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.
"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!
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
Where politics intersect with the geek news, its definitely Slashdot material. Stories run here all the time about the MPAA/RIAA/or some other group vs. technolgies and people that threaten their perceived right to profit at all costs.
Why shouldn't they run stories about promising stem cell research vs. some wackadoos who think a microscopic clump of cells=living, breathing person? The former is an issue that has wider implications for the quality of life of many people who suffer some rather horrific conditions.
Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
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.....
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 $$ they wanted, they have discovered a tax issue. In order for the bonds to be issued as tax-free issues, then the state can't use the monies in profit making enterprises. So the State can't compel the grant recipients to pay the state back, no matter how much the generate in revenue from the discoveries that the taxpayers are now funding for them. And apparently the legal/tax ramifications of all of that were made clear to the primary boosters of the measure *before* the election. And they just neglected to mention that to the voters at all. They just kept selling how it was a "sure thing" investment. And the bonds are FAR less appealing in the market, and FAR more expensive to issue, if they aren't tax free bonds.
Anytime anyone tells you they have a sure fire investment, guaranteed to make you rich beyond your wildest dreams, RUN the other way, tightly clutching your wallet. A lesson that the state will be learning the hard way, this time around.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
Baloney. Private industry, by and large, does not fund basic research. They wait for governmentally funded research to get to a nearly-marketable place, and then take it up. Stem cell research is still a long way from being marketable, and thusly, big pharma is happy to sit around making obscene amounts of money from cialis, vioxx (doh), etc etc until we're 10 years down the road researchwise.
Anyone that thinks that a government operation funded by someone elses money can make more rational decisions that a private company investing it's hard earned $$ 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.