Slashdot Mirror
Stem Cell Research in a Judge's Hands
deman1985 wrote to mention a San Francisco Chronicle article discussing the future of stem cell research in California. The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine has had a suit filed against it for doling out money to stem cell research groups, and the future of the organization is now in the hands of the Judge on the case. From the article: "The taxpayers groups said that at least five members of the 29-member board have conflicts because they are University of California officials and the school's various campuses have already applied for stem cell grants. Others on the board are biotechnology executives and investors whose investments could benefit from stem cell grants."
I don't remember exactly what the numbers were, but as I recall this proposition passed in CA by a large margin. Even if it has to be passed again, I think it will be. This will be at most a temporary setback.
The institute which is being sued was a direct result of the passing of California's Proposition 71.
n tire.pdf
The proposition basically said that a institute would be created to oversee applications and grants of stem cell research, and fund said research by issuing bonds worth up to $350million per year, up to a maximum of $3billion overall.
It's ironic that the representativesof the voters that voted this bill in are the ones that are now suing the institute the bill created, completely ignoring the fact that the bill itself states that funding deliberations are exempt from the state's open-meeting law.
Go read it, it's all here: http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/bp_nov04/prop_71_e
They voted for something they DID NOT READ AND UNDERSTAND FULLY. This is a sad reality in today's elections; very rarely you find anyone who actually knows what they're voting for, instead following the misleading propaganda out there, with stupid statements like "If you don't pass this bill, millions of kids will die!". Just check out the homepage for the institute itself:
http://www.curesforcalifornia.com/
Sometimes, it boggles the mind how ignorant and idiotic my fellow Californians can be....
"We'll need 2000 crickets, 4 cans of Easy Cheese, and the fluid from 18 glowsticks for this plan to work...." - ph0n1c
What religion? This is about money. California is stealing money from education funding to pay for this, and other budget shortfalls.
Basically, some medical research companies saw a way to make a quick buck at the expense of a gullible public anxious to stick it to Bush and his religious right cronies. The result: a 3 billion dollar beuraucracy to pad the wallets of people who work the system.
I wouldn't do it. I'm against it, using embryos, and yes it is a slippery slope that was passed into barbarism as far as I am concerned, a long time ago. I am way pro technology, but also pretty strong proponent of human rights, ALL humans, not just the ones certain groups pick and choose from. I was a civil rights worker, meaning I think we all have them, born with them, back when it meant personal physical danger. I feel that strongly about this issue of human rights. Not rights for this human but not that human, ALL humans.
I think the entire idea of farming humans for parts is disgusting, it is a violation of civil rights deluxe, and just because something is currently legal doesn't make it un-disgusting to me. I'm against current "war on some drug" laws. it's still a law or "legal" that they can restrict hemp for medicinal purposes for instance. Ethically I think that's wrong. I don't care if it is the law, it's still wrong and I'll say so if I think it.
And so on. I am not the least bit shy on ethical issues as opposed to "laws". When you restrict someone's freedoms, you restrict all of ours, and starting with the very very very youngest then switching to the most elderly, our society is de-evolving into a "too inconcenient, get rid of them, or use them for some commercial purpose" mentality.
Disgusting.
And yes, given the utterly shameful and disgusting track record of the "eugenics movement" in the 20th century, I think it's safe to say that people would eventually be killed for parts, in fact, I think the practice goes on in china openly right now, where a variety of "crimes" get you the death sentence pretty readily and your parts sold. Maybe a quick buck might have something to do with sentencing? And no telling if it is going on other places, I bet it is though.
And the potential for on purpose human cloning for parts is right here right now with the tech we have. And it all starts with embryos, and treating them as commercial products to be bought and sold and fooled around with, and works up from there. And I don't have a dividing line, because none exist that are of any credible worth (IMO), so you are left with the creation of the embryo as the starting point.
Just because something is possible to do is no reason it should be done. For another for instance, I would support a global ban on nuclear weapons research, period, right this second if such a thing was possible.
Humans won't be able to socially evolve until we become mature enough to say NO to some things based on collective ethics. We've tried the mass "yes, anything goes" method, it is somewhat lacking... Once you drop everything to a dollars and cents level as your primary criteria of "worth", then life becomes too cheap, and it gets treated as a commodity. Once "convenience" becomes acceptable in disposing of humans, then life has gotten too cheap, something socialy is out of whack. what do souless corporations call their employees now again? Oh ya, "human resources" like so many tons of coal. Who has the best deal on a wholesale lot of "human resources" today?
See? Disgusting.
I'm still *totally in favor of stem cell research*, to be clear, there's a ton of promise there and I welcome all of it, just not embryonic. As to the other issues about how all those embryos get there in the first place where they become "disposable" and "we might as well use them then", that's another topic for another time.
Baloney. Private industry, by and large, does not fund basic research. They wait for governmentally funded research to get to a nearly-marketable place, and then take it up. Stem cell research is still a long way from being marketable, and thusly, big pharma is happy to sit around making obscene amounts of money from cialis, vioxx (doh), etc etc until we're 10 years down the road researchwise.
Anyone that thinks that a government operation funded by someone elses money can make more rational decisions that a private company investing it's hard earned $$ needs to have their head examined.
Anyone who thinks private companies spend more than a pittance on basic research needs to have their head examined. Speaking as a biomedical researcher, I can assure you that the vast majority of basic reasearch occurs in publically funded labs. The non-linear nature of basic scientific research means for-profit companies have little patience with it.
If the market says that it's a losing bet, I don't want to fund that bet w/ my tax dollars instead. Unfortunately, my fellow voters in this state, aren't as smart.
This fallacy of the market as an all-knowing, all-powerful, most-efficient means of everything, though accepted by you, is not accepted by everyone (including, fortunately, the majority of our fellow californians). There are many areas where market forces are applicable and positive...but basic biomedical research, like law enforcement, like road-building, like military protection, like public health, is simply not one of them.
-Ted
-=-=- Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.