkin (D-IA), the co-sponsors of the original bill, sit. They will thus have ample opportunity to loosen Bush’s restrictions by attaching provisions to must-pass legislation. And the House will also be much friendlier to efforts to pass this legislation in light of the recent election.

Supporters will also be able to bring up stem cell legislation repeatedly, and lawmakers may be loath to oppose it as the 2008 election approaches. Already, opponents of the research considered vulnerable are looking for compromises, including allowing research on non-viable embryos.

Sen. Harkin has been clear that he will use any and all methods to pass this legislation. After the vote, he was quoted as saying “If the president does veto this bill…then we will be back. Momentum is building. One way or another, we are going to lift these arbitrary restrictions this year.” Those words have been echoed by his counterpart in the House, Rep. DeGette (D-CO), who has promised that “If the President vetoes this bill we will use every legislative vehicle at our disposal to ensure this research is expanded.”

And further lost in all the talk of funding is the national government’s strong regulatory role. Although it has chosen not to exercise that ability, the federal government has tremendous potential to alter the scientific landscape. This Congress could potentially consider legislation on reproductive cloning, somatic cell nuclear transfer, chimeras, and other issues with direct relevance to stem cell research.

States have been providing impressive support for stem cell research, but it would be misguided to think the federal government is no longer the most important player in the field. The federal government still provides the most funding by far, has the most effective and wide-reaching regulatory structures, and has the greatest potential to shape the direction of the science. While states should continue to be encouraged in their efforts, stem cell advocates ignore the importance of the federal government at their own risk

http://www.bioethicsforum.org/stem-cell-legislation.asp

Paula

[vlhperry]

This article is full of truths. Financially it is unquestionably the biggest argument for stem cell research to be federally funded as yet to be written. But don't make the mistake of jumping to the conclusion that the article states funding embryonic stem cells is the best use of Federal funds.

There is more to embryonic stem cell research than finances. Lets look at the facts found in the recent release of the National Parkinson Foundation Newsletter. There is an article in this journal that interviews some of the foremost researchers of movement disorders. The general concensus is that stem cell therapy will not, I repeat, not provide a solution, if ever, in up to 20 or more years. The etiology of the disease shows the simplistic idea of replacing the dopamine neurons with new dopamine neurons will not work. It took a long time for 80% of the neurons to die before symptoms appear. What needs to be researched is when the destruction begins and what causes it. We need to find that process out before we can find a plausable treatment.

I will not say cure because the process of killing the neurons takes a long time, exposure to some type of long term toxin seems likely. It is time to stop the guessing at what will work, wasting research time and money, and spend money on understanding the process of neurological disorders.

Government funds do not just appear from nowhere. The government does not make money or inflation would be astronomical. It is collected from the people who work hard in this country. A country where home sales are going down, grandparents are raising their grandchildren because their children are unable to afford to move up and out. More veterans are joining the ranks of WWII, Korean war, War of the Gulf, as the War in Iraq continues. Another words, money is a limited commodity. How to spend it is not the theme of the article. The article explains why separate states cannot financially provide as high funding as the Federal Government. It does not state that the best use of the money is Embryonic stem cell research.

Hard Science? Science is a philosophy like any other study. Embryonic stem cell research is a theory not a fact and even should researchers discover a way to make them produce the correct number of stem cells to replace those that died, it will still be a theory because the reason the cells die off is still unknown. To keep throwing money at guessing without gathering the facts is silly. As more and more money is used to research the etiology of the illness and not just theories, possibility of a cure is much closer.

Vicky

[paula_w]

Vicky,

Actually, there are some top scientists who would not disagree with you about putting any more substances in our bodies without knowing more. What scares me is the more we know, the more we don't know. They just discovered an earth- like planet the other day.....there is so much we don't know.

But unfortunately, I do know about suffering and I do know where I could be headed, am already living with pain 24/7 [takes the fun out of a lot of things and makes you not want to do anything].

So I'll settle for heavy duty symptom relief. Next up is gene therapy - how close are we? Phase II - it won't be happening tomorrow. There's considerable buzz about licensing out patented material. Much to the glee of attorneys, patent battles can tie things up for years.

SO why bother? Nothing is going to be ready in time anyway. Well, I do still have hope....and the other reason is....it's just so darned interesting!

paula

[vlhperry]

"Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard"

The curfew tolls the knell of parting day,
The lowing herd wind slowly o'er the lea,
And leaves the world to darkness and to me.

Now fades the glimmering landscape on the sight,
And all the air a solemn stillness holds,
Save where the beetle wheels his droning flight,
And drowsy tinklings lull the distant folds;

Save that from yonder ivy-mantled tower
The moping owl does to the moon complain
Of such, as wandering near her secret bower,
Molest her ancient solitary reign.

Beneath those rugged elms, that yew-tree's shade,
Where heaves the turf in many a mouldering heap,
Each in his narrow cell for ever laid,
The rude forefathers of the hamlet sleep.

The breezy call of incense-breathing morn,
The swallow twittering from the straw-built shed,
The cock's shrill clarion, or the echoing horn,
No more shall rouse them from their lowly bed.

For them no more the blazing hearth shall burn,
Or busy housewife ply her evening care:
No children run to lisp their sire's return,
Or climb his knees the envied kiss to share.

Oft did the harvest to their sickle yield,
Their furrow oft the stubborn glebe has broke;
How jocund did they drive their team afield!
How bowed the woods beneath their sturdy stroke!

Let not Ambition mock their useful toil,
Their homely joys, and destiny obscure;
Nor Grandeur hear with a disdainful smile,
The short and simple annals of the poor.

The boast of heraldry, the pomp of power,
And all that beauty, all that wealth e'er gave,
Awaits alike the inevitable hour.
The paths of glory lead but to the grave.

Nor you, ye proud, impute to these the fault,
If Memory o'er their tomb no trophies raise,
Where through the long-drawn aisle and fretted vault
The pealing anthem swells the note of praise.

Can storied urn or animated bust
Back to its mansion call the fleeting breath?
Can Honour's voice provoke the silent dust,
Or Flattery soothe the dull cold ear of Death?

Perhaps in this neglected spot is laid
Some heart once pregnant with celestial fire;
Hands that the rod of empire might have swayed,
Or waked to ecstasy the living lyre.

But Knowledge to their eyes her ample page
Rich with the spoils of time did ne'er unroll;
Chill Penury repressed their noble rage,
And froze the genial current of the soul.

Full many a gem of purest ray serene,
The dark unfathomed caves of ocean bear:
Full many a flower is born to blush unseen,
And waste its sweetness on the desert air.

Some village-Hampden, that with dauntless breast
The little tyrant of his fields withstood;
Some mute inglorious Milton here may rest,
Some Cromwell guiltless of his country's blood.

The applause of listening senates to command,
The threats of pain and ruin to despise,
To scatter plenty o'er a smiling land,
And read their history in a nation's eyes,

Their lot forbade: nor circumscribed alone
Their growing virtues, but their crimes confined;
Forbade to wade through slaughter to a throne,
And shut the gates of mercy on mankind,

The struggling pangs of conscious truth to hide,
To quench the blushes of ingenuous shame,
Or heap the shrine of Luxury and Pride
With incense kindled at the Muse's flame.

Far from the madding crowd's ignoble strife,
Their sober wishes never learned to stray;
Along the cool sequestered vale of life
They kept the noiseless tenor of their way.

Yet even these bones from insult to protect
Some frail memorial still erected nigh,
With uncouth rhymes and shapeless sculpture decked,
Implores the passing tribute of a sigh.

Their name, their years, spelt by the unlettered muse,
The place of fame and elegy supply:
And many a holy text around she strews,
That teach the rustic moralist to die.

For who to dumb Forgetfulness a prey,
This pleasing anxious being e'er resigned,
Left the warm precincts of the cheerful day,
Nor cast one longing lingering look behind?

On some fond breast the parting soul relies,
Some pious drops the closing eye requires;
Ev'n from the tomb the voice of nature cries,
Ev'n in our ashes live their wonted fires.

For thee, who mindful of the unhonoured dead
Dost in these lines their artless tale relate;
If chance, by lonely Contemplation led,
Some kindred spirit shall inquire thy fate,

Haply some hoary-headed swain may say,
"Oft have we seen him at the peep of dawn
Brushing with hasty steps the dews away
To meet the sun upon the upland lawn.

"There at the foot of yonder nodding beech
That wreathes its old fantastic roots so high,
His listless length at noontide would he stretch,
And pore upon the brook that babbles by.

"Hard by yon wood, now smiling as in scorn,
Muttering his wayward fancies he would rove,
Now drooping, woeful wan, like one forlorn,
Or crazed with care, or crossed in hopeless love.

"One morn I missed him on the customed hill,
Along the heath and near his favourite tree;
Another came; nor yet beside the rill,
Nor up the lawn, nor at the wood was he;

"The next with dirges due in sad array
Slow through the church-way path we saw him borne.
Approach and read (for thou can'st read) the lay,
Graved on the stone beneath yon aged thorn."


The Epitaph

Here rests his head upon the lap of earth
A youth to fortune and to fame unknown.
Fair Science frowned not on his humble birth,
And Melancholy marked him for her own.

Large was his bounty, and his soul sincere,
Heaven did a recompense as largely send:
He gave to Misery all he had, a tear,
He gained from Heaven ('twas all he wished) a friend.

No farther seek his merits to disclose,
Or draw his frailties from their dread abode,
(There they alike in trembling hope repose)
The bosom of his Father and his God.

Thomas Grey

Paula, If you can still appreciate poetry, you can still appreciate life.

Love,
Vicky

[Thelma]

You know as long as the freedom of speech is curtailed by anyone there is no hope for any of us.

Please stop Vicky and pick another verse from the books you read and let go of this.

To take hope and continually stuff it in poetry and prose is wasted on me and I am so tired of it.

You are taking a high road while most others are walking the walk on a road least travelled. The road to the cure.

We are not alone on this journey but the stones you are throwing just make the trip harder.

We shall prevail and no stones are to big to dodge till we find the truth and it does not live in old poems and bibical sayings it lives in

THE FREEDOM TO LET THOSE WHO KNOW,THE RESEARCHERS OF TODAY................FOR THE CHILDREN OF TOMORROW............DO THEIR THING

[paula_w]

I just gotta be me....gotta be me..what lady sang that?

I thought about answering your posts, and wasn't quite sure what to say. Both of you are who you are, sometimes allies, sometimes on opposite sides of the fence, and I can understand where both of you are coming from.

Here's where I am coming from: What we need to do, and now, is really drill down into the candidates backgrounds and what they say and where. We need to prioritize for the overall picture. Maybe not end up with everything we want- but some.

For example, let Bush fight the war on terror-what nobody seems to look ahead to, is that by not fighting it, the globe is agreeing to conduct business and war in a more efficient and economic fashion, aka terrorism. Efficiency will become about quantity, not size. It may never end. But he is standing for a nation that no longer exists.

I wonder if your odds of losing someone or being killed yourself in an act of war, will increase or decrease, with precision strikes [improved from the crude radioactive poisonings that sloppily left a trail of plutonium from Russia to London, to mention just one].

to continue original rant - and let researchers study ESCR, including therapeutic cloning. The ethics are there, life isn't fair.

it's a friendly rant...morphing from anxious thoughts into words.

Paula

[chasmo]

we are a group of people, like so many others, that are given the old "we care about your predicament...don't let the door hit you in the butt on your way out" heave ho. We're a "feel good" group for the lawmakers, because we can be satisfied with little effort. We gratefully take the scraps we are thrown.

Whether you are for or against stem cell research is a moot point, when we do not have the basic research with a good 5 year plan to find out what exactly PD is, we are doomed to failure. We are merely cannon fodder for the political machine, I fear.........

Until we "rain on their parade", we are just a noisey bunch of sick people who intrude on their day.

until we get angry enough to become militant in our demands, we will forever be fighting over table scraps.....

Charlie

[fayeforcure]

Originally Posted by chasmo

Until we "rain on their parade", we are just a noisey bunch of sick people who intrude on their day.

until we get angry enough to become militant in our demands, we will forever be fighting over table scraps.....

Charlie

YES, YES, YES, I sooooooo agree!

In the disabled community we are brainwashed into being "grateful" with what you get. It's a disasterous recipe for complacency rather than progress.

Faye