Obama Assasinates Any Hope of Stem Cell Treatments in the US

Posted By: David granovsky
Posted on: Mar. 12, 2009 at 9:41 PM

5 Comments

0.0 / 5

Based on 0 ratings.

Email Friend

Add to Favorites Add to del.icio.us

del.icio.us

Digg It!

Slashdot It!

Just when the US was waking up to the benefits of ASC and iPSC and their ability to treat illnesses…

OBAMA PULLS FUNDING FOR BOTH ADULT & INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS!!!

————————————————–

EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS = 0 TREATMENTS FOR 0 DISEASE.
ADULT STEM CELLS = 120+ TREATMENTS FOR 120+ DISEASES.
INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS = ALL OF THE BENEFITS OF ADULT & EMBRYONIC PUT TOGETHER. -dg

President Obama Also Kills Bush Executive Order for Adult Stem Cell Research

by Steven Ertelt - LifeNews.com Editor -March 10, 2009

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — President Barack Obama did more on Monday than just force taxpayers to fund embryonic stem cell research that requires the destruction of human life.

HE ALSO RESCINDED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER PRES BUSH OUT INTO PLACE FUNDING ADULT STEM CELLS AND NEW RESEARCH WITH iPS CELLS.

http://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/2009/03/13/obama-assasinates-any-hope-of-stem-cell-treatments-in-us/

Tags: obama stem cell adult embryo treat heal ips

Click here to view more articles by David granovsky

Rate This Article | Create Account

Anonymous commenting has been disabled, you must login to comment on articles.

Signup for an account

Comments:

Phaedrus

Mar. 13, 2009 at 12:57:29 PM

View Profile

I think you're misunderestiquoting...

Adult Stem Cell scientists and businesses are concerned that President Obama's executive order repealing restrictions on Embryonic Stem Cell research will have the unintended consequence of diverting attention and resources away from the promising Adult Stem Cell scientific advances

In none of the AP, or NYTimes, or other reliable sources have I seen anything that said Obama was defunding, or shutting down ASC research - only that he was undoing the order that banned funding ESC research. So, if the scientists want to focus on IPSC, then I'm sure that money will flow there.

It looks like you're trying to create a controversy where there is none. Obama wants to expand research funding, where Bush had banned it.

If your point is that Obama is banning IPSC funding, that isn't true. Don't get your facts from the Steven Ertelt - LifeNews.com Editor, the South Korea Times, other anti abortion news outlets or other Mooney related papers.

Report Abuse

David granovsky

Mar. 13, 2009 at 02:25:37 PM

View Profile

Check the EXEC ORDER. Obama passed the buck to the NIH. The NIH will now develop the guidelines for what is and isn't researched. But they received While they may prove to be pro-ASC in the future, they have made no claims or vocal advocacy of ASC research and treatment in their policies or guidelines.

In fact, this is currently on their policy guildelines page: http://stemcells.nih.gov/policy/guidelines.asp

Why not use adult stem cells instead of using human embryonic stem cells in research?
Human embryonic stem cells are thought to have much greater developmental potential than adult stem cells. This means that embryonic stem cells may be pluripotent—that is, able to give rise to cells found in all tissues of the embryo except for germ cells rather than being merely multipotent—restricted to specific subpopulations of cell types, as adult stem cells are thought to be.

They have completely ignored the many articles and publications on the plasticity of adult stem and iPS cells.

And how will they spend the money from the stimulus package?

NIH Stimulus Spending Focused Mostly on Existing Grants; No Funds to Restore Previous Cuts

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the NIH will back the use of adult stem and iPS cell research for the development of treatments and ignore the pharmaceutical industry's desire to keep adult stem cell success and the potential of iPS cells quiet. I hope I am.

Report Abuse

ObamaInCharge

Mar. 13, 2009 at 03:01:56 PM

View Profile

[This is a reply to comment by Phaedrus on Mar. 13, 2009 at 12:57:29 PM]

Phaedrus
Mar. 13, 2009 at 12:57:29 PM

I think you're misunderestiquoting... Adult Stem Cell scientists and businesses are concerned that President Obama's executive order repealing restrictions on Embryonic Stem Cell research will have the unintended consequence of diverting...

View this Comment

I wanted to keep the debate on this subject all in one place:

link:[www.voiceofarizona.com]

But sometimes a good discussion is hard to contain.

Yes, I believe there is a deliberate or accidental misconstruing of the headline, and it centers upon the phrase unintended consequence. What other unintended consequences could occur because government money will now be allowed to be spent on embryonic stem cell research?

1. An asteroid hits the earth and wipes out mankind and the entire biosphere for several million years because the government didn't replace one faulty deep sky camera meant to monitor the heavens and give us advanced warning of such impending collisions. The sky watch program was short just one dollar to replace this camera, because that dollar went to stem cell research.

2. Embryonic stem cell research could lead to the reinnervation of a spinal cord injury patient, restoring his sex life and ability to procreate. This man goes on to sire the Antichrist, or worse yet, another George W. Bush. Mankind is once again doomed.

3. The ESC research money is granted to the biology department of a major university to set up a lab next door to a bioweapons facility. Unfortunately the ESC research lab catches fire just two weeks later, and in the susequent blaze an extremely virulent bio-engineered super-plague is released into the atmosphere and rapidly kills mankind in a particularly angonzing and aesthetically unpleasant manner.

These are but just a few possible unintended consequences of embryonic stem cell research . . . oh, and the complete deprivation of currently productive and ongoing adult stem cell research. Possible, but not likely.

So rather than assign all possibilities equal probability when performing important decision-making, maybe we should be realisitic in our assessments before proclaiming that the sky is falling.

Embryonic stem cell research WILL NOT starve adult stem cell research. On the contrary, embryonic and adult stem cell research will synergistically help each other. If you like adult stem cell research on the basis of scientific advancement and the promise of practical medical therapies, then you are going to love the new team of adult AND embryonic stem cell research.

Report Abuse

David granovsky

Mar. 13, 2009 at 04:29:05 PM

View Profile

[This is a reply to comment by ObamaInCharge on Mar. 13, 2009 at 03:01:56 PM]

ObamaInCharge
Mar. 13, 2009 at 03:01:56 PM

I wanted to keep the debate on this subject all in one place:

But sometimes a good discussion is hard to contain.
Yes, I believe there is a deliberate or accidental misconstruing of the headline, and it centers upon the phrase unintended...

View this Comment

I never said we shouldn't research embryonic stem cells. I only said we shouldn't not research Adult or iPS cells. I have conspicuously avoided commenting on embryonic stem cell research for a variety of reasons, one is that science and religion are poor bedfellows and no debate focused on both will ever be resolved to the comfort of both parties.

But the most significant reason is that ESC are mired in religious and moral debate and any discussion of them along those grounds takes away from my desire to get across one point: ASC have huge treatment potential and should have been already used in the US for years to help the multitude of dying and debilitated patients that are gaining therepeutic benefit around the world from them.

And with the amazing potential and pluripotency of iPS, many believe there is no need to continue to research straight embryonics. But that is for others to decide. So, back against the wall, I will tell you my position on ESC/iPSC research.

ESC/iPSC should be researched because it doesn't matter if we are talking about sailing west to find a new route to asia, going to the moon or mars or exploring the edges of the galaxy. Even if we have no guarantees of advancement for the human race or technology from the research, we still must find the way to do it.

We must do it because "it's next. because we came out of the cave and we looked over the hill and we saw fire; and we crossed the ocean and we pioneered the west and we took to the sky. The history of man is on a timeline of exploration and THIS is what's next."

But it takes away from my point which is that I am interested in helping human who have life altering, debilitating, threatening or ending diseases.

I want to help them now...
and we can...
and we aren't...
and I don't want to wait 10-20 years for a possible ESC treatment.

That's all.

Report Abuse

ObamaInCharge

Mar. 13, 2009 at 05:31:46 PM

View Profile

[This is a reply to comment by David granovsky on Mar. 13, 2009 at 04:29:05 PM]

David granovsky
Mar. 13, 2009 at 04:29:05 PM

I never said we shouldn't research embryonic stem cells. I only said we shouldn't not research Adult or iPS cells. I have conspicuously avoided commenting on embryonic stem cell research for a variety of reasons, one is that science...

View this Comment

And I absolutely agree that we shouldn't not research ASC and IPSC. I am only addressing the misperception that between ASC/IPSC and ESC, we have to choose. We can and should do both. I also agree that the scientific and religious aspects of embryonic stem cell research do not cohabitate well in any serious discussion of a way forward, although opening up the debate to the moral and ethical dimensions of ESC research would make this discussion more accessible to non-science geeks. I am happy to focus on the medical science, since all the other stuff has been hashed and rehashed many times before.

But the most significant reason is that ESC are mired in religious and moral debate and any discussion of them along those grounds takes away from my desire to get across one point: ASC have huge treatment potential and should have been already used in the US for years to help the multitude of dying and debilitated patients that are gaining therepeutic benefit around the world from them.

No disagreement from me on this either. But I also think ESC has huge treatment potential. Neglect and malnutrition has stunted its growth. With proper feeding, it will catch up. That doesn't mean we stop feeding ASC and IPSC, just because we are now allowing ESC to join the dinner table.

And with the amazing potential and pluripotency of iPS, many believe there is no need to continue to research straight embryonics. But that is for others to decide.

That's where we part company. There is a need to research ESC along with the further along ASC research. Just as you cannot limit yourself to applied physics and neglect theoretical physics (because today's theory becomes tomorrow's applied), you cannot ignore the basic science that will help illuminate the way for ASC applications, and perhaps one day do things that ASC/IPSC are fundmentally incapable of accomplishing.

I want to help them now...
and we can...
and we aren't...
and I don't want to wait 10-20 years for a possible ESC treatment.

I don't want patients to wait for embryonic stem cell therapies 10-20 years down the road if ASC or IPSC stem cell treatments are available sooner. And they won't. Whichever route gets you there first is the best route to take. You can't know that ahead of time; some roads abruptly dead-end. That's why it's wisest to take both forks in the road.

Report Abuse