Stem Cell Research Information + Impact

Messages In This Digest (2 Messages)

1.: JOHN McCAIN, BASEBALL, AND STEM CELL RESEARCH From: Stephen Meyer

2a.: #446 Friday, May 30, 2008 - FDA, THE CANCER SCARE, AND MY SECRET PLA From: Stephen Meyer

View All Topics | Create New Topic

Messages

1.: JOHN McCAIN, BASEBALL, AND STEM CELL RESEARCH

Posted by: "Stephen Meyer" Stephen276@comcast.net stephen_meyer_stemcells

Wed Jun 4, 2008 6:15 am (PDT)

JOHN McCAIN, BASEBALL, AND STEM CELL RESEARCH

Do you like the stem cell policies of President George Bush? If so, you
will love John McCain, who is more of the same, only worse.

A McCain Presidency would attack stem cell research three ways.

1. He has promised to sign a bill to put stem cell scientists in
jail; 2. He approves of a law to redefine human life as legally
beginning at the blastocyst stage, potentially criminalizing embryonic
stem cell research; 3. He has pledged to appoint even more
ultra-conservative judges to the Supreme Court, effectively stacking it.

But you heard that the Senator from Arizona supported the Stem Cell
Research Enhancement Act? That is true, and he deserves credit. John
McCain did vote twice to support (H.R. 810, S5, Castle/DeGette)--unlike
President Bush, who twice vetoed it.

Bear in mind, however, that Castle/Degette is not a strong bill. It was
written as cautiously and conservatively as possible, so that even the
most anti-research President might be able to sign it. There is no
reference to advanced stem cell research like SCNT (Somatic Cell Nuclear
Transfer), and no funding. Its improvement? Mr. Bush's policy
allowed federal funding only for those embryonic stem cell lines in
existence before August 9th, 2001. Castle/Degette would have removed
the date.

So a McCain Presidency would allow one mildly positive bill to go
forward. That's it: his total contribution to stem cell research.

How he would oppose the research is far more significant.

Look at three commitments the Senator has made, all utterly damaging to
research.

STRIKE ONE: Like President Bush, and Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS),
Senator McCain is in favor of jailing stem cell scientists if they
participate in advanced stem cell research, Somatic Cell Nuclear
Transfer (SCNT), sometimes called therapeutic cloning. As you know, SCNT
involves a skin cell and an emptied egg like a woman loses every month;
it involves no sperm, no implantation in the womb, no womb—and no
child at all—except perhaps a person being healed of an incurable
disease. However, John McCain has pledged to prohibit SCNT, the first
ban on medical research in American history, which Mr. Bush tried (and
failed) to do in all his years in office. The law to ban the research is
the Cloning Prohibition Act, offered by Brownback.

The Brownback Cloning Prohibition Act sees no difference between cloning
a baby (useless, dangerous, and deserving of criminalization ) and
copying cells with SCNT, which positive process is supported by
essentially the entire medical, research, and patient advocate
community.

The Act would put scientists in jail for ten years, and/or fine them a
minimum of one million dollars. It would threaten the same penalties for
doctors, parents, or patients themselves; anyone who tried to use SCNT.

Could Senator McCain support such a cruelly unfair law? Listen to his
own words, in an interview with conservative National Review editor
Ramesh Ponnoru.

(interviewer Ponnoru) "On the question of stem cells. I believe the
last time around you voted for federal funding for using the embryos at
I.V.F. clinics. Have you reconsidered that? Is that still your view?

Sen. McCain: Yeah. It's still my view. I've watched many close
friends suffer from many of these debilitating diseases. I'm for all
kinds of stem-cell research. But I would hope that we can make
scientific progress so that this wouldn't be that much of an issue
any more but I support federal funding for it and I understand that I
have a difference of opinion with some of my friends in the pro-life
community.

Ponnuru: All kinds of stem-cell research? What about stem-cell research
that involves human cloning?

Sen. McCain: I'm obviously against any human cloning. Obviously.

Ponnuru: Would you be willing to ban it?

Sen. McCain: Sure.

Ponnuru: So you'd support something like the Brownback bill? (The
Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2007, see below)

Sen. McCain: Yes. I think I'm a co-sponsor."*…

--National Review, March 5th, 2007

STRIKE TWO: Senator McCain supports a bill which would redefine human
life as legally beginning at the blastocyst stage: granting
"personhood" status to the microscopic joining of sperm and egg.

According to his spokesperson (and numerous sources including Paul
Krugman of the New York Times)**, McCain would sign the South Dakota
anti-abortion law, considered the most extreme ever proposed. The law
contains "personhood" provisions, stating that "life begins
at conception". This could be disastrous to stem cell research
hopes.

Remember that discarded blastocysts are currently the only source of
embryonic stem cells. If a blastocyst (the microscopic joining of sperm
and egg) has legal standing in a court of law, this could criminalize
the entire field of embryonic stem cell research. The In Vitro
Fertility (IVF) process, mixing sperm and eggs in a Petri dish,
generally ends up with 15-20 blastocysts, most of which are too weak to
survive. These will be thrown away, donated to another couple (who
generally prefer to make their own), frozen forever—or donated to
research as a source of hope for cure.

Could this use of discarded blastocysts, turning medical trash into
treasure, be allowed, if the bill John McCain approved should become
law?

Look at the official text:

"BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA

Section 1. "…the guarantee of due process of law under the South
Dakota Bill of Rights applies equally to born and unborn human beings.

"Section 2. The legislature finds that the life of a human being
begins when the ovum is fertilized by male sperm…"

From the instant of fertilization, a blastocyst (often shed unnoticed by
married women in their natural cycles) is entitled to "due process
of law".

Mr. McCain claims to support embryonic stem cell research—but he
approves of legislation which could make that research illegal?

STRIKE THREE: Senator McCain has pledged to support "strict
constructionist" (ultra-conservative) judges to the Supreme Court.
His example of the sort of judge he would appoint? Samuel Alito and
Antonin Scalia. There are already seven Republican judges to only two
Democrats on the court, considered one of the most conservative ever. If
even one more conservative judge was appointed, the Roberts Court would
have an absolute conservative majority.

And who would advise him on his Supreme Court appointments? None other
than that most anti-stem cell Senator of all, Sam Brownback****.\

Folks, in baseball terms, if John McCain was at bat, the count would be
one ball, and three strikes.

In the twisted logic of those who oppose stem cell research, that is
probably a home run.

But for me, he's out.

*Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2007 (Introduced in Senate)

S 1036 IS

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 1036

To amend the Public Health Service Act to prohibit human cloning.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
March 29, 2007
Mr. BROWNBACK (for himself, Ms. LANDRIEU, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. BUNNING, Mr.
BURR, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mr. COBURN, Mr. CORKER, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. CRAPO, Mr.
DEMINT, Mrs. DOLE, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. ENSIGN, Mr. ENZI, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr.
GRASSLEY, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. KYL, Mr. LOTT, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr.
MARTINEZ, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. THOMAS, Mr. THUNE, Mr. VITTER, and Mr.
VOINOVICH) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and
referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

A BILL

To amend the Public Health Service Act to prohibit human cloning.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2007'.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON HUMAN CLONING.
Part H of title IV of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 289 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`SEC. 498D. PROHIBITION ON HUMAN CLONING.
`(a) Definitions- In this section:

`(1) HUMAN CLONING- The term `human cloning' means human asexual
reproduction, accomplished by introducing nuclear material from one or
more human somatic cells into a fertilized or unfertilized oocyte whose
nuclear material has been removed or inactivated so as to produce a
living organism (at any stage of development) that is genetically
virtually identical to an existing or previously existing human
organism.

`(2) ASEXUAL REPRODUCTION- The term `asexual reproduction' means
reproduction not initiated by the union of oocyte and sperm.

`(3) SOMATIC CELL- The term `somatic cell' means a diploid cell (having
a complete set of chromosomes) obtained or derived from a living or
deceased human body at any stage of development.

`(b) Prohibition- It shall be unlawful for any person or entity, public
or private, in or affecting interstate commerce, knowingly--

`(1) to perform or attempt to perform human cloning;

`(2) to participate in an attempt to perform human cloning; or

`(3) to ship or receive for any purpose an embryo produced by human
cloning or any product derived from such embryo.

`(c) Importation- It shall be unlawful for any person or entity, public
or private, knowingly to import for any purpose an embryo produced by
human cloning.

`(d) Penalties-

`(1) CRIMINAL PENALTY- Any person or entity that violates this section
shall be fined or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.

`(2) CIVIL PENALTY- Any person or entity that violates any provision of
this section shall be subject to, in the case of a violation that
involves the derivation of a pecuniary gain, a civil penalty of not less
than $1,000,000 and not more than an amount equal to the amount of the
gross gain multiplied by 2, if that amount is greater than
$1,000,000…"

**

529M0546

SENATE STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE ENGROSSED NO. HB 1215 - 02/17/2006

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:
Section 1. The Legislature accepts and concurs with the
conclusion of the South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortion… that
life begins at the time of conception…

***"McCain Is Not a Moderate", by Paul Krugman, the New York
Times

"Most notably, Mr. McCain's spokesperson says that he would have
signed South Dakota's extremist new anti-abortion law.

The spokesperson went on to say that the senator would have taken "the
appropriate steps under state law" to ensure that cases of rape and
incest were excluded. But that attempt at qualification makes no sense:
the South Dakota law** has produced national shockwaves precisely
because it prohibits abortions even for victims of rape or incest.

The bottom line is that Mr. McCain isn't a moderate; he's a man of
the hard right. How far right? A statistical analysis of Mr. McCain's
recent voting record, available at www.voteview.com, ranks him as the
Senate's third most conservative member."—13 March, 2006

****"On the issue of appointments to the Supreme Court, McCain
mentioned that Sam Brownback (emphasis added) would play an advisory
role in helping decide who he should nominate for the Supreme Court. As
models of who he would select, John McCain pointed to Justices Samuel
Alito and Antonin Scalia." –Catholic News Agency, January 23,
2008.

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

2a.: #446 Friday, May 30, 2008 - FDA, THE CANCER SCARE, AND MY SECRET PLA

Posted by: "Stephen Meyer" Stephen276@comcast.net stephen_meyer_stemcells

Wed Jun 4, 2008 6:16 am (PDT)

#446 Friday, May 30, 2008 - FDA, THE CANCER SCARE, AND MY SECRET PLAN

Cancer is prevalent in my family. My mother died young (58) of breast
cancer; my older sister died of leukemia, a form of blood cancer (age
23); my younger sister is battling both cancer and leukemia right now.

So when I hear that the field of stem cell research may be held up
because of the possibility of cancer, how shall I feel?

Cautious, definitely. Cancer is a serious risk.

But the only way any of us can keep safe from cancer altogether is to
live on a different planet.

The air we breathe, the water we drink—polluted. The food we take
into our bodies—chemicals, pesticides, preservatives, all known
carcinogens.

Should we stop the research because of that fear?

Should we say, no human trials with embryonic stem cells until we can
guarantee there are no risks at all?

In other words, never?

As you know (if you have suffered through this column for any length of
time) the FDA is considering allowing human trials for embryonic stem
cell therapies.

April 10th was a hearing, and the transcript is available online, at the
FDA page. (http://www.fda.gov <http://www.fda.gov/> ) The search box is
at the upper right corner of the page, type in embryonic, then choose
the April 10th hearing transcripts if you want to read the complete
word-by-word testimony. Some parts of the hearing were closed, I
understand, but you can definitely get the message.

The number one topic—voiced on almost every page of the
transcript—is the fear of cancer.

Over and over and over, statements are made about cancer and teratomas
and tumors, as if our field was as dangerous as tobacco, which of course
is allowed.

Numerous statements are made about not allowing the trials to go forward
until all possible threats of cancer are removed.

Is there a risk of cancer?

Here are the facts, as plain as I understand them, and always with the
proviso that I am neither scientist, nor doctor.

If a scientist were to put pure embryonic stem cells into my body, there
would almost certainly be a teratoma. A teratoma is a lump, a growth, a
tumor—not cancer. A teratoma is harmless of itself, unless it grows
in a place where any lump would be dangerous—like the spine. We
don't want it, but a teratoma is not cancerous.

Also—and this is important— a teratoma comes (if it does) only
when undifferentiated embryonic stem cells are put in. To the best of my
knowledge, no scientist wants to do this—nobody wants to put
undifferentiated cells in. They want to differentiate (change) the cells
first.

Think of a carpenter's nails, screws, nuts and bolts. These all
begin as hot liquid metal, very dangerous to work with—but we do not
use them in that formless shape—at the nail factory, the molten iron
is poured into molds, and shaped, and cooled. We only use them when the
metal is completely set.

Same with stem cells. The embryonic stem cells are
differentiated—shaped—into whatever kind of cell is needed. We
use them only after differentiation.

In the Keirstead/Geron experiments, that means oligodendrocytes, cells
to create myelin, cells to insulate damaged nerves in the spine.

These are already differentiated.

For the past few days I have been struggling with the nearly 300 page
FDA report, the transcript of the April 10th hearing on embryonic stem
cells and "safety". I put that in quotes because that is not all
that is being debated; there is also the unsaid agenda which everybody
carries.

All of us have a plan. With me, it is to advance the research.

With some of the folks in the hearings, it seems to be the
opposite—what kind of logical-sounding excuse can they come up with
that will delay human trials?

It is never easy, guessing the intent of people's minds. Honorable
folks can disagree. Very intelligent folks, doctors and scientists, and
as always, part of me wants to say, well, these folks are smarter than
me, let them alone, don't make a fuss.

But everybody on earth is smarter than me in one thing or
another—that does not mean I am going to keep silent. Not to mention
I am a parent, and this affects my paralyzed son, and millions like him,
all around the world, somebody's loved one, afflicted with one
incurable condition or another.

I don't intend to be on my deathbed (many years from now!) and there
is my son in his wheelchair beside me—still in his wheelchair? I am
sure he would be polite and not actually say, gee Dad, if only you had
stepped up to the plate…

No, before I head into the great beyond, I intend to see my son on his
feet: walking around, kicking a soccer ball, or kicking an anti-science
politician—sorry.

So I will always voice my opinion, no matter how much more qualified the
opposition may be.

And I will also have a backup plan.

So here it is, my secret backup plan.

Roman and I will probably go to China.

Not now, of course. The research is not ready. But when it is, I think
the Chinese will bring it together first. That's why I'm
studying Mandarin every day, one hour, without fail: tapes in the car,
books by my bedside, little cards in my wallet.

When the time is right, I will borrow on my house again, like I did when
Rome was injured, and we will go.

I will work with a Chinese spinal cord injury surgeon (some of whom
already do 300 traditional spinal cord operations in a year), and a
scientist or two, make sure everyone knows exactly what has to be done
(always assuming Roman agrees, of course) telling them in two languages
exactly the mix of stem cells and neurotrophic agents or whatever has to
be administered.

After the operation, I figure it will take six months of rehabilitation,
which we will do in China also, because we could not afford it here,
even borrowing on the house.

Why China? Why not stay in my own land, especially since I honestly
believe the research breakthroughs will happen here?

There is an American option, of course. I will write about that in the
near future.

But to go from idea to implantation, the way it looks now, there are too
many road blocks in the way. Naturally, I will be working to remove
those obstacles, but… in a few minutes I will pick up my
Chinese/English dictionary and start the morning practice.

Maybe I am wrong.

I hope I am.

But when I see cancer fear being systematically spread—even hyped!--
in the FDA report, it feels like they are just going through the
motions, after which they fully intend to deny the trials.

Right now, as you know, the FDA orally notified Geron that the trials
were "on hold", for unspecified reasons.

Geron is waiting for a letter from the FDA explaining those reasons.

It is my guess the FDA will deny the trials. The letter will say
something like there are too many risks for the trials to go forward at
this time, and here are a list of impossible conditions that must be met
first, before embryonic stem cell research is allowed a chance.

If I am wrong, fine.

Some good people tell me, don't worry, be patient, just wait-- the
next President will fix things.

But what if the FDA establishes guidelines that are impossible to meet,
and those guidelines have to be overturned before human trials can take
place?

It will be very hard for new FDA scientists to overturn safety
standards, even misguided ones.

If the stem cell trials are blocked by unfair tactics, like setting the
safety bar impossibly high, you and I will need to speak up.

Start thinking about this. Discuss it with your friends. Think about
groups you belong to, media folks you may know.

Get ready.

Don Reed

www.stemcellbattles.com <http://www.stemcellbattles.com/>

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (2)