Jolie Rouge

Missouri's stem-cell mistake
By David Prentice
Wed Dec 27, 3:00 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Few issues dominated news in Missouri this year like stem-cell research. In November, Amendment 2, a pro-embryonic-stem-cell measure, passed with less than 51 percent of the vote. Media nationwide cheered the result.

Today, the cheap slogans are gone. But the destructive impact of the law's fine print is not. At the time, supporters called it the "anti-cloning" amendment. Actually, it writes legal protection for human cloning into Missouri's constitution. The ethical and moral implications are significant and disturbing.

Bankrolled by biotech

Here's a warning to other states looking to follow suit: Don't get hooked by the lure of stem-cell research riches. You'll just end up corrupting science, the law, and the sanctity of human life.

The pro-Amendment 2 forces, girded by a $30 million campaign bankrolled by biotech special interests, might have expected a greater margin of victory, considering opponents had a tenth of that to spend. It seems $30 million is the price tag for mass deception.

Hidden provision for human cloning

The first page of Amendment 2 claims to ban human cloning. A couple pages later, buried in the proverbial fine print, the amendment pledges protection for "somatic cell nuclear transfer."

This scientifically sexy phrase is little more than intentional misdirection. Nuclear transfer is cloning - a fact that the National Academies of Science and the American Medical Association recognize.

Quite simply, nuclear transfer entails fusing a woman's egg with the DNA of another cell, creating a living human embryo. The embryo is then allowed to grow several days until it is ripped apart to harvest its stem cells like a cash crop.

Thus, biotech special interests surreptitiously achieved constitutional protection of human cloning under the guise of a ban. Yet, sadly, only 49 percent of Missourians were able to wade through the swamps of disinformation.

Human eggs put up for bid

Now that the cloning license is constitutionally protected in Missouri, there is a new demand for millions of fresh human eggs. But this is no problem for the cloners. Amendment 2 specifically allows fertility clinics to purchase women's eggs for any amount of money. Thus, women's fertility is put up for bid in the marketplace, and women's bodies are commodified and sold to the highest bidder.

Amendment 2 supporters may claim that such an assessment of Missouri's future is scaremongering. They may say that the future in Missouri is bright, that "Amendment 2 will usher in new investment and cures."

In truth, private investors have found it difficult to find funds for embryonic stem-cell research. This is the very reason big biotech needs Missourian taxpayer dollars to fund its morally offensive research.

Embryonic stem cells don't deliver

The implication that embryonic stem cells will provide "life-saving cures" - the same implication made by Michael J. Fox in his highly publicized television ads - is patently false.

Such an assessment not only disingenuously portrays opponents as heartless bio-Luddites, but it inaccurately portrays the science.

To date, research scientists have failed to provide even one treatment for human patients with embryonic stem cells. Furthermore, trials in mice have repeatedly shown that the treatment will be problematic.

At its best, embryonic stem-cell research is unnecessary; at its worst, it's deeply unethical. Peddling this false hope to desperate people is shameful. Adult stem cells, meanwhile, are producing treatments and hope for people right now.

Other possible ballot initiatives

Perhaps an honest assessment of these facts will effect a change of heart among Missourians and a collective reassessment of Amendment 2, possibly in 2008, but it's not likely. And Amendment 2 forbids anyone from discouraging "stem cell-related activity," and makes it a punishable offense. So much for free speech.

More and more officials say they want to bring embryonic stem-cell research to their state. In the next election cycle, it's likely that several states will have measures such as Amendment 2 on the ballot.

But government should never be able to veto the inviolable dignity of human life.

When citizens give the state the power to dispose of society's most defenseless members, democracy devolves into tyranny.

* Dr. David Prentice, senior fellow for Life Sciences at the Family Research Council and affiliated scholar at the Center for Clinical Bioethics at Georgetown University Medical Center, worked on the Amendment 2 project in Missouri.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20061227/cm_csm/yprentice

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

MIKAER

Are we not currently cloning cattle to eat?

Jolie Rouge

Human stem cells found in amniotic fluid
By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor
Sun Jan 7, 2:53 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Stem cells nearly as powerful as embryonic stem cells can be found in the amniotic fluid that protects babies in the womb, U.S. researchers reported on Sunday.

They used them to create muscle, bone, fat, blood vessel, nerve and liver cells in the laboratory and said they believe the placenta and amniotic fluid can provide one more source of the valued cells, which scientists hope will someday transform medicine.

They would also provide a non-controversial source of the cells, which are found with difficulty throughout the body and in days-old embryos. Embryonic cells are considered the most malleable of the various types of stem cells, but these amniotic fluid-derived cells are a close second, said Dr. Anthony Atala, of the Institute for Regenerative Medicine at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, who led the study.

"Our hope is that these cells will provide a valuable resource for tissue repair and for engineered organs as well," Atala said in a statement. "I feel these cells are pluripotent like human embryonic stem cells."

Pluripotent means the cells can give rise to any type of tissue in the body -- blood, nerve, muscle, and so on. Adult stem cells, found in the tissues and blood of fetuses, babies and adults, are already partly differentiated and are less adaptable.

The use of human embryonic stem cells is controversial in some countries, including the United States. President Bush has restricted federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research, although researchers using private money can do as they please and Congress, even before the Democrats took over, was planning ways to encourage more research.

PROVEN PROPERTIES

Writing in the journal Nature Biotechnology, Atala and colleagues described how they have spent seven years proving the properties of these cells. "It has been known for decades that both the placenta and amniotic fluid contain multiple progenitor cell types from the developing embryo, including fat, bone, and muscle," Atala said. "We asked the question, 'Is there a possibility that within this cell population we can capture true stem cells?' The answer is yes."

They used discarded samples from amniocentesis, a test used to check fetuses for birth defects. The cells come from the fetus, which breathes and sucks in, then excretes, the amniotic fluid throughout pregnancy, Atala told reporters in a telephone conference.

Tests in mice showed the stem cells could be used to replace damaged brain cells, and could be "printed" onto structures using technology similar to that seen in inkjet printers to make bone tissue.

Like embryonic stem cells, they appear to thrive in lab dishes for years, while normal cells, called somatic cells, die after a time. "They are easier to grow than human embryonic stem cells," Atala added in a telephone interview. And, unlike embryonic stem cells, they do not form a type of benign tumor called a teratoma, he said.

Atala said a bank with 100,000 specimens of the amniotic stem cells theoretically could supply 99 percent of the U.S. population with perfect genetic matches for transplants.

They are not found in cord blood, a source of a different type of stem cell used mostly to treat leukemia. But they could be banked in much the same way cord blood is now banked, Atala said. "This is early work," Atala cautioned. "It is still several years away before we try this in a patient."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070107/...cells_fluid_dc


Amniotic fluid yields stem cells
By PAUL ELIAS, AP Biotechnology Writer
1 hour, 26 minutes ago

Scientists reported Sunday they had found a plentiful source of stem cells in the fluid that cushions babies in the womb and produced a variety of tissue types from these cells — sidestepping the controversy over destroying embryos for research.

Researchers at Wake Forest University and Harvard University reported the stem cells they drew from amniotic fluid donated by pregnant women hold much the same promise as embryonic stem cells. They reported they were able to extract the stem cells without harm to mother or fetus and turn their discovery into several different tissue cell types, including brain, liver and bone. "Our hope is that these cells will provide a valuable resource for tissue repair and for engineered organs as well," said Dr. Anthony Atala, head of Wake Forest's regenerative medicine institute and senior researcher on the project.

It took Atala's team some seven years of research to determine the cells they found were truly stem cells that "can be used to produce a broad range of cells that may be valuable for therapy."

However, the scientists noted they still don't know exactly how many different cell types can be made from the stem cells found in amniotic fluid. They also said that even preliminary tests in patients are years away.

Still, Atala said the research reported in the scientific journal Nature Biotechnology expands far beyond similar work discussed at a heart research conference in November. There, Swiss researcher Simon Hoerstrup said he managed to turn amniotic fluid stem cells into heart cells that could be grown into replacement valves. Hoerstrup has yet to publish his work in a scientific journal.

Atala said the new research has found even more promising stem cells with the potential to turn into many more medically useful replacement parts. "We have other cell lines cooking," Atala said.

The hallmark of human embryonic stem cells, which are created in the first days after conception, is the ability to turn into any of the more than 220 cell types that make up the human body. Researchers are hopeful they can train these primordial cells to repair damaged organs in need of healthy cells.

The cells from amniotic fluid "can clearly generate a broad range of important cell types, but they may not do as many tricks as embryonic stem cells," said Dr. Robert Lanza, chief scientist at the stem cell company Advanced Cell Technology. "Either way, I think this work represents a giant step forward for stem cell research."

It's the latest advance in the so-called regenerative medicine field that has sprung from Atala's lab in Winston-Salem, N.C. In April, Atala and his colleagues rebuilt bladders for seven young patients using live tissue grown in the lab.

In the latest work, Atala's team extracted a small number of stem cells swimming among the many other cell types in the amniotic fluid. One of the more promising aspects of the research is that some of the DNA of the amnio stem cells contained Y chromosomes, which means the cells came from the babies rather than the pregnant moms.

Dr. George Daley, a Harvard University stem cell researcher, said that finding raises the possibility that someday expectant parents can freeze amnio stem cells for future tissue replacement in a sick child without fear of immune rejection.

Nonetheless, Daley said the discovery shouldn't be used as a replacement for human embryonic stem cell research. "While they are fascinating subjects of study in their own right, they are not a substitute for human embryonic stem cells, which allow scientists to address a host of other interesting questions in early human development," said Daley, who began work last year to clone human embryos to produce stem cells.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070108/...e/stem_cells_6
___

On the Net:

Wake Forest regenerative medicine institute: http://www.wfirm.org/

Nature Biotechnology: http://www.nature.com/nbt/index.html

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Congress to open 2nd stem cell showdown
By LAURAN NEERGAARD, AP Medical Writer
Mon Jan 8, 5:59 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Congress opens a second showdown with President Bush over embryonic stem cells this week, with Democrats now in charge and hoping to push through an expansion of taxpayer-funded research into the controversial cells.

At stake is whether cells that scientists consider the most promising will be the ones most used in the race to develop cures for dozens of diseases.

Complicating that question: There are different types of stem cells. Fetal stem cells found floating in amniotic fluid are the latest to make headlines, a finding cited by foes of the embryonic stem cell legislation that is certain to pass the House Thursday. "We don't have to split the nation on this if we've got an alternative," said Rep. Phil Gingrey (news, bio, voting record), R-Ga., an obstetrician who opposes embryonic stem cell research because culling the cells from 5-day-old embryos destroys them.

"What we hope is that scientists will find ways to unlock the promise of stem cells without having to force people into the choice of claiming a human life in so doing," White House spokesman Tony Snow said Monday, making clear the president hasn't changed his stand since vetoing an identical bill to expand embryonic stem cell research just six months ago.

So why try again, when even supporters doubt they can override another veto? Polls show a majority of Americans support embryonic stem cell research, and Democrats say the public demanded action by casting ballots for stem cell supporters in the November election.

Focusing on preliminary "alternatives" like the amniotic stem cells won't fool that public, added Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa. "If we truly want to cure and treat diseases that afflict so many people in this country, our nation's top scientists should be allowed to pursue stem cell research of all kinds, be it embryonic, adult or amniotic," he said.

The scientific community stands firm that research, not ideology, must determine stem cells' true promise — and that embryonic stem cells so far are backed by the most promising evidence that one day they might be used to grow replacements for damaged tissue, such as new insulin-producing cells for diabetics or new nerve connections to restore movement after spinal injury. "Let's let the laboratories worldwide figure out which ones are the best for the task at hand, and that's discovering treatments and cures for people who need them," adds bioethicist Christopher Scott, who heads the Stanford Program on Stem Cells and Society.

He is tracking how batches of embryonic stem cells created by U.S. researchers are being shipped abroad, and worries that other countries more aggressively pursuing the field may be first to turn the master cells into cures unavailable to Americans. "Will patients have to travel to Australia to get the therapies?" he asks.

Embryonic stem cells are able to morph into any of the more than 220 cell types that make up the human body. They typically are culled from fertility-clinic leftovers otherwise destined to be thrown away. But because the culling kills the embryos, Bush on Aug. 9, 2001, restricted government funding to research using only the embryonic stem cell lines then in existence, groups of stem cells kept alive and propagating in lab dishes.

The problem: There are only about 21 of those lines available for study, most created in ways that preclude use in humans. At least 300 more lines now are available that many scientists insist are better suited for implantation into sick people.

The new legislation wouldn't fund the creation of stem cell lines and hence any embryo destruction, but it would allow the National Institutes of Health to fund research using those already existing newer stem cell lines.

The federal stalemate hasn't halted the work: Scientists are using private money to research newer cell lines, and five states are pouring millions into it. Indeed, when the NIH listed eight top advancements in the field for 2006, five of the projects involved privately funded cell lines. What about other approaches? Embryonic stem cells mature into adult stem cells that make only a certain type of tissue. Scientists one day hope to turn back the clock, turning, say, blood-producing stem cells found in bone marrow into the type that could grow a liver.

A study in Oregon is transplanting stem cells from aborted fetuses into the brains of children with a killer neurologic disease, to see if they might stop the damage.

Fetuses also shed stem cells into the amniotic fluid cushioning them, allowing scientists to cull those cells harmlessly when pregnant women undergo birth-defect tests. Those cells can turn into several different tissue types, but don't yet seem as flexible as embryonic ones.

And scientists are working on ways to cull stem cells from embryos without killing them.

All this work is years away from fruition, caution specialists — and studying one at the expense of another could mean missing breakthroughs. For example, the pancreas doesn't seem to harbor adult stem cells, explains Dr. Leonard Zon, stem cell chief at Children's Hospital of Boston. "If you want to try to make cells that produce insulin, you have to use embryonic stem cells," he says. "New ways of making cells that have embryonic stem cell characteristics are very important to pursue, but they shouldn't inhibit ... the progress already moving forward."

___

EDITOR'S NOTE — Lauran Neergaard covers health and medical issues for The Associated Press in Washington.

Associated Press writer Laurie Kellman contributed to this report.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070108/...eat_stem_cells

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

House passes bill for stem cell research
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer
53 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The Democratic-controlled House Thursday passed a bill bolstering embryonic stem cell research that advocates say shows promise for numerous medical cures.

But the 253-174 vote fell short of the two-thirds margin required to overturn President Bush's promised veto, despite gains made by supporters in the November elections. Bush vetoed identical legislation last year and the White House on Thursday promised he would veto it again.

The White House said the bill — the third bill of the Democrats' first 100 hours agenda to pass the House — "would use federal taxpayer dollars to support and encourage the destruction of human life for research."

At stake was whether research on cells taken from human embryos — considered by scientists to be the most promising approach to developing potential treatments or cures for dozens of diseases — should be underwritten with taxpayer funds.

The debate raises passions because the research typically involves the destruction of frozen embryos created for in vitro fertilization. It draws fierce opposition from anti-abortion lawmakers and like-minded constituents who believe their taxes should not fund such research. Proponents of the research said it is done on embryos that would otherwise be discarded from fertility clinics anyway.

"I support stem cell research with only one exception — research that requires killing human life," said Minority Leader John Boehner (news, bio, voting record), R-Ohio. "Taxpayer-funded stem cell research must be carried out in an ethical manner in a way that respects the sanctity of human life. Fortunately, ethical stem cell alternatives continue to flourish in the scientific community."

Democrats countered with Rep. James Langevin (news, bio, voting record), D-R.I., an anti-abortion lawmaker who is paralyzed from the chest down from a handgun accident that occurred when he was a teenager. The research, Langevin said, offers "tremendous hope that not only stem cell research might lead one day to a cure for spinal cord injuries but one day a child with diabetes will no longer have to endure a lifetime of painful shots and tests."

Dr. Robert Lanza, a top stem cell researcher at Advanced Cell Technology, Inc., said that stem cell-based treatments could be just a few years away for eye and spinal cord injuries, but that a decade or more of research is needed before treatments might become available for diseases such as diabetes and Alzheimer's.

Polls show most Americans support embryonic stem cell research, and Democrats say the issue played a big role in the Nov. 7 elections that returned their party to the majority in the House and Senate.

But in the House, Democratic gains of 30 seats don't translate into anywhere near that number of new votes for the embryonic stem cell research bill, sponsored by Reps. Diana DeGette (news, bio, voting record), D-Colo., and Mike Castle, R-Del.

For starters, many Democratic freshmen defeated more moderate Republicans who voted for the bill when it originally passed in 2005 and on an unsuccessful veto override attempt last year. And some Republicans who supported the bill have been replaced with opponents of the measure.

As a result, House embryonic stem cell research proponents have gained only 15 votes over the high-water mark of 238 in the prior GOP-controlled House.

If every House member votes, it takes 290 votes to override a veto, and both the House and Senate must override a veto for a bill to become law without a president's signature.

Scientists still say, however, that embryonic stem cells so far are backed by the most promising evidence that one day they might be used to grow replacements for damaged tissue, such as new insulin-producing cells for diabetics or new nerve connections to restore movement after spinal injury.

The legislation would lift Bush's 2001 ban on federal dollars spent on deriving new stem cells from fertilized embryos. Bush's veto of the bill last year was the first veto of his presidency.

Embryonic stem cells are able to morph into any of the more than 220 cell types that make up the human body. Bush on Aug. 9, 2001, restricted government funding to research using only the embryonic stem cell lines then in existence, groups of stem cells kept alive and propagating in lab dishes.

But those 21 stem cell lines have many problems, and researchers say 300 newer lines, culled from fertility clinic leftovers otherwise destined to be thrown away, are considered better suited for implantation into sick Americans.

Scientists take those cells from a 5-day-old embryo, when it's bigger than the period at the end of this sentence.

___

The bill is H.R. 3.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070111/..._co/stem_cells
___

On the Net:

Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Florida OKs some stem cell research
By DAVID ROYSE
Wed Jan 31, 10:25 AM ET

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - Gov. Charlie Crist said Wednesday he planned to recommend that lawmakers spend state money for stem cell research, but only the kind that doesn't require the destruction of embryos.

Crist said he would recommend spending $20 million for a grant program to pay for studies that use cells culled from adults, umbilical cord blood and amniotic fluid donated by pregnant women. But he won't recommend paying for the most controversial — and many say most promising — type of research on embryonic stem cells. Crist said he opposed that because too many people — including state lawmakers — oppose destroying embryos, which is required to do the studies.

Crist didn't say exactly whether he approves of embryonic stem cell research himself. "I know it gives angst for some. I think we can do it in a way that doesn't cause that kind of angst," Crist said at The Associated Press Florida Legislative Planning Session, a meeting of newspaper editors.

"I'm pragmatic ... I want to be respectful of concerns that they might have," said Crist, a Republican. "I also want to make progress."

Two competing bills will be considered by lawmakers this year. One to be filed by Rep. Anitere Flores, R-Miami, will mirror Crist's proposal.

Another, filed by Rep. Franklin Sands, D-Weston, calls for spending $20 million on research that would include embryonic stem cell studies.

Researchers say the embryonic stem cells are promising in medical research because they have the ability to become any type of cell in the body. Crist on Wednesday noted new studies that show promise in amniotic stem cells.

Researchers reported earlier this year that the stem cells they drew from amniotic fluid donated by pregnant women hold much the same promise as embryonic stem cells. But they also cautioned that the research was early and that the use of embryonic cells in studies should continue.

Using embryonic stem cells in research is legal — they typically are culled from fertility-clinic leftovers otherwise destined to be thrown away.

But there is little money available for the studies because the federal government has refused to pay for research using new lines of stem cells from embryos since 2001. Cells that were harvested before then can still be used, although many researchers say they are decreasingly useful.

Crist said his plan would allow for spending state money on those lines of stem cells that were in existence before the federal ban.

Crist planned to formally announce the proposal later Wednesday in Tampa.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070131/...dmBHNlYwM3NTM-

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Calif. awards $45M in stem cell grants
By PAUL ELIAS, AP Biotechnology Writer
Fri Feb 16, 7:37 PM ET

BURLINGAME, Calif. - California's stem cell agency on Friday doled out nearly $45 million in research grants to about 20 state universities and nonprofit research laboratories, far exceeding the federal government's spending on the controversial work.

In issuing the first significant research grants in its two-year history, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine became the nation's biggest financial backer of human embryonic stem cell research. "Today, we are making history," Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who made a brief appearance at the agency's oversight board meeting.

Stanford University researchers were the biggest winners when they landed 12 grants worth a combined $8 million, including the first publicly financed human embryo cloning project.

The Republican governor's support of the research puts him at odds with the Bush administration, which has limited federal funding to about $25 million annually. California voters in 2004 passed Proposition 71 to create the institute and give it authority to borrow and spend $3 billion for the research.

Two lawsuits challenging the state agency's constitutionality have prevented it from borrowing the funds from Wall Street bond markets. The first research grants came from a $150 million loan from the state and another $31 million in loans from philanthropic organizations.

Schwarzenegger authorized the state loan last year, and said he would approve more state loans if the agency runs out of money before the lawsuits are resolved.

The research aims to use stem cells — created in the first days after conception and giving rise to all the organs and tissues — to replace diseased tissue.

But many social conservatives, including President Bush, oppose the work because embryos are destroyed in the process. The microscopic embryos are usually donated by fertility clinics.

The agency last year awarded $14 million in training grants for novice researchers, but the grants Friday were intended to fund more ambitious projects that aim to push the research out of the lab and into patients.

Thirty scientists who are new to the field and 27 more with stem cell research experience all received grants. "Our intent was to bring new ideas and new talent to human embryonic stem cell research," said agency president and chief scientist Zach Hall.

Next month, another round of 25 grants worth about $80 million will go to established stem cell scientists.

Four other states have also skirted federal restrictions with stem cell research funding schemes of their own: Connecticut has a 10-year, $100 million initiative; Illinois spent $10 million last year; Maryland has approved a $15 million budget; and New Jersey has spent about $25 million in two years.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070217/...AJ64NtfMWs0NUE



I study changes in stem cells
AMANDA KRAMER

Name: Lorraine Faxon Meisner

Occupation: Chief scientific officer of Cell Line Genetics; UW-Madison professor emerita

I started out not knowing what my interests were in life. I studied English literature and realized it just wasn't for me. I eventually switched into sociology and got a degree in anthropology at the University of Chicago.

But toward my last year, I was wondering about some of the unusual behavior I saw (like reactions to pain) while studying different cultures, and I started wondering how many of these cultural differences were due to environment or to heredity.

So, I started taking genetics and animal-behavior classes, and it was like the bells went off. I was so enchanted by these subjects. This would have been in the late 1950s.

I eventually went on to get a master's degree. My husband and I moved to Boston and I had a new baby (my second). I had originally arranged to work with a famous professor at Harvard, but when I got there, he had hired someone else, and I started looking hard for a job.

I became a technician at a lab at Harvard for a time and then got a call from a famous pathologist and began to work for him - and that's how I got into cytogenetics.

A few years passed and I eventually got my doctorate - and one more baby. I worked at the University of Virginia for a few years, and then had a post at Stanford, and now I've been at the UW for 38 years.

What I do now is I'm a professor emerita at UW and I recently started Cell Line Genetics with three colleagues.

I got interested in studying stem-cell lines and decided there was a great need for this kind of work. What we do is receive cell lines (usually growing in a little flask with a medium) from researchers, pharmaceutical companies or universities.

The lines can be taken from mice, humans or monkeys. If it's growing, we take it. By studying the changes that occur in the lines, it can provide a kind of window into normal development and how cancer starts, so we try to make sure those lines are normal to start with.

When we get the sample, we take it out and process it to get dividing cells. We put those cells on a slide to look at the chromosomes through a large microscope.

Then we tell the researchers (who sent us the sample) whether the cells are normal and we can make recommendations.

It's so exciting. It's a service I feel good about and we're finding out all sorts of wonderful things and working with motivated people. I'm here in University Research Park. It's a great place to work. There are all these young companies up and down the hall and everyone's always working on a project. Sometimes we get to share ideas or equipment. It's like borrowing a cup of sugar - only better.

http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/biz/...115881&ntpid=2

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Adult stem cell study flawed, panel says
By JOSHUA FREED, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 45 minutes ago

MINNEAPOLIS - A scientific panel says a 2002 study that suggested adult stem cells might be as useful as embryonic ones was flawed and its conclusions may be wrong, a finding that raises questions about the promise of a less controversial source for stem cells.

The research by Catherine Verfaillie at the University of Minnesota concluded that adult stem cells taken from the bone marrow of mice could grow into an array of biological tissues, including brain, heart, lung and liver.

So far only embryonic stem cells, which are commonly retrieved by destroying embryos at an early stage of development, are known to hold such regenerative promise. Many scientists believe they might one day be used to treat certain diseases and other conditions.

Opponents of stem cell research seized on the 2002 findings as evidence that stem cell science could move forward without destroying embryos. But Verfaillie has acknowledged flaws in parts of the study after inquiries from the British magazine New Scientist, which first publicized the questions last week.

A panel of experts commissioned by the university concluded that the process used to identify tissue derived from the adult stem cells was "significantly flawed, and that the interpretations based on these data, expressed in the manuscript, are potentially incorrect," according to a portion of the panel's findings released by the university.

The panel concluded that it wasn't clear whether the flaws mean Verfaillie's conclusions were wrong. It also determined that the flaws were mistakes, not falsifications.

Tim Mulcahy, vice president of research at the university, said it would be up to the scientific community to decide whether Verfaillie's study still stands up. "From her perspective, the findings stand. I think the scientific community will have to make their own opinion," he said.

Other researchers have been unable to duplicate Verfaillie's results since the 2002 publications, increasing their skepticism about her claims. But that may only be an indication of how difficult the cells are to work with, said Amy Wagers, a Harvard University stem cell researcher who was not involved in the investigation.

Verfaillie did not respond to a phone message left with her current employer, the Catholic University of Leuven in Belgium. She told the Star Tribune of Minneapolis in a story published Friday that the problem was "an honest mistake" that did not affect the study's conclusions about the potential of adult stem cells.

Her research was scrutinized after a writer for New Scientist noticed that some data from the original 2002 article in the journal Nature duplicated data in a second paper by Verfaillie around the same time in a different journal, even though they supposedly referred to different cells. Verfaillie told the Star Tribune that the duplication was an oversight and said she notified the University of Minnesota, which convened the panel to take a closer look at the research.

The editor of the London-based scientific journal Nature said in a statement, "We are in touch with the author and investigating the problems that have been mentioned. We have no further comment."

Dr. Diane Krause of Yale University, who (like Verfaillie) has studied using bone marrow as an alternative to embryonic stem cells, said she believes Verfaillie's research will hold up, despite being hard to repeat. "When it comes to Catherine, she's impeccable. She's one of the most careful scientists I know," Krause said.

Nigel Cameron, who runs the Institute on Biotechnology and the Human Future and is a bioethics professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law in the Illinois Institute of Technology, said scientists who have been trying to find a middle way on stem cells have seen their work seized by one side or the other for their own advantages. "This is a fascinating example of the way in which science is becoming politicized, on both sides of this debate," said Cameron, who supported President Bush's 2001 ban on federal dollars spent on deriving new stem cells from fertilized embryos. "It's no longer scientists in white coats coming up with facts. There are uses being made of the facts on all sides, and I think it's quite problematic."

___

National writer Matt Crenson in New York contributed to this report.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070224/...G2AWNU1aKs0NUE

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Illinois senate OKs stem cell research
Fri Feb 23, 12:38 PM ET

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - The Illinois Senate voted Friday to spend state tax dollars on embryonic stem cell research, despite objections from those who argue the research destroys human life.

The measure passed 35-23 and now goes to the Illinois House.

Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich has already used his executive powers to fund stem cell research. He created the Illinois Regenerative Medicine Institute, which has awarded $15 million in grants.

The Senate legislation would make the institute and its grants a part of state law.

Supporters say embryonic stem cells could yield treatments for a wide variety of diseases, including diabetes and Alzheimer's. They argue the cells are taken only from embryos created for in vitro fertilization that would otherwise be discarded. "They go into the public sewer system. I really believe my maker would want me to use these embryos to sustain and improve human life," said one supporter, Sen. Kirk Dillard, R-Hinsdale.

But opponents condemn the research because it involves the destruction of human embryos. "Obviously we all want cures to diseases. The question is, what are willing to sacrifice to get them?" said Sen. Chris Lauzen, R-Aurora. "The unique identity of an individual human being disappears for eternity."

Some senators also questioned the idea of spending money on the research when the state is already in trouble financially.

___

The bill is SB4.

On the Net: http://www.ilga.gov

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070223/...NiS_mJ9pus0NUE

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Report: Fetal stem cells trigger tumors in ill boy
By LAURAN NEERGAARD, AP Medical Writer
Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:01 pm ET

WASHINGTON – A family desperate to save a child from a lethal brain disease sought highly experimental injections of fetal stem cells — injections that triggered tumors in the boy's brain and spinal cord, Israeli scientists reported Tuesday.

Scientists are furiously trying to harness different types of stem cells — the building blocks for other cells in the body — to regrow damaged tissues and thus treat devastating diseases. But for all the promise, researchers have long warned that they must learn to control newly injected stem cells so they don't grow where they shouldn't, and small studies in people are only just beginning.

Tuesday's report in the journal PLoS Medicine is the first documented case of a human brain tumor — albeit a benign, slow-growing one — after fetal stem cell therapy, and hammers home the need for careful research. The journal is published by the Public Library of Science.

"Patients, please beware," said Dr. John Gearhart, a stem cell scientist at the University of Pennsylvania who wasn't involved in the Israeli boy's care but who sees similarly desperate U.S. patients head abroad to clinics that offer unproven stem cell injections.

"Cells are not drugs. They can misbehave in so many different ways, it just is going to take a good deal of time" to prove how best to pursue the potential therapy, Gearhart said.

The unidentified Israeli boy has a rare, fatal genetic disease with a tongue-twisting name — ataxia telangiectasia, or A-T. Degeneration of a certain brain region gradually robs these children of movement. Plus, a faulty immune system leads to frequent infections and cancers. Most die in their teens or early 20s.

Israeli doctors pieced together the child's history: When he was 9, the family traveled to Russia, to a Moscow clinic that provided injections of neural stem cells from fetuses — immature cells destined to grow into a main type of brain cells. The cells were injected into his brain and spinal cord twice more, at ages 10 and 12.

Back home in Israel at age 13, the boy's A-T was severe enough to require that he use a wheelchair when he also began complaining of headaches. Tests at Sheba Medical Center in Tel Aviv uncovered a growth pushing on his brain stem and a second on his spinal cord. Surgeons removed the spinal cord mass when the boy was 14, in 2006 and they say his general condition has remained stable since then.

But was the boy prone to tumors anyway or were the fetal stem cells to blame? A Tel Aviv University team extensively tested the tumor tissue and concluded it was the fetal cells. Among other evidence, some of the cells were female and had two normal copies of the gene that causes A-T — although that boy's underlying poor immune function could have allowed the growths to take hold.

Using stem cells from multiple fetuses that also were mixed with growth-spurring compounds "may have created a high-risk situation where abnormal growth of more than one cell occurred," wrote lead researcher Dr. Ninette Amariglio of Sheba Medical. She urged better research to "maximize the potential benefits of regenerative medicine while minimizing the risks."

This brain disease wasn't conducive to stem cell therapy in the first place, said stem cell specialist Dr. Marius Wernig of Stanford University, who said it's unclear exactly what was implanted.

"Stem cell transplantations have a humongous potential," Wernig said. But "if people rush out there without really knowing what they're doing ... that really backfires and can bring this whole field to a halt."


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090218/...em_cells_tumor

See also : Stem Cell Research

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

[b]Obama overturns Bush policy on stem cells
By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Philip Elliott, Associated Press Writer
15 mins ago

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Monday cleared the way for a significant increase in federal dollars for embryonic stem cell research and promised no scientific data will be "distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda."

Obama signed the executive order on the divisive stem cell issue and a memo addressing what he called scientific integrity before an East Room audience packed with scientists. He laced his remarks with several jabs at the way science was handled by former President George W. Bush.

"Promoting science isn't just about providing resources, it is also about protecting free and open inquiry," Obama said. "It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it's inconvenient especially when it's inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology."

He said his memorandum is meant to restore "scientific integrity to government decision-making." He called it the beginning of a process of ensuring his administration bases its decision on sound science; appoints scientific advisers based on their credentials, not their politics; and is honest about the science behind its decisions.

Fulfilling a campaign promise, Obama signed the order that on stem cell research that supporters believe could uncover cures for serious ailments from diabetes to paralysis. Proponents from former first lady Nancy Reagan to the late actor Christopher Reeve had pushed for ending the restrictions on research.

Obama paid tribute to Reeve, calling him a tireless advocate who was dedicated to raising awareness to the promise of research.

Obama's action reverses Bush's stem cell policy by undoing his 2001 directive that banned federal funding for research into stem lines created after Aug. 9, 2001.

The president said his administration would work aggressively to make up for the ground he said was lost due to Bush's decision, though it can't be known how much more federal money will be spent on the research until grants are applied for and issued.

"Medical miracles do not happen simply by accident," Obama declared.

Embryonic stem cells are master cells that can morph into any cell of the body. Scientists hope to harness them so they can create replacement tissues to treat a variety of diseases — such as new insulin-producing cells for diabetics, cells that could help those with Parkinson's disease or maybe even Alzheimer's, or new nerve connections to restore movement after spinal injury.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, criticized Obama, saying in a statement that the president had "rolled back important protections for innocent life, further dividing our nation at a time when we need greater unity to tackle the challenges before us."

Bush limited the use of taxpayer money to only the 21 stem cell lines that had been produced before his decision. He argued he was defending human life because days-old embryos — although typically from fertility clinics and already destined for destruction — are destroyed to create the stem cell lines.

The Obama order reverses that without addressing a separate legislative ban, which precludes any federal money for the development of stem cell lines. The legislation, however, does not prevent funds for research on those lines created without federal funding.

Researchers say the newer lines created with private money during the period of the Bush ban are healthier and better suited to creating treatment for diseases.

Obama called his decision a "difficult and delicate balance," an understatement of the intense emotions generated on both sides of the long, contentious debate. He said he came down on the side of the majority of Americans who support increased federal funding for the research, both because strict oversight would prevent problems and because of the great and lifesaving potential it holds. "Rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values," Obama said. "In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering."

Obama warned against overstating the eventual benefits of the research, but he said his administration "will vigorously support scientists who pursue this research," taking another slap at Bush in the process. "I cannot guarantee that we will find the treatments and cures we seek. No president can promise that. But I can promise that we will seek them actively, responsibly, and with the urgency required to make up for lost ground," he said.

It's a matter of competitive advantage globally as well, the president argued. "When government fails to make these investments, opportunities are missed. Promising avenues go unexplored," Obama said.

But the president was insistent that his order would not open the door to human cloning. "We will develop strict guidelines, which we will rigorously enforce, because we cannot ever tolerate misuse or abuse," Obama said. "And we will ensure that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090309/...ama_stem_cells

Because they care about results ... not just maintaining their goverment funding ...

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?