Friday, October 31, 2008

[StemCellInformation] Digest Number 765

Stem Cell Research Information + Impact

Messages In This Digest (1 Message)

Message

1.

STEM CELLS MAY CURE THE ECONOMY: One Last E-Blast

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

Fri Oct 31, 2008 5:57 am (PDT)


STEM CELLS MAY CURE THE ECONOMY: One Last E-Blast

by Don C. Reed

If I could reach every stem-cell-supportive candidate right now, I would
say:

Dear Candidate:

In these few remaining hours before election, consider a last-minute
e-blast about your stem cell research support. Here's why:

It is a terrific way to reach independent voters Voters who
self-identify as independents are the strongest supporters of stem cell
research, stronger even than Democrats.

"Support (for embryonic stem cell research) is higher among
Democrats (64 percent) than among Republicans (46 percent), and is
highest among the politically important independents (67
percent).*--Peter D. Hart Research Associates, Results for America.

Reminding voters of your stem cell support cannot hurt you-- and it
might help a lot.

In virtually every demographic, a majority of voters supports full stem
cell research. Recent polling, for example shows American Catholics
support embryonic stem cell research three-to-one. One national survey
sponsored by the National Catholic Reporter shows "77% of American
Catholics support stem cell research on excess embryos." Another
2008 poll, by Belden Russonello & Stewart, found: "By a wide margin,
they (Catholic voters) … favor stem cell research with early human
embryos (69% support)"
--http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/documents/executivesummary.pdf
<http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/documents/executivesummary.pdf> .,

Who opposes stem cell research? An increasingly isolated minority of
die-hard ideological ultra-conservatives—who will never vote for a
progressive anyway…

And if I could ask every candidate to send out ONE LAST E-BLAST, it
would focus on one tremendous boost to the economy:

Dear Fellow Citizen:

We all agree: the economic meltdown is the number one concern of every
American.

But my opponent fails to realize that healthcare costs are at the roots
of the current crisis.

Listen to the American Association of Retired Persons, "Health care
expenses can be one of the biggest, if not the biggest, causes of
bankruptcy among older Americans."

You know the cost of your healthcare is skyrocketing. But take a look at
the total costs…

***"The medical care costs of people with chronic diseases account
for more than 75% of the nation's $2 trillion medical care
costs". –Department of Health and Human Services,
http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/overview.htm

Two trillion dollars? That mountain of debt may well be the root cause
of the recession.

Consider: Health care costs are now more than all federal income taxes
combined.

(To verify that, visit the Internal Revenue Service website, Tax Stats
at a Glance: (http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/article/0,,id=102886,00.html):

Individual income tax: $1.3 trillion ($1,366,241,000,000)

Corporation income tax: $400 billion ($395,536,000,000)

Add it up, round it off: $1.7 trillion.

All the federal income taxes in America combined, ($1.7 trillion
dollars) are not as much as our health care costs ($2 trillion)—and
why are our medical costs so high?

Because people are getting sick, but not getting well: an estimated 100
million Americans suffer a chronic (incurable) illness or disability:
that is one out of three citizens! We are keeping people alive,
maintaining them in their misery, but not curing them.

Too many of our loved ones suffer disease and disability for which there
is no cure—except, perhaps, through stem cell research.

How do we lower these impossible medical costs? The answer is huge, and
plain.

Cure is the best way to lower health care costs. Remember an earlier
great success America had, when our own Jonas Salk invented a way to
prevent the crippling disease of polio. If the Salk vaccine had not been
developed, today we would be spending an estimated $28 billion each and
every year for that one disease.

We do not have that cost today, because we backed medical research:
overcoming the objections of the same ultra-conservatives (like my
opponent) who are against it today.

Stem cells and other biomedical advances are a pillar of the new
economy: a great way to help cure the financial crisis.

One final example: medical care for a paralyzed person may cost three to
five million dollars over a lifetime. But what is there was a cure?
Embryonic stem cell therapies to alleviate paralysis are being
considered by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) right now. Patients
with a spinal cord injury may soon have the chance to walk out of the
hospital, instead of being condemned to a lifetime in a wheelchair.

We must consider our families: shall we develop a new industry bringing
good-paying jobs to the community, while working to heal our suffering
loved ones? Or not?

On November 4th, our country will decide: choosing between leaders who
can grasp the shining promise of the future, or those who are
inextricably tied to the failures of the past.

That decision is in your hands.

Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Y! Messenger

Instant hello

Chat in real-time

with your friends.

Yahoo! Groups

Real Food Group

Share recipes

and favorite meals.

Weight Loss Group

on Yahoo! Groups

Get support and

make friends online.

Need to Reply?

Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.

Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the Web

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

[StemCellInformation] Digest Number 764

Messages In This Digest (1 Message)

Message

1.

'Personhood' Amendment on Colorado Ballot

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

Wed Oct 29, 2008 2:35 pm (PDT)


* <http://www.npr.org/templates/topics/topic.php?topicId=1003>
'Personhood' Amendment on Colorado Ballot
by Bente Birkeland

Listen Now [4 min 3 sec] add to playlist
[Kristi Burton in La Junta, Colo.] Enlarge
Kristen Wyatt
Kristi Burton, who helped write the personhood amendment, eats lunch
with supporters at Trinity Lutheran Church in La Junta, Colo. AP
"If you don't know you're pregnant ... and you drink
or do something dangerous -- or you do something problematic very early
on, and you're in Colorado or passing through Colorado -- have you
committed child abuse and endangerment?"Jessica Berg
Elsewhere On The Web
* Protect Families Protect Choices Coalition
<http://www.protectfamiliesprotectchoices.org/> * Colorado For
Equal Rights <http://www.coloradoforequalrights.com/>

All Things Considered
<http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=2> , October
29, 2008 · Colorado is one of several states facing a controversial
ballot measure this fall that could have far-reaching impacts on
abortion law. Amendment 48 would define "personhood" as beginning at the
moment of conception, giving fertilized human eggs the same
constitutional rights as a person.

The first of its kind in the U.S., the amendment is the brainchild of
21-year-old Kristi Burton, who says she wants to establish a concrete
definition of when life begins to protect unborn children. On a Sunday
in October, Burton drove three hours from her home near Colorado Springs
to speak at Life Church, an evangelical congregation in Fort Collins.

"Basically we're then directing our courts and our Legislature to say
now that an unborn child is defined as a person; you need to look at
that when making your laws," Burton said. She had set up a table
displaying pictures of babies, along with bumper stickers and
promotional DVDs to support her initiative. "If you'd like to get
involved, we have many materials you can pick up, and please do pray for
us. I really do believe that in the end, God is the one that fights the
battle."

Similar measures have been proposed in Mississippi, Montana and Georgia,
but Colorado is the only state to get enough signatures to put the
personhood amendment on the ballot. It's the latest tactic by the
anti-abortion movement to set the legal groundwork to overturn the
controversial Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in 1973.

Burton, who is studying at an online Christian law school, has been
working on the concept for the past two years and says an attorney
friend of hers wrote the amendment.

"I do believe that Roe v. Wade should be overturned," Burton says. "I
mean even a lot of people on the pro-choice side say it was a bad
decision made on bad law. And that's why we're trying to define a person
and that's why Roe v. Wade should be relooked at. At least present new
information."

As it stands, however, the amendment goes far beyond the issue of
abortion, raising a host of questions regarding which constitutional
rights a fertilized egg can logically be entitled to. Jessica Berg, a
professor of law and bioethics at Case Western Reserve University, says
the amendment could lead to some bizarre situations — such as
counting fertilized eggs in the state census and pregnant drivers using
the HOV lanes.

"If you don't know you're pregnant at that point, and you drink or do
something dangerous — or you do something problematic very early on,
and you're in Colorado or passing through Colorado — have you
committed child abuse and endangerment?" Berg wonders.

Berg says that as written, the amendment would classify all the
fertilized eggs used in fertility labs — which number in the
hundreds of thousands — as persons.

"You could never get rid of them," she says of the fertilized eggs.
"It's not clear whether you could freeze them, because we certainly
don't have a concept of freezing indefinitely a person. It's not clear
how you then adopt them — would you have to go through all the
normal adoption proceedings?"

The controversial amendment has divided the anti-abortion community. The
Colorado Catholic Conference worries that the courts would strike it
down and end up reaffirming current abortion laws, and Colorado's
anti-abortion Democratic governor, Bill Ritter, says the state could
rack up huge legal bills defending the amendment.

"[The amendment] is outside the bounds of present law, present
constitutional law," Ritter says. "It's just an extreme position by a
really narrow interest group, narrowly crafted, and it's the wrong
response."

The latest polls have the personhood amendment trailing by 15 percentage
points, with 16 percent of the electorate undecided. National Conference
of State Legislatures analyst Jennie Drage Bowser says even if it does
fail, she thinks other states will still copy it.

"When a ballot measure is tried as a new idea in one state, it's not at
all uncommon that that model is repeated in other states," she says. "So
I do think that people in the anti- abortion community are going to be
watching what happens in Colorado, and it could serve as a successful
model. At the very least, though, it's important because it is a new
strategy."

Should the amendment pass, both sides expect it would spend years being
litigated in the courts. Proponents hope it would be challenged all the
way to the U.S. Supreme Court to force a review of Roe v. Wade.

Bente Birkeland reports from Rocky Mountain Community Radio.
Related NPR Stories
* July 23, 2008Candidates Strongly Disagree On Abortion
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92760943> *
Sep. 26, 2008Critics: Abortion Rule Would Impede Birth Control
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95098405> *
Oct. 27, 2008South Dakotans Again Consider An Abortion Ban
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95942981>

Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Best of Y! Groups

Discover groups

that are the best

of their class.

Yahoo! Groups

Stay healthy

and discover other

people who can help.

Yahoo! Groups

Cat Group

Join a group for

people who love cats

Need to Reply?

Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.

Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the Web

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

[StemCellInformation] Digest Number 763

Stem Cell Research Information + Impact

Messages In This Digest (2 Messages)

Messages

1.

MISTAKE IN DON REED'S ARTICLE:

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

Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:19 am (PDT)


MISTAKE IN DON REED'S ARTICLE:

The following article, which I posted yesterday, contained an error on
the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment. That cruelty was recently denounced by
survivors of the Tuskegee Airmen Experiment, (which was the reason for
my confusion) but there were no Airmen in theTuskegee Syphilis
Experiment, which was inflicted on uneducated sharecroppers.

I apologize for this error. Readers are urged to Google both the
Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment and the Tuskegee Airmen Experiment. One is
a travesty, the other a triumph.

But my original point still stands.

Thanks,

Don C. Reed

SHAME ON MICHIGAN CATHOLIC CONFERENCE: Lies Discredit Church

In a series of dishonest TV ads, print media, and DVD mass mailings, the
Michigan Catholic Conference is attacking stem cell research, maligning
Proposal 2— and undermining the good name of the Catholic Church.

My family is Catholic. But the truth is the truth, and when the Church
is wrong, it's wrong.

The Church is run by human beings, who can make mistakes. When the
Church ordered Joan of Arc to be burned to death as a witch, that was a
mistake. When the Spanish Inquisition tortured and murdered Jews and
took their money, that was a crime. When the Vatican maintained silence
about the Nazis in World War II, that was a sin of omission, for which
Pope John Paul II personally apologized, to his great credit.

And when expensive TV ads (paid for by the Michigan Catholic Conference)
talk about Proposal 2 wanting to raise taxes, or clone people, or mix
cows and human eggs together, these are deliberate and knowing lies.

Proposal 2 does not raise Michigan taxes one cent. Proposal 2 does not
change Michigan 's strict law against cloning, which still carries a
jail sentence. And the only embryonic stem cell research Proposal 2
supports is on blastocysts left over from in vitro fertility
procedures—biological material that would otherwise be thrown away.

Right now, the Church's leadership is out of touch with its members,
the vast majority of whom support embryonic stem cell research.*

That is forgivable. Down through history many religions have been slow
to support medical breakthroughs. Anesthesia was forbidden by the Church
because the Good Book said women were supposed to "bring forth
(their) children in pain." The small pox vaccine was opposed because
it was thought the disease was God's punishment for sin.
Even X-rays were opposed because it was thought they might be used to
see through women's clothing!

But the Church is not supposed to lie, ever. "Thou shalt not bear
false witness" is a Biblical Commandment which applies to upper
management like everybody else.

Anti-Proposal 2 advertisements (paid for by the Michigan Catholic
Conference) are filled with manipulation, misinformation, deceit: so
many lies, it is difficult to answer them all.

Each ad is built around a different falsehood.

Here are a few:

1. Alleged tax increase: false. The ad shows an actor dressed as a
custodian shoveling bundles of dollar bills into a wheelbarrow. The
camera pulls back, and the money is shaped like the state of Michigan .
Michigan can't afford to spend millions of dollars on stem cell
research, the ad says. The reality? Proposal 2 has no taxation. Zero.
There is not a single tax dollar in the whole measure. It is what is
called a "permissions bill", merely allowing scientists to do
their work without fear of imprisonment.

2. Another ad shows fictitious cloning companies, with fake names like
"Clone Crop", implying that Proposal 2 would allow the cloning
of people. This is utterly false. The reality is plain, and verifiable:
Michigan has strict laws prohibiting cloning, including a ten year jail
sentence; nothing in Proposal 2 changes that.

3. In a genuinely ridiculous ad, an actor in a cow costume raises his
hoof in objection to a mad scientist wanting to make cow-people. This
would be laughable if the purpose was not so damaging. The only kind of
embryonic stem cell research Proposal 2 supports is the use of
blastocysts that would otherwise be thrown away: leftover biological
materials already destined for the trash.

4. The most recent ad is perhaps the worst. One of the cruelest acts
ever perpetrated by a government was the Tuskegee Airmen Syphilis
Experiment. This was a crime against humanity done by the U.S. Public
Health Service, a symbol of shame—and now the MCC is attempting to
tie that act of criminality to modern-day stem cell research.

Let's take a look at reality.

First, what was the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment? Google it. Find out
about it, because it was a crime of Nazi-like evil, which must never be
allowed to happen again.

Over forty years, 1932 to 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service denied
cure to 399 African-American men with syphilis—even after penicillin
was invented.

Those men could have been cured. But the government denied them the
medicine which would have made them well. Many of them died because that
medical advance was withheld.

Is this not very much like what the Michigan Catholic Conference is
trying to do with these ads? As penicillin was denied to suffering
African-Americans, even so research which might ease suffering and save
lives for literally millions of Americans today is being held back.

Fortunately, survivors and family members of the Tuskegee tragedy have
spoken out, objecting to the misleading advertisements.

"It's disgraceful that they would use this horrible chapter in
American history to score cheap political points and block patients from
hope and cures," said Aurelia E. Alexander Smith of Detroit , whose
late father, Capt. Halbert L. Alexander was a Tuskegee Airman. "My
hope is that people who see this ad aren't fooled by the lies, and
instead listen to the facts about stem cell research."

Is the Michigan Catholic Conference ( MCC ) responsible for the
outrageous lies in this ads? Absolutely, because it paid for them. The
MCC is the single largest contributor to the opposition to Proposal 2.
That is a matter of public record.

If the Michigan Catholic Conference wants to make a religious objection
to the research, that is fine. It has every right to do so, just as some
faith communities are opposed to blood transfusions, and forbid their
membership to accept that medical treatment.

But lying is different. A church is supposed to be honest. If it
deliberately and publicly deceives, not once but systematically, over
and over-- how shall it be trusted?

Catholics everywhere should speak up. The faith of millions demands a
public apology for these disgraceful ads.

And if anybody reading this would like to try and help balance the
incredibly damaging impact of those TV commercials (which are being run
over and over in Michigan ), they need only click on the following:

www.CureMichigan.com <http://www.curemichigan.com/>

If you can, do what I just did and make a small donation. I put in
another $25—I know, big spender, huh—but the good news is that
money will be doubled. A matching grant has been promised, so that every
dollar contributed will be matched by one from an anonymous donor.

Ads to answer the lies have been made, but it is difficult to find the
money to pay for them being aired. The Catholic Church is the largest
property owner in the world, and has extremely deep pockets. It would be
a shame if their ads were not countered for lack of a few dollars.

But whether you can afford to contribute or not, go to
www.CureMichigan.com <http://www.curemichigan.com/> , and take a look at
the honest work these citizens of Michigan are doing.

They are standing up for everyone. The entire nation will benefit from
their efforts to reverse what have been called the most restrictive
anti-science laws in the nation.

They are fighting for the right of every American family to have access
to the best medical care science can provide.

We must not let them stand alone.

*A recent national survey sponsored by the National Catholic Reporter
shows "77% of American Catholics support stem cell research on
excess embryos." This is in line with other polls such as that done
by Belden Russonello & Stewart, which found that "69% of Catholics
support stem cell research with early human embryos"—July, 2008

Don C. Reed Sponsor, Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research Act Founder
and Co-Chair, Californians for Cures Don Reed is also Vice President
of Public Policy for Americans for Cures Foundation; opinions voiced
here as an individual may or may not reflect those of the Foundation.

2.

HELP MICHIGAN TODAY—And Skip a Lot of Fighting Later On!

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

Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:20 am (PDT)


HELP MICHIGAN TODAY—And Skip a Lot of Fighting Later On!

Folks: Last night I went to a fundraiser for a California Senator, a
strong friend of stem cell research. At the end of his remarks, he
opened the floor for questions—and naturally I brought up Michigan!

What does California have to do with the wolverine state?

Because every stem cell supporter in America should be helping in the
Michigan fight. The good folks back there are standing up for everyone,
taking on the Religious Right, in an all-out battle for freedom for cure
research.

If the anti-research forces can be defeated in Michigan, in a state held
up as a right-to-life model, stem cell research ceases to be a
controversy. That is hugely important; we will soon have a President who
supports our research, and we want the only question to be—how many
billions should be invested—NOT if we should do it or not because of
the artificial controversy.

The opposition knows this too. They are billing their anti-research
struggle as a last stand, and you cannot believe how much money and time
they are willing to devote to try and keep the nation's most
restrictive anti-science policies in place.

I went back there for a week, volunteering to help in the Michigan
campaign, and it was a joy. Great folks, friendly and cheerful, despite
not getting much sleep in recent history. They are doing everything
right; everybody is working hard, and intelligently.

But against them is one of the fiercest political forces on earth. The
Catholic Church is the largest single property-owner on Earth, and they
know how to use their wealth for political effect.

If you are a Catholic in Michigan right now, you have been hammered
relentlessly. Statements have been made from Rome that supporters of the
research should be excommunicated, literally damned to Hell for all
eternity. Your family would have been inundated with propaganda, not
only weekly bulletins and preachments from the altar, but expensive
professional slick commercials, multi-media stuff, including at least
two major mailings. Two twelve-minute DVDs have been made, packaged and
shipped to every Catholic family in Michigan—504,000 households.
That's 1,008,000 DVDs alone. Wouldn't it be great if we had the
money to send out that level of communication?

And on TV? The Michigan Catholic Conference is funding some of the
cruelest and most dishonest advertisements ever made.

You might think lying would be frowned on, in an ad paid for by a
church, but no, the prohibition against fibbing seems to have been set
aside.

The lies in the ads are too many to fully recount: here are just a few:
charges of new taxes (a flat lie, there is not a nickel in government
money in Proposal 2), threats of cloning (illegal now, and it will still
illegal after the law passes), ludicrous allegations of cow-human
monstrosities (one ad features an actor in a cow suit!), and on and on
and on.

Unfortunately, the ads are working. With the avalanche of lies being
hurled at Proposal 2, people apparently are thinking, well, maybe some
of this stuff is true—and every week a new ad is built around yet
another lie.

Our support was high: 50% in favor of loosening some of the cruelest
anti-research restrictions, 32% against. But after the media blitz paid
for by the Michigan Catholic Conference, our numbers are way down—46
in favor/43 against. That is way too close.

The battle must be won.

But it cannot be successful if the opposition's lies go unanswered.

The campaign needs a few bucks from people like you and I. If you
already agree, go to www.CureMichigan.com <http://www.curemichigan.com/>
, and chip in a few more bucks. (I will do so again, right now—hang
on, back in a minute—okay, back, I just contributed another $25. If
you know my wife, do not tell her. Like everybody else, we are pinching
our pennies right now…)

If you are not quite convinced, please read the following update—and
then go to www.CureMichigan.com.

SUMMARY – Michigan voters support eSCR. Pro- messages are more
compelling than anti-, and additional resources will solidify victory by
assuring a proper level of closing communication.

HISTORIC SUPPORT / PUBLIC OPINION
For years in Michigan public opinion research has showed Michigan voters
strongly supporting embryonic stem cell research (ESCR). CureMichigan
collected 600,000 petition signatures in only 15 weeks, which proved
historic as they collected more signatures in less-time than any other
previous effort in Michigan political history.

The good news is while every independent statewide poll to-date has
showed the effort leading. Something we all know from experience is
that positive cure messages prove more convincing than even the
opposition's strongest anti-cure argument against ESCR.

WELL-FUNDED OPPOSITION
The Religious-Right has publicly declared Michigan as the "last
stand" against ESCR. They have so far invested over $7,000,000 in a
misleading, deceptive television campaign. The Michigan Catholic
Conference has invested over $5 million, alone, with $2.2 million coming
in just the past week. Shamefully, their latest ad invokes racism by
blatantly linking stem cell research to the Tuskegee Experiments from
the 1940s. You can watch their ads at www.2goes2far.com
<http://www.2goes2far.com/> .

The unfortunate news is that we know this deception confuses voters and
instills fear of medical research.

WHY MICHIGAN MATTERS
Winning in Michigan this November is critically important.
· Should Michigan win, the "pro-cure" die is cast,
but,
· Should Michigan lose, the Religious-Right will be
empowered. They will take their despicable tactics and prey on other
voters in other states. They will argue the tide has turned because
even Michigan, a political "Blue State", will have said
"no" to ESCR.

DONOR MATCH
If you act today, your contribution will be matched by a very generous
donor as CureMichigan seeks to bolster paid communication over the final
days to solidify support amidst a flurry of deception by the Religious
Right.

More information on the campaign, and the lives it touches, can be found
at CureMichigan.com <http://www.curemichigan.com/> .

The facts about embryonic stem cell research in Michigan

The current law

§ Michigan law makes it a felony to use new embryonic stem
cells — meaning embryonic stem cells that are leftover from
fertility treatment — for research into cures to serious diseases
and injuries.
§ Under the current law, a researcher who uses new embryonic
stem cells to find cures in Michigan can be fined up to $10 million and
imprisoned up to 10 years.
§ Michigan is one of five states with the most severe
restrictions on embryonic stem cell research, along with Arkansas, North
Dakota, South Dakota and Louisiana.

Full text of the ballot proposal

INITIATIVE PETITION - AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION

A Proposal to Amend the Constitution of the State of Michigan by adding
a new Article I, Section 27 as follows:

Article I, Section 27.(1) Nothing in this section shall alter
Michigan's current prohibition on human cloning.

(2) To ensure that Michigan citizens have access to stem cell therapies
and cures, and to ensure that physicians and researchers can conduct the
most promising forms of medical research in this state, and that all
such research is conducted safely and ethically, any research permitted
under federal law on human embryos may be conducted in Michigan, subject
to the requirements of federal law and only the following additional
limitations and requirements:
(a) No stem cells may be taken from a human embryo more than fourteen
days after cell division begins; provided, however, that time during
which an embryo is frozen does not count against this fourteen day
limit.
(b) The human embryos were created for the purpose of fertility
treatment and, with voluntary and informed consent, documented in
writing, the person seeking fertility treatment chose to donate the
embryos for research; and
(i) the embryos were in excess of the clinical need of the person
seeking the fertility treatment and would
otherwise be discarded unless they are used for research; or
(ii) the embryos were not suitable for implantation and would otherwise
be discarded unless they are used for research.
(c) No person may, for valuable consideration, purchase or sell human
embryos for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures.
(d) All stem cell research and all stem cell therapies and cures must be
conducted and provided in accordance with state and local laws of
general applicability, including but not limited to laws concerning
scientific and medical practices and patient safety and privacy, to the
extent that any such laws do not:
(i) <http://www.curemichigan.com/petition_sign.php> prevent, restrict,
obstruct, or discourage any stem cell research or stem cell therapies
and cures that are permitted by the provisions of this section; or
(ii) create disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise
associate with such research or therapies or cures.
(3) Any provision of this section held unconstitutional shall be
severable from the remaining portions of this section.

FOLKS, SEND A COUPLE BUCKS RIGHT NOW TO WWW.CUREMICHIGAN.COM
<http://www.curemichigan.com/>

Thanks,

Don C. Reed

P.S. On our last day in Michigan, Gloria and I treated ourselves to a
trip to the magnificent Detroit Zoo, one of the most beautiful in the
world. Gloria loved the polar bear swimming underwater, but for me the
highlight was three wolverines, powerful, small, agile, fearsome—but
nearly extinct in the wild.

The wolverine is the symbol of courage and ferocity, but it can well be
wiped off the face of the earth if it does not receive a little wisdom
and caring from humanity.

Like stem cell research in Michigan.

www.CureMichigan.com
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Y! Messenger

Instant hello

Chat over IM with

group members.

Healthy Living

Learn to live life

to the fullest

on Yahoo! Groups.

Cat Zone

on Yahoo! Groups

Join a Group

all about cats.

Need to Reply?

Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.

Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the Web

Monday, October 27, 2008

[StemCellInformation] Digest Number 762

Messages In This Digest (2 Messages)

Messages

1.

The National Republic Online-Change of One Word Effects Stem Cell Re

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

Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:48 pm (PDT)


http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjM0MGNmZjY2NGIyYzYzMjhmMzI0MGR\
mODZlZmM5ZDA

<http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjM0MGNmZjY2NGIyYzYzMjhmMzI0MG\
RmODZlZmM5ZDA
>

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Going Out With a Bang [Stephen Spruiell
<mailto:sspruiell@nationalreview.com> ]

The 2008 Republican Platform Committee has finally reached the finish
line, but before it crossed it tripped up on the issue of stem-cell
research. When the committee reached the stem-cell language, North
Carolina delegate Mary Summa offered what appeared on the surface to be
a small change. Summa sought to change the sentence:

We call for a ban on human cloning and a ban on the creation of and
experimentation on human embryos for research purposes.

to read:

We call for a ban on human cloning and a ban on the creation of or
experimentation on human embryos for research purposes.

thus severing experimentation on human embryos from their creation for
that purpose. It's just one word, but it has huge implications. It is a
call for a total ban on embryonic stem-cell research, including
privately funded research using frozen embryos from in-vitro
fertilization (IVF) clinics. By contrast, the 2004 platform was in
accord with President Bush's policy at the time, which made limited
federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research available for the first
time.

In introducing her amendment, Summa gave an emotional speech in which
she said, "I want my five children to live in a world where the weak are
protected from the strong. I want them to live in a world where all life
is protected."

The amendment drew opposition from Indiana delegate and pro-life
activist James Bopp Jr. "The sentence now in the draft, which ties the
creation to the experimentation, is exactly right," Bopp said. He argued
that the amendment would declare off-limits certain types of life-saving
therapeutic research he supports.

Bopp's objection was itself objected to by several delegates who
supported the amendment. Then Summa asked Bopp point-blank, "Under the
current language in this document, does this mean that you can
experiment on human embryos that are frozen in IVF clinics?"

Bopp answered, "The way I read this sentence is that it does have
limited application. It does not call for a ban on everything that I
might support. The amendment that has been put forward would ban not
only the type of research that I oppose, but also the types of
therapeutic research I have described."

He added, "We should not be in the business of prohibiting therapeutic
research."

At this point, Kansas delegate Kris Kobach offered an amendment to
Summa's amendment that would have replaced the words "experimentation
on" with "destruction of." Committee co-chairman Sen. Richard Burr asked
Summa if she would accept the change. She replied, "I certainly would
accept the amendment, but the former prosecutor in me would like Mr.
Bopp to answer my question."

Bopp quipped, "The defense attorney in me would say I have answered her
question."

Bopp then offered his own amendment to Summa's amendment. At this point
Burr broke it up. He instructed Summa, Bopp and Kobach to confer until
they had come up with a single amendment on stem-cells. The committee
then moved on to other matters.

When the three of them returned, Summa's eyes were red and swollen. She
re-submitted her original amendment, without modification. Burr called
for a vote, and the motion passed.

The 2008 Republican Platform calls for a ban on all embryonic stem-cell
research, public or private.

08/27 08:40 PM
<http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjM0MGNmZjY2NGIyYzYzMjhmMzI0MG\
RmODZlZmM5ZDA=
>

2.

The 2008 Republican Platform Committee has finally reached the finis

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

Mon Oct 27, 2008 6:18 am (PDT)


http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjM0MGNmZjY2NGIyYzYzMjhmMzI0MGR\
mODZlZmM5ZDA

<http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjM0MGNmZjY2NGIyYzYzMjhmMzI0MG\
RmODZlZmM5ZDA
>

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Going Out With a Bang [Stephen Spruiell
<mailto:sspruiell@nationalreview.com> ]

The 2008 Republican Platform Committee has finally reached the finish
line, but before it crossed it tripped up on the issue of stem-cell
research. When the committee reached the stem-cell language, North
Carolina delegate Mary Summa offered what appeared on the surface to be
a small change. Summa sought to change the sentence:

We call for a ban on human cloning and a ban on the creation of and
experimentation on human embryos for research purposes.

to read:

We call for a ban on human cloning and a ban on the creation of or
experimentation on human embryos for research purposes.

thus severing experimentation on human embryos from their creation for
that purpose. It's just one word, but it has huge implications. It is a
call for a total ban on embryonic stem-cell research, including
privately funded research using frozen embryos from in-vitro
fertilization (IVF) clinics. By contrast, the 2004 platform was in
accord with President Bush's policy at the time, which made limited
federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research available for the first
time.

In introducing her amendment, Summa gave an emotional speech in which
she said, "I want my five children to live in a world where the weak are
protected from the strong. I want them to live in a world where all life
is protected."

The amendment drew opposition from Indiana delegate and pro-life
activist James Bopp Jr. "The sentence now in the draft, which ties the
creation to the experimentation, is exactly right," Bopp said. He argued
that the amendment would declare off-limits certain types of life-saving
therapeutic research he supports.

Bopp's objection was itself objected to by several delegates who
supported the amendment. Then Summa asked Bopp point-blank, "Under the
current language in this document, does this mean that you can
experiment on human embryos that are frozen in IVF clinics?"

Bopp answered, "The way I read this sentence is that it does have
limited application. It does not call for a ban on everything that I
might support. The amendment that has been put forward would ban not
only the type of research that I oppose, but also the types of
therapeutic research I have described."

He added, "We should not be in the business of prohibiting therapeutic
research."

At this point, Kansas delegate Kris Kobach offered an amendment to
Summa's amendment that would have replaced the words "experimentation
on" with "destruction of." Committee co-chairman Sen. Richard Burr asked
Summa if she would accept the change. She replied, "I certainly would
accept the amendment, but the former prosecutor in me would like Mr.
Bopp to answer my question."

Bopp quipped, "The defense attorney in me would say I have answered her
question."

Bopp then offered his own amendment to Summa's amendment. At this point
Burr broke it up. He instructed Summa, Bopp and Kobach to confer until
they had come up with a single amendment on stem-cells. The committee
then moved on to other matters.

When the three of them returned, Summa's eyes were red and swollen. She
re-submitted her original amendment, without modification. Burr called
for a vote, and the motion passed.

The 2008 Republican Platform calls for a ban on all embryonic stem-cell
research, public or private.

08/27 08:40 PM
<http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjM0MGNmZjY2NGIyYzYzMjhmMzI0MG\
RmODZlZmM5ZDA=
>

Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Y! Messenger

Group get-together

Host a free online

conference on IM.

Yahoo! Groups

Everyday Wellness Zone

Check out featured

healthy living groups.

Best of Y! Groups

Discover groups

that are the best

of their class.

Need to Reply?

Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.

Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the Web

Friday, October 24, 2008

[StemCellInformation] Digest Number 761

Messages In This Digest (2 Messages)

Messages

1.

SHAME ON MICHIGAN CATHOLIC CONFERENCE: Lies Discredit Church

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

Fri Oct 24, 2008 12:53 pm (PDT)


SHAME ON MICHIGAN CATHOLIC CONFERENCE: Lies Discredit Church

In a series of dishonest TV ads, print media, and DVD mass mailings, the
Michigan Catholic Conference is attacking stem cell research, maligning
Proposal 2— and undermining the good name of the Catholic Church.

My family is Catholic. But the truth is the truth, and when the Church
is wrong, it's wrong.

The Church is run by human beings, who can make mistakes. When the
Church ordered Joan of Arc to be burned to death as a witch, that was a
mistake. When the Spanish Inquisition tortured and murdered Jews and
took their money, that was a crime. When the Vatican maintained silence
about the Nazis in World War II, that was a sin of omission, for which
Pope John Paul II personally apologized, to his great credit.

And when expensive TV ads (paid for by the Michigan Catholic Conference)
talk about Proposal 2 wanting to raise taxes, or clone people, or mix
cows and human eggs together, these are deliberate and knowing lies.

Proposal 2 does not raise Michigan taxes one cent. Proposal 2 does not
change Michigan's strict law against cloning, which still carries a
jail sentence. And the only embryonic stem cell research Proposal 2
supports is on blastocysts left over from in vitro fertility
procedures—biological material that would otherwise be thrown away.

Right now, the Church's leadership is out of touch with its members,
the vast majority of whom support embryonic stem cell research.*

That is forgivable. Down through history many religions have been slow
to support medical breakthroughs. Anesthesia was forbidden by the Church
because the Good Book said women were supposed to "bring forth
(their) children in pain." The small pox vaccine was opposed because
it was thought the disease was God's punishment for sin.

Even X-rays were opposed because it was thought they might be used to
see through women's clothing!

But the Church is not supposed to lie, ever. "Thou shalt not bear
false witness" is a Biblical Commandment which applies to upper
management like everybody else.

Anti-Proposal 2 advertisements (paid for by the Michigan Catholic
Conference) are filled with manipulation, misinformation, deceit: so
many lies, it is difficult to answer them all.

Each ad is built around a different falsehood.

Here are a few:

1. Alleged tax increase: false. The ad shows an actor dressed as a
custodian shoveling bundles of dollar bills into a wheelbarrow. The
camera pulls back, and the money is shaped like the state of Michigan.
Michigan can't afford to spend millions of dollars on stem cell
research, the ad says. The reality? Proposal 2 has no taxation. Zero.
There is not a single tax dollar in the whole measure. It is what is
called a "permissions bill", merely allowing scientists to do
their work without fear of imprisonment.

2. Another ad shows fictitious cloning companies, with fake names like
"Clone Crop", implying that Proposal 2 would allow the cloning
of people. This is utterly false. The reality is plain, and verifiable:
Michigan has strict laws prohibiting cloning, including a ten year jail
sentence; nothing in Proposal 2 changes that.

3. In a genuinely ridiculous ad, an actor in a cow costume raises his
hoof in objection to a mad scientist wanting to make cow-people. This
would be laughable if the purpose was not so damaging. The only kind of
embryonic stem cell research Proposal 2 supports is the use of
blastocysts that would otherwise be thrown away: leftover biological
materials already destined for the trash.

4. The most recent ad is perhaps the worst. One of the cruelest acts
ever perpetrated by a government was the Tuskegee Airmen Syphilis
Experiment. This was a crime against humanity done by the U.S. Public
Health Service, a symbol of shame—and now the MCC is attempting to
tie that act of criminality to modern-day stem cell research.

Let's take a look at reality.

First, what was the Tuskegee Airmen Syphilis Experiment? Google it. Find
out about it, because it was a crime of Nazi-like evil, which must never
be allowed to happen again.

Over forty years, 1932 to 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service denied
cure to 399 African-American men with syphilis—even after penicillin
was invented.

Those men could have been cured. But the government denied them the
medicine which would have made them well. Many of them died because that
medical advance was withheld.

Is this not very much like what the Michigan Catholic Conference is
trying to do with these ads? As penicillin was denied to suffering
African-Americans, even so research which might ease suffering and save
lives for literally millions of Americans today is being held back.

Fortunately, survivors and family members of the Tuskegee Airmen tragedy
have spoken out, objecting to the misleading advertisements.

"It's disgraceful that they would use this horrible chapter in
American history to score cheap political points and block patients from
hope and cures," said Aurelia E. Alexander Smith of Detroit, whose
late father, Capt. Halbert L. Alexander was a Tuskegee Airman. "My
hope is that people who see this ad aren't fooled by the lies, and
instead listen to the facts about stem cell research."

Is the Michigan Catholic Conference (MCC) responsible for the
outrageous lies in this ads? Absolutely, because it paid for them. The
MCC is the single largest contributor to the opposition to Proposal 2.
That is a matter of public record.

If the Michigan Catholic Conference wants to make a religious objection
to the research, that is fine. It has every right to do so, just as some
faith communities are opposed to blood transfusions, and forbid their
membership to accept that medical treatment.

But lying is different. A church is supposed to be honest. If it
deliberately and publicly deceives, not once but systematically, over
and over-- how shall it be trusted?

Catholics everywhere should speak up. The faith of millions demands a
public apology for these disgraceful ads.

And if anybody reading this would like to try and help balance the
incredibly damaging impact of those TV commercials (which are being run
over and over in Michigan), they need only click on the following:

www.CureMichigan.com <http://www.curemichigan.com/>

If you can, do what I just did and make a small donation. I put in
another $25—I know, big spender, huh—but the good news is that
money will be doubled. A matching grant has been promised, so that every
dollar contributed will be matched by one from an anonymous donor.

Ads to answer the lies have been made, but it is difficult to find the
money to pay for them being aired. The Catholic Church is the largest
property owner in the world, and has extremely deep pockets. It would be
a shame if their ads were not countered for lack of a few dollars.

But whether you can afford to contribute or not, go to
www.CureMichigan.com <http://www.curemichigan.com/> , and take a look at
the honest work these citizens of Michigan are doing.

They are standing up for everyone. The entire nation will benefit from
their efforts to reverse what have been called the most restrictive
anti-science laws in the nation.

They are fighting for the right of every American family to have access
to the best medical care science can provide.

We must not let them stand alone.

*A recent national survey sponsored by the National Catholic Reporter
shows "77% of American Catholics support stem cell research on
excess embryos." This is in line with other polls such as that done
by Belden Russonello & Stewart, which found that "69% of Catholics
support stem cell research with early human embryos"—July, 2008
Don C. Reed
Sponsor, Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research Act
co-chair, Californians for Cures
Vice President, Public Policy, Americans for Cures
2.

Going Out With a Bang   [Stephen Spruiell]

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

Fri Oct 24, 2008 12:55 pm (PDT)


View the Following Article First

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjM0MGNmZjY2NGIyYzYzMjhmMzI0MGR\
mODZlZmM5ZDA

<http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjM0MGNmZjY2NGIyYzYzMjhmMzI0MG\
RmODZlZmM5ZDA
>

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Going Out With a Bang [Stephen Spruiell
<mailto:sspruiell@nationalreview.com> ]

The 2008 Republican Platform Committee has finally reached the finish
line, but before it crossed it tripped up on the issue of stem-cell
research. When the committee reached the stem-cell language, North
Carolina delegate Mary Summa offered what appeared on the surface to be
a small change. Summa sought to change the sentence:

We call for a ban on human cloning and a ban on the creation of and
experimentation on human embryos for research purposes.

to read:

We call for a ban on human cloning and a ban on the creation of or
experimentation on human embryos for research purposes.

thus severing experimentation on human embryos from their creation for
that purpose. It's just one word, but it has huge implications. It is a
call for a total ban on embryonic stem-cell research, including
privately funded research using frozen embryos from in-vitro
fertilization (IVF) clinics. By contrast, the 2004 platform was in
accord with President Bush's policy at the time, which made limited
federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research available for the first
time.

In introducing her amendment, Summa gave an emotional speech in which
she said, "I want my five children to live in a world where the weak are
protected from the strong. I want them to live in a world where all life
is protected."

The amendment drew opposition from Indiana delegate and pro-life
activist James Bopp Jr. "The sentence now in the draft, which ties the
creation to the experimentation, is exactly right," Bopp said. He argued
that the amendment would declare off-limits certain types of life-saving
therapeutic research he supports.

Bopp's objection was itself objected to by several delegates who
supported the amendment. Then Summa asked Bopp point-blank, "Under the
current language in this document, does this mean that you can
experiment on human embryos that are frozen in IVF clinics?"

Bopp answered, "The way I read this sentence is that it does have
limited application. It does not call for a ban on everything that I
might support. The amendment that has been put forward would ban not
only the type of research that I oppose, but also the types of
therapeutic research I have described."

He added, "We should not be in the business of prohibiting therapeutic
research."

At this point, Kansas delegate Kris Kobach offered an amendment to
Summa's amendment that would have replaced the words "experimentation
on" with "destruction of." Committee co-chairman Sen. Richard Burr asked
Summa if she would accept the change. She replied, "I certainly would
accept the amendment, but the former prosecutor in me would like Mr.
Bopp to answer my question."

Bopp quipped, "The defense attorney in me would say I have answered her
question."

Bopp then offered his own amendment to Summa's amendment. At this point
Burr broke it up. He instructed Summa, Bopp and Kobach to confer until
they had come up with a single amendment on stem-cells. The committee
then moved on to other matters.

When the three of them returned, Summa's eyes were red and swollen. She
re-submitted her original amendment, without modification. Burr called
for a vote, and the motion passed.

The 2008 Republican Platform calls for a ban on all embryonic stem-cell
research, public or private.

08/27 08:40 PM
<http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjM0MGNmZjY2NGIyYzYzMjhmMzI0MG\
RmODZlZmM5ZDA=
>

Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Y! Messenger

PC-to-PC calls

Call your friends

worldwide - free!

Featured Y! Groups

and category pages.

There is something

for everyone.

All-Bran

10 Day Challenge

Join the club and

feel the benefits.

Need to Reply?

Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.

Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the Web

Recent Posts