Please login to post a response.

• stem cells
• Posted: 2008-02-19 17:34:24 By Irene K
• I just want to point out to everyone here that as we all know, there is great hope in the area of stem cells. Obama and Hillary both support this, but Obama actually co-sponsored the bill. His father-in-law has MS, and he has seen up close what disability does to a person and to a family. McCain says he supports the research, but does not support creating new lines, which is not good enough for me. If you believe that a dot in a Petri dish is a person, I'm not going to bother arguing, but if you see that dot for the miraculous treatments it could bring to millions, then I encourage you to vote for Obama.

• Re: stem cells
• Posted: 2008-02-19 22:48:15 By Darran Z
• Irene,
  
  While I admire your aspiration for hope regarding stem cells, there are a few things many people are unaware of. The issue isn't the legislation. It is only how much money government money can be thrown into the studies. In other words, ou could raise billions of dollars private to expand upon other lines. The goverment just didn't want to go further than they are now, at least Bush didn't.
  
  Secondly, from an FFB conferenece I attened not long ago, the issue wasn't the number of lines as people seem to think will be the answer. But rather, the obstacle is, trying to get the stem cells to develop into specific types of cells. In our case, RPE cells to replace the damaged RPE cells of the retina. Until that obstacle is overcome, no amount of additional lines in research would overcome this. We have that within reach already but trying to "tell" a cell to develop into specific cells is the issue.
  
  Secondly, a British company published something last year that they can do this exact same thing with skin cells, thus avoiding the contreversy of embryonic stem cell research which is highly politically polarized.
  
  There is hope, but it will be much further away than you think. If you would talk to some of the researchers to see how progress is going, most of them will state that any "cure" is years away. The closest thing right now of a treatment is Neurotech's CNTF device which are in Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials and possibly on the market within 10 years. This will halt the progression of RP. At least that is the goal of the study.
  
  Darran

• Re: Re: stem cells
• Posted: 2008-02-20 15:44:19 By Irene K
• One of the researchers, a Lois Smith at Harvard, told me that the obstacles were more political than medical. And she did say that treatment would be some years away, but that time is on our side. Treatment can't come soon enough when you have this, but progressive does not mean overnight. Bush's disapproval of creating new lines can only put a damper on it. Of course the researchers have to figure out how to make the cells do what we want--but more money means more research and more people able to come up with ideas. More lines means more to work with. We want a president who supports the research in its broadest form.

• Re: Re: Re: stem cells
• Posted: 2008-02-20 15:52:58 By Darran Z
• Bush only limited PUBLIC money for research. There is no ban on private funding to futher lines. That is often the political barrier mentioned above. Who says the government had to solve all our problems?
  
  From the FFB standpoint and th eprojects they help fund on stem cell research, additional lines were not the issue.
  
  Darran

• Re: Re: Re: stem cells
• Posted: 2008-02-20 16:08:58 By Darran Z
• Here's a little history over stem cell research. YOu can't blame Bush on this one, blame Clinton.
  
  "Since 1996, Congress has voted each year to ban federal funding for research that harms human embryos. So the Clinton administration did not fund embryonic stem-cell research, and early on, President Bush vowed not to as well. But on August 9, 2001, the president surprised many by announcing that federally funded research could go forward under certain circumstances."
  
  http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/july-dec04/stemcell_8-10.html
  
  Darran

• Re: Re: Re: Re: stem cells
• Posted: 2008-02-20 21:49:06 By Marisa P
• I don't want to get in the middle of this debate but if public funding wasn't needed, the FFB wouldn't have sent out notices urging us to contact state senators, representatives and the president himself to back the bill. So, yes, I agree as it happens in other areas, without the administration's support, things progress slower.

• Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stem cells
• Posted: 2008-02-20 22:50:45 By Darran Z
• I'm not arguing that funding isn't needed. That never was my argument. But your scenerio just proved my point of the "government solves all my problems" mentality. Meaning, the longer we rely on government the longer it will take. But there are no bans regarding additional lines from sources of private funding. The Gov't tends to be the biggest source of grants for research projects. That is why they push that way as well as ask individual contributions. You have to understand how the FFB operates. I've learned alot since becoming a board member of my local chapter. I'm trying to establish a VisionWalk in my area because I know funding is vital. That is said in each conference/symposium I have attended. But there is more an individual can do privately than rely upon public funds.
  
  Darran

• Re: stem cells
• Posted: 2008-02-22 10:41:13 By Irene K
• I think we can all agree that funding from all sources is welcome and should be encouraged. That's really all I was trying to say. It can only help to have a president who supports the stem cell cause. I also wish there were a way to unite all the causes that will benefit from stem cells, which would give the entire thing a greater presence. But while I admire your realism, please remember to believe in miracles. Sometimes miracles need help and that's what this is about.

• Re: Re: stem cells
• Posted: 2008-02-25 15:19:12 By Darran Z
• True. But look at Dr. Radtke's project. While he doesn't use stem cells per se, he is using cell transplantation which results are mediocre. He's been at it for several years now.
  
  There are a couple of new trials coming about, but no one is holding their breath as they are aware there is a long way to go.
  
  The British found a way to create stem cells from the skin. That will take a new turn on this whole issue of whether it's ethical or not. So people are working on all fronts to overcome this "ethical barrier" that is so highly politically polarized. There is much to this and what is going on that you probably realize or know.
  
  Darran

• Re: Re: stem cells
• Posted: 2008-02-29 10:07:34 By andrew b
• Voting is always about more than one issue. I plan to post on the RP board about some common issues, and what the candidates positions are.