Slashdot Mirror
Stem-Cell Research Funding Institute Is Shuttered
An anonymous reader writes "The National Institutes of Health, the top funder of biomedical research in the U.S., has closed a program designed to bring induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS cells) from the lab to the clinic. It has made no public mention of the closure, but the website has been deleted and Nature News reports that the center director, Mahendra Rao, resigned his post in frustration after the program allocated funds to only one clinical trial in its last round of funding."
I just want to make sure that's what you're saying... because you know, blame Bush.
our greatest enemy is us? http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=stem+cell+therapy momkind new clear options wwwildly popular
certain whack-a-loon true believer in congress will be happy.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
This sucks regardless of what side of the aisle you are on.
There are diseases where the only known effective treatment at this point in time is stem cells. And those are/were in the trial stages.
Fuck politics.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
It's not because of the subject that the research is being stopped. The NIH, along with the NSF and NASA, had its science budget cut during the sequester and it hasn't recovered. Lots of programs all over the country are being discontinued as a result.
Everyone knows stem cells are bad. We can't let rational thought and facts get in the way of our crusades.
Seriously, at this point the anti-embryonic stem cell movement has tarnished the name and scientists should pick a new name to avoid these sort of issues in less objectionable forms of stem cell research.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
Mahendra Rao, M.D., Ph.D.
"Dr. Mahendra Rao is internationally renowned for his research involving human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) and other somatic stem cells. He has worked in the stem cell field for more than 20 years, with stints in academia, government and regulatory affairs and industry. He received his M.D. from Bombay University in India and his Ph.D. in developmental neurobiology from the California Institute of Technology.
Following postdoctoral training at Case Western Reserve University, he established his research laboratory in neural development at the University of Utah. He next joined the National Institute on Aging as chief of the Neurosciences Section, where he studied neural progenitor cells and continued to explore his longstanding interest in their clinical potential.
Most recently, he spent six years as the vice president of Regenerative Medicine at Life Technologies in Carlsbad, California. He co-founded Q Therapeutics, a neural stem cell company based in Salt Lake City, Utah. He also served internationally on advisory boards for companies involved in stem cell processing and therapy; on committees, including as the U.S. Food and Drug Administrationâ(TM)s Cellular Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee chair; and as the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine and International Society for Stem Cell Research liaison to the International Society for Cellular Therapy." ref
I'm an indépendant but I do hater liars of any stripe - the Republicans only objected to embryonic stem cells, there are lots of other paths and kinds of stem cells.
The Republicans otherwise funded stem cell research.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This is bureaucratic troubles, not partisan politics. No one is opposed to iPS on ideological grounds. Well, no one who is worth considering anyway. iPS aren't made from embryos. ESC are the ones that conservatives hate, that come from fertilized eggs.
One of the lead international researchers, from Japan, has been charged with fraud had her paper(s) retracted and demoted from RIKEN. Although she is counter-suing RIKEN it appears a major flame out of a once hot career.
The nasty bit about science is: even if you stop believing in it, its still there. So pluripotent stem cell research happens elsewhere, medical breakthroughs happen elsewhere, patents are granted elsewhere, people are cured elsewhere. Of course the progress of science is slowed, but not stopped.
Except that most "bible thumpers" hate embryonic stem cells and often hail induced pluripotent stem cells as the "religiously ethically correct alternative", as they do not require embryo to produce.
I'm too lazy to look it up, so are the induced pluripotent stem cells the 'bad' ones that come from embryos and make baby Jesus cry? Or are they the 'good' ones that come from adults that get the Yahweh pro-life seal of approval?
Hooray for Obama our wise Brother Leader! No more space shuttle so if we want to put astronauts on the space station we have to beg the Russians to get us there and now no more of that awful stem cell crap! Great job!
Our Royal Federal Government, the lush fountain of richness and wonder from which all science and progress flows, has decided not only to kill ALL research worldwide but to BAN it. Only our Great Federal Government, giver of all that is good, could possibly EVER lead to progress and innovation and technology. Imagine where the Holy Grail of Perfection would be today if we gave trillions or perhaps quadrillions of dollars for dead-end pork-barrel research that would NEVER happen otherwise. Amen.
Disclaimer: I work for a government-funded research house on the east coast.
And not a single one of them is treated with embryonic stem cells. Because of tumors.
Don't speak the truth here. If it weren't for the endless knee jerk most Slashdotters would get no exercise.
Let me explain the title of the post.
I was the third poster. The first two were fuck Obama posts.
I don't give a shit if it's W or Obama or Ted Cruz or Pelosi or whoever. It sucks. period.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Well, just open the shutters again? Was does "shuttered" mean? Is this a weird colloquial American usage, like "anymore" to mean "these days"? What's wrong with "closed" or "shut down"?
and yet they will be all for in vitro fertilization.
The embryo's used in research comes from the waste of in vitro fertilization.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
the Republicans only objected to embryonic stem cells, there are lots of other paths and kinds of stem cells.
To your rank and file Bible Thumping Republican, they are one in the same.
The Republicans otherwise funded stem cell research.
Really? They made an exception for stem cells? Because they are against ALL government funded scientific research - that whole government waste, low taxes, fuck the poor but bail out their buddies ... thing.
and China and Taiwan and South Korea and places that like massive grants of private funds
It's like you don't get that research gets done no matter what you "say".
Seriously, you're wasting your time.
(not speaking for anyone, just telling you what happens IRL)
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
How many Bible thumpers does Japan have? China? India? Is the US the only country with enough intelligence to do medical research?
Makes good research but I wonder if it could ever by economically viable. Maybe someone can enlighten me and explain otherwise.
I imagine if it ever hit mainstream with usage on a public daily basis, you'd need millions of embryos, perhaps even every day? What? Would women be expected to line up for embryo drives like we have blood drives today?
You're missing the point and I can't help but think you're doing it on purpose... the cells being researched are in no was part of the types of stem cells targeted by pro-life groups.
If you couldn't read the GPs post and understand what he was saying may I suggest going back to the 5th grade and taking a reading course or maybe get on some meds so that you don't snap to a conclusion with the impulses of a threatened cobra.
One of the main issues is lack of understanding of embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells.
We classify Stem Cells in one group... However the issue with embryonic stem cells are that they come from aborted human fetuses. Which many people would consider sacrificing a human life just to perform scientific research, this usually falls in the unethical category. However there is a group who doesn't consider a fetus to be human life, so it would fall in the ethical category.
Politics being politics, will normally favor the group to say No don't do that, vs the group that will say lets go do that.
As you will suffer less angry people from a dept who didn't get funding, then a dept that does get funding.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Well, if the less-religious were to donate half as much money to the research as the "true believers" give to God they probably wouldn't have funding issues.
"The Truth" == "conservative talking points"?
Wow... somehow I do not think you meant to make that assertion, but it is the logical conclusion of the combination of your statement and reality. In this particular case, that's correct. It may not always be, but HERE it is. "The Truth" is not a partisan thing... we all used to be able to agree on basic facts even when they did not line-up with our ideologies; the basic facts provided a stable intellectual platform upon which we could debate. In the modern hyper-partisan world however where politicians boldly lie to their bases and the independents about their opponents and everybody is forced to doubt even the most basic documented facts we are headed for real trouble.
The simple fact is this: The Republicans (led at the time by George W Bush) were the first to actually federally-fund (there was plenty of other funding before that, so do not misconstrue this point) stem cell research, and the Conservatives (NOT the same thing as Republicans, but generally a subset of the Republicans) were in agreement on that funding. The only stem cell research they opposed was that which used the cells from (generally aborted) human embryos, and any future creation of human embryos for the express purpose of stem cell harvesting; to Conservatives the use of cells from human embryos was just a step too far into Godwin territory. Incidentally, Bush did NOT ban private funds being used for such research by non-government researchers, he just banned taxpayer involvement in it.
Reality == reality. If your politics/beliefs/opinions are unable to face that then your politics/beliefs/opinions are what is wrong.
However the issue with embryonic stem cells are that they come from aborted human fetuses.
This is right-wing propaganda at its worst. embryonic stem cells DO NOT COME FROM ABORTED HUMAN FETUSES. They come from left over embryos that those seeking fertility treatment no longer need. They were never aborted because they were never implanted in the first place. Because they were never implanted, they never had the chance to develop into anything near resemblance to a fetus. Please get your facts straight, no matter which side of the debate you are on.
========== "Hello World" in my programming language of choice: ATG - LET THERE BE LIFE - TAG ==========
seemed more honest and intelligent.
"To your rank and file Bible Thumping Republican, they are one in the same."
Garbage. First, where ARE these "Bible Thumpers" you paranoid lefties are always going on about? I've never seen ANYBODY "Thump" a Bible except on TV shows and in movies where idiots in Hollywood are extrapolating about people they've never even met. Second, the George W Bush stem cell policy was widely discussed and debated in the media, on the web, etc and the most-religious conservatives in the US agreed with the policy (so your "point" here is a total LIE)
"Really? They made an exception for stem cells? Because they are against ALL government funded scientific research - that whole government waste, low taxes, fuck the poor but bail out their buddies ... thing.
Are you on hallucinogenic drugs or is somebody spoon feeding you this CRAP? The vast majority of conservatives (even the religious ones you are so paranoid about) in the US support government funded scientific research into a very wide array of things (including many things that the anti-science left opposes like nuclear power, nuclear weapons, etc). Religious conservatives in the US backed the Apollo program to put man on the moon at a time when a lot of lefties, led by Democrat congressman Walter Mondale tried to use the Apollo 1 fire as justification to de-fund NASA and shift the dollars into welfare programs. Religious conservatives in the US supported all the scientific research done by the Reagan and Bush41 administrations into rockets, lasers, x-ray systems, rail guns, etc as part of the Strategic Defense Initiative (lefties opposed much of this). Religious conservatives in the US supported the Bush43 administration efforts to aim NASA manned spaceflight back at the moon and at Mars, and supported things like the Hubble telescope and the Space Station.
You guys on the left like to pretend that anybody who opposes ANYTHING that YOU label "science" is therefore "anti-science" on ALL science. If somebody disagrees on Global Warming, you lie and say he is "anti-science". If somebody supports ALL science except human embryo stem cells (on moral grounds) you proclaim him "anti science". I wonder... if somebody proposed a scientific study that involved dissecting live homosexual activists to study their brains, would YOU object? (I certainly would) On MORAL grounds? (that'd be the case for me) Would that make YOU "anti-science"????? By your warped standards it WOULD... but by MY standards it would not... it would just make you a decent human being.
The ONLY stem cell research religious conservatives in the US oppose is research involving cells harvested from human embryos (generally from aborted embryos). The opposition is both because they generally believe it wrong to abort human beings, and because of the likely morally-objectionable effects that (a) the use of aborted children could lead to additional abortions to produce more stem lines, (b) the activity could go industrial and lead to the creation of human lives for the pure purpose of killing them and taking their cells, and (c) the very dark potential for converting human life into an industrial component. There was no significant religious opposition to stem cell research using cells from adults, or even using embryonic cells that were already obtained at the time the policy went into effect (the opposition was to federal funding for research using any new embryonic cells)
Nothing in the stem cell policies which George W Bush established (and which the religious supported) blocked private researchers from going ahead with private money on embryonic cells ... the Bush policy just cut the taxpayer out of the morally-dubious endeavor. You are brilliantly correct that if all the whiny shrill lefties who have been screaming about this would just donate the same amount to some organization of their choice that religious people donate to their causes then THAT organization could easily do the work that Bush did not fund (and also did not ban). The fact that this has not happened is all the proof needed that, for the left, this is all about the political talking point and NOT about the research at all.
"America is rapidly becoming a country where the ignorant and stupid drown out the intelligent and thoughtful. Where your faith defines science, policy, and what other people are allowed to do. Where if you (as a religious nutjob) want to shout down someone else's view point, then you're exercising your free speech. But if someone wants to protest your point of view, then your free speech is being infringed."
Yeah, it's very sad to see this once predominantly-Christian nation devolve into a progressive nightmare where any heretic who denies the religion of global warming or abortion or gay marriage gets shouted down while supporters of global warming insist on defining policy and what other people are allowed to do (no matter WHAT the impact on the economy is... because their crusade against carbon is the "one true faith")
"In short, America has become a country with a ridiculous double standard, driven by people who are incapable or unwilling to evaluate evidence, and where religious superstition trumps everything else."
Yup, you have nailed progressivism completely! The gurus of global warming refuse to evaluate all the evidence and insist that it's ok for them to have the "carbon footprint" of a small town as they live in mansions and fly private jets BUT the "little people" in "flyover country" must live with less to "save the planet" ... you're right: some religious fanatics have double standards...
"In short, Christians in the US are little better than the Taliban.
sooo.... in YOUR pea-brain Christians ban all music and art, and kite flying, and deny girls the right to go to school or a doctor, and fund their economy from heroin sales... and kill anybody who does not worship their God? You cannot possibly be as stupid and dishonest as your post makes you look.... do you remember to periodically inhale?
"Americans no longer believe in their own founding values, they believe in them as narrowly interpreted for their own benefit."
You are right... the founders all believed there is a God, who created man and gave man his rights, and because his rights came from God, government could not take them away. They believed that the federal government should be very small, doing only do a very limited number of things and leaving all else to the states, the communities, and the individuals... and they made this VERY clear in the Constitution; try reading it some time. It is those basic Christian beliefs of our founders that made America a place where the individual is respected, has rights to freedom of speech and thought and worship and where minorities (both political and ethnic) have rights. The Christian idea that each man is directly accountable to his maker (rather than communities being collectively accountable) is what leads to all this freedom for the individual, and lack of this belief is why in so many other societies so many have been killed for not behaving as the society dictated (like not believing in Allah, or playing music, or shaving a beard, etc). It was those very Christian beliefs that drove the end of slavery and drove the civil rights movement of the sixties. Our founders' belief in the Christian view of man as a sinner led them to design a government that had checks-and-balances, to try to make it harder for sinners to misuse. That set of beliefs led them to design a judicial system that presumes flaws and errors and therefore has paths for rectifying them. It was a big reason why they favored small government (to keep some politically powerful sinner or group of sinners from getting the power to mess with the lives of the individual people). Without the Christians you apparently despise, you would not have the rights you have to attack them. A reminder from one of our founders:
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams
Our founders gave us a REPUBLIC and NOT a democracy, but the Democrats hav
Are you really so ignorant of the world that you think that any of these countries have christian majorities?
In Japan, extremist taoists and buddhists are the problem. In India, usually hindus and buddhists. And China has strong enough central government to suppress such people.
There are diseases where the only known effective treatment at this point in time is stem cells. And those are/were in the trial stages.
Fuck politics.
This is the thing that frustrates me the most about the current political situation. A few nihilists who have taken over one of our parties (the "Republican" one), are able to screw over the whole system so that nothing productive can get done. But that's not the worst part; any gamer can tell you that the world is full of griefers. The worst part is that they are getting away with this behavior because nobody blames them directly. So here you're clearly ticked, but you blame "politics". Why aren't you blaming the actual greifers causing the problem?
Hell, we're about to have an election this year, and both houses are likely to get more of these greifers. If voters don't make the responsible individuals pay for this behavior, where does it end?
That reinforces my point. Even people who do not have a Judeo-Christian religion still believe in the sanctity of life. Even in the US this research is not banned, just public money can't be used to fund it.
The only problem there is money. Not intelligence. In fact, a lot of researchers doing research everywhere in the world are in fact foreigners in the country doing research.
The issue is that of funds. This research is astronomically expensive and extremely difficult, requiring very expensive hardware, extremely specialized workforce and solid infrastructure.
If you're trying to push for american exceptionalism line here, you certainly can. It won't make you any less silly, as this kind of research also happens in all other rich countries. It just doesn't face the same pressure on the embryonic cells as it does in US due to prevalence of certain religious groups and their grip on power that is largely absent in Europe and Japan, the other two giants in the field.