One's opportunity to register an opinion about the new stem cell guidelines:

Draft NIH Human Stem Cell Guidelines
Comments Form

Comments Deadline: 11:00pm EST on May 26, 2009.

http://nihoerextra.nih.gov/stem_cells/add.htm

In addition, opinion article in the LATimes. author obviously dismayed with limitations of new guidelines:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...,7311414.story

Obama's bad stem cell compromise
Obama traded his word on stem cell research for a political deal, sacrificing 'therapeutic cloning' research necessary to help millions suffering from Alzheimer's, diabetes and other illnesses.
By Marion Roach
May 10, 2009

(I think Carolyn may have posted the information re: registering one's opinion about ESC research guidelines previously--am unable to access the post, so have added this info. )

PAN sent out a notice to all SCC and CCCs yesterday that included this:

"If you haven’t done so already, please help generate comments on the NIH’s draft stem cell guidelines. 90% of the comments that NIH has received have been AGAINST this promising research. ...submit comments by the May 26th deadline. It takes five minutes to submit comments..."

How to Submit Your Comments:

• To access the NIH comment form, visit: http://nihoerextra.nih.gov/stem_cells/add.htm
  
• Provide your name, and select ‘self’ for Affiliation

PAN has suggested the following comments. You can copy/paste, OR if you have other comments of your own you can enter those, OR you can modify the PAN suggested comments and use those words:

Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans suffering from many diseases and disorders. I am not a scientist, but I am a member of the Parkinson’s community and have been following progress in this field with great interest. Significant strides have been made over the past decade, and the final guidelines issued by NIH must build on this progress so that cures and new therapies can get to patients as quickly as possible. The final guidelines should not create new bureaucratic hurdles that will slow the pace of progress.

I am pleased that these draft guidelines -- in Section II B -- would appear to permit federal funding of stem cell lines previously not eligible for federal funding and for new lines created in the future from surplus embryos at fertility clinics. However, as drafted, Section II B does not ensure that any current stem cell line will meet the criteria outlined and thus be eligible for federal funding. It will be important for the final guidelines to allow federal funds for research using all stem cell lines created by following ethical practices at the time they were derived. This will ensure that the final guidelines build on progress that has already been made.

I also believe that the final guidelines should permit federal funding for stem cell lines derived from sources other than excess IVF embryos, such as somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). Sections II B and IV of the draft guidelines do not permit such federal funding and I recommend that the final guidelines provide federal funding using stem cell lines derived in other ways. If not, it is essential that the NIH continue to monitor developments in this exciting research area and to update these guidelines as the research progresses.

Whatever you do, it is important to comment to NIH in some way!