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.
C'mon editors. Are you guys just trying to drive this site into the ground? Every day, this place has been less news for nerds, and more politics for left-wing idiots.
This is really an arm of SlashKos now. Politics stories practically every day fill up the front page, and hardly any of them are really about real politics.
I remember once CmdrTaco said that this place wasn't about politics, but that exactly has happened. I guess pagehits and flamewars are easier than real news for geeks.
"Others on the board are biotechnology executives and investors whose investments could benefit from stem cell grants."
Meanwhile, the people who will benefit the most from stem cell research must continue to suffer disabilities while governments and special interest groups keep beating each other with their dicks!
Havn't traveled much have you. The world over is filled with pretemptious a holes. The europeans might not be as obsessed with sex and religious stuff, but trust me, that are just as bad when it comes to stuff that don't fit into their norm. Czech friend explain it this way. They are just as racist and bigited as Americans, they just don't know it, because they almost never have to deal with someone whos not like them.
As far as I can tell, the stem cell agency was created as much as a backhand to Bush for not supporting stem cell work on a federal level as it was to actually get some work done. Well, the work isn't getting done.
Personally, I'd like to see some good come of this. Unfortunately, when a public agency is born out of controversy, unified support is hard to come by.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
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
TO all of those who say this should not be on slashdot..BS!..This is as scientific as nasa, nano technology or anythign else.
This did pass with a wide margin during the last elections, and they really need to shape this up. I think any college applying for grants should not have people on the board..Its called bias, and there are not enough people in the political system who do not have it.
I believe that the more schools help themselves without the grants, the more they should get because of the grants..Instead of putting all thier money into sports, cheerleading and Aestetic purposes, put it into something useful..
We have already proven that this is the next step in curing disabilities, regrowing missing parts(such as teeth..imagine never having to get dentures or an implant), possibly even giving hearing back to the deaf, sight back to the blindies, and possibly(they theorize) regrowing limbs..
If you dont call this science(which is one of the major categories on slashdot) then tell me what do you consider science? All robots and machines..If so i feel sorry for you!
This is not flamebait post, no is it trolling, for people who look at this and shun it, wait until the day they need this science for themselves...I have heard Christians who shun this, until the break thier back, then the whole argument is completely reversed and they are all for it.
~~"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~~Dennis Miller
Um...did you read the article. It sounded more like people had a problem with a commitee doling out 3 billion dollars without having to hold public hearings on who gets the money. No where did I read that a religious group was involved. This sounds more like "old as time...liberals blame 'right wingers' for something." btw, I am not religious nor against stem cell research so don't blame me.
The judge will hopefully rule in favor of stalling this. Prop 71 uses taxpayer funds and this will never go away. Even though it's s'posed to expire in 10 years, it will keep getting renewed and we CA taxpayers get to foot the bill. More CA spent on research that may go nowhere. The fact that embrionic stem cell research isn't largely funded elsewhere in the world should be a big hint that the controversy isn't just religious. The private sector doesn't want to invest in this. That should speak volumes about even the scientific community's faith (pardon the pun) in embrionic stem cell research.
As far as CA judges go, they CONSTANTLY overturn voter approved initiatives. Prop 187, passed in 1994, forbids funding for just about anything for illegal immigrants. But a judge overturned it, and this is just one of many bills passed by whopping margins that a judge has said "no way" to.
It's sad the $3 billion of tax payer funds won't go to adult stem cell research, where the results have been forthcoming. There's been
Of course, most of those studies are funded already. Maybe it's because venture capitalists don't want to throw good money at bad research. Sadly, the CA taxpayer does.
Religous people trying to stop research.
Or people with a sense of fiscal responsibility perhaps? Nice anti-religion troll.
I have no problem with Stem Cell Research. In fact, I think it should be encouraged and funded with public dollars (as long as the public funding it gets the royalties, patents, or benefits - not private corporations). However, this was a ballot measure in California to distribute billions of dollars to a new research institute with virtually no oversight. It isn't part of an existing California State Agency, it is its own ambiguous entity with required funding levels outside of any state-run controls. Already, the fiscal irresponsibility of this program has been proven by their choise for location: one of the highest rent districts in California, San Francisco. (Remember the dot-com stupidity?)
California is already running a budget that is aproximately $15,000,000,000 in deficit. This program would tack on several billion dollars more in state spending a year. It is fiscally irresponsible and was passed entirely as a "feel-good" measure and played exclusively off of general anti-Bush sentiments in the California voting public. How, and who it allocates funds to isn't clearly defined. Ownership of any technologies produced through its programs isn't clearly defined. It doesn't have clear goals other than the broad term "stem cell research". It has an enormous budget, without restrictions, and without oversight controls for abuses. It is, in short, a money pit.
It was a bad ballot measure, pure and simple.
California is problematic, in that it keeps passing mandatory expenditures through ballot proposals, therebye completely bypassing both the legislature and the governator and causing huge unforseen consequences. (For another great example of this, take a look at "Proposition 13" which locked in property taxes and has completely screwed up school and other local funding, and is now nearly impossible to fix or overturn).
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State." ~Thomas Jefferson, 1802
It's shame that American forefathers' words have gone completely unheard. One would think that these men had it correct, given America's dominance in the world today. Why then is the government still making descisions based soley on religion and not on scientific advancement. If God did not intend for us to discover the miracle of life (DNA, stem cells, etc) he would not have made our minds capable of understanding them.
If scientists were allocating $3 billion in public funds for research then I doubt that embryonic stem cell research would be allocated very much. Energy research would be the highest priority. The demand for Bush bashing is far higher than the actual demand for embryonic stem cell research. The proposition was also sold on many false promises, like the promise that the research would pay for itself. If their promises were true than there would be no need for public funding. There are also constitutional problems with open meetings, conflict of interest, and the use of tax-exempt bonds for taxable assets.
We would be much better off if the funds raised to pass the initiative had been used for research instead.
I'm a fairly well informed Californian, who voted against this measure. It was a boondoggle from the get go. And only gets worse with time.
I voted against the measure for one simple, obvious fact. The supporters sold this to the state as a moneymaker. That it was a "can't lose" "investment" and that any research that was commercialized would send money back to the state, more than sufficient to repay the bonds, etc. Of course if that was the case, and that there was tons of medical cash to be made. Then private companies would already be funding this research.
Basically, *ANY* sure fire, guaranteed investment, where there our outsized returns that are 100% guaranteed is going to have people lined up around the block to get in on it. And the State has no need to float a massive bond to fund it. The market will throw money at anything even remotely like that.
So the basic premise that the measure was sold to the voters on, was a blatant lie. There's never been any guarantee at all that the taxpayers of Calif wouldn't be on the hook for the whole 3 Billion.
And since the measure was passed, it's only gotten to be less of a deal for the residents of Calif.
The part that the article referenced neglected to mention. Is that there are now some questions about the legality of the measure as it was passed. Specifically, now that they have all the $$ they wanted, they have discovered a tax issue. In order for the bonds to be issued as tax-free issues, then the state can't use the monies in profit making enterprises. So the State can't compel the grant recipients to pay the state back, no matter how much the generate in revenue from the discoveries that the taxpayers are now funding for them. And apparently the legal/tax ramifications of all of that were made clear to the primary boosters of the measure *before* the election. And they just neglected to mention that to the voters at all. They just kept selling how it was a "sure thing" investment. And the bonds are FAR less appealing in the market, and FAR more expensive to issue, if they aren't tax free bonds.
Anytime anyone tells you they have a sure fire investment, guaranteed to make you rich beyond your wildest dreams, RUN the other way, tightly clutching your wallet. A lesson that the state will be learning the hard way, this time around.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
All that has *EVER* been banned, is federal funding of research. If there are so many promising avenues out there, just begging to be investigated, so they can yield fabulous, cheap treatments, then private reseach, funded by private dollars will find them.
Anyone that thinks that a government operation funded by someone elses money can make more rational decisions that a private company investing it's hard earned $$ needs to have their head examined.
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.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
There are a lot of stem cells out there. There is no actual need to use embryonic cells. The popular press and most people think of the two as the same thing, they are not, one is specific, the other is general. There is a clear cut and obvious (and quite dangerous) slippery slope using embryos, so it is better to focus research on all the other sources.
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.
..and then we'll see where the hypocrites are when cures and treatments for horrible diseases appear.
..don't panic
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.