billvon 2,446 #26 March 9, 2009 >perhaps had it been kept private and not supplemented with lazy tax dollars, >the someone like you or me or even a Billvon wouldn't right now be the CEO of >the US Solar Panel Company . . . Quite possible! However, it's even more possible that you and I would not be having this conversation at all had not ARPAnet been turned into a more commercially useful network by those "lazy tax dollars." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #27 March 10, 2009 my parents went florida to texas, 3 hours late, dirty cars, bad food, overpriced tickets. My dad will not fly and he was not able to drive. When was the last time amtrack made a profit?........never. When was the last time it broke even? Never Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #28 March 10, 2009 I don't have a problem with federal dollars being used if they think a cure is viable. Hell, we fund research for cancer and heart disease.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #29 March 11, 2009 QuoteActually, regardless of what Obama decrees, I don't see this as changing the research at UW-Madison and Japan regarding use of non embryonic stem cell research. The potential of these so called IPS (induced pluripotent stem) cells is not yet known. They may be as versatile as embryonic stem cells, but much more work on both types of cells will be needed before that can be determined. Now those who are opposed to government regulation or intervention on anything/everything may not care or may be opposed on principle ... there’s an argument that the reversal of the Bush administration EO closes an ethical loop-hole. We all recognize (I hope) that the result of President GW Bush's policy is that the embryonic stem cell research has taken place in the US, but essentially WITHOUT government regulation, without any policy, and without any oversight. Those researchers and institutions engaged in embryonic stem cell research, in terms of research using creation or use of new embryonic stem cell lines, have been self-regulating, depending primarily on the findings and reports and suggested guidance of such societies as the National Academy of Sciences and the International Society for Stem Cell Research to determine institutional policy. I don’t have any reason to suspect that there are any malevolent ‘mad scientist’ types out there engaged in stem cell research … but one tool was absent from the metaphorical toolbox. In his Executive Order, President Obama requests, “Within 120 days from the date of this order, the Secretary, through the Director of NIH, shall review existing NIH Guidance and other widely recognized safeguards, and issue new NIH guidance on such research that is consistent with this order.” Thus, by making Federal funds available to the research, the government (primarily the NIH) will now start to issue guidance on the appropriate use of the embryos/appropriate research. This is extremely important. It allows for a public debate in which scientists, medical researchers, and the public can get involved to create real policies and guidance. I believe that with this Executive Order there is now LESS risk that research that is ethically or morally questionable will be conducted. Now there will be some guidance from the government through the individual scientists, medical researchers, bio-ethicists, and theologians who will be directly and indirectly involved in the Rule-Making process. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #30 March 11, 2009 QuoteI wonder if companies that supply truckloads of aborted fetuses will become the next hot stock pick. The Dickey amendment (added annually to the HHS Appropriation bill) prohibits the use of Federal funds for destruction of an embryo, i.e., for creation of stem cell lines. The President’s Executive Order allows Federal funding for research that utilize human embryonic stem cells but not for creation of those stem cells. The previous policy was no Federal funding for creation of stem cell lines and no Federal funding for research utilizing human embryonic stem cells, except for those cell lines created before 9 August 2001 - the new EO repeals that date. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,446 #31 March 11, 2009 > My dad will not fly and he was not able to drive. Glad he had Amtrak as an option, then! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #32 March 11, 2009 Ok, so if the new EO isn't allowing creation of new stem cell lines, the only thing it really does is create oversight by fed.gov - would you agree? Also, it seems like the new oversight will not affect research that is funded by private means.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #33 March 11, 2009 QuoteOk, so if the new EO isn't allowing creation of new stem cell lines, the only thing it really does is create oversight by fed.gov - would you agree? No. Research using cells lines created (derived) after 9 August 2001 are now eligible. There are lots of problems with the existing cells line due to age and storage -- that, perhaps just as much as the Bush admin EO, drove the development of IPS. It also eliminated federal fudning for cell lines derived without harming the nascent embryo, a technique that was not 'discovered' until after the 2001 EO. QuoteAlso, it seems like the new oversight will not affect research that is funded by private means. Yes. It also doesn't impact work done outside the US (of course). And yes, the same thing can be said for a lot of research from synthetic biology to immunology to bionanotechnology to polymers that may have chemical and biological weapons applications. It's a tool in the metaphorical toolbox. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #34 March 11, 2009 QuoteQuoteI wonder if companies that supply truckloads of aborted fetuses will become the next hot stock pick. The Dickey amendment (added annually to the HHS Appropriation bill) prohibits the use of Federal funds for destruction of an embryo, i.e., for creation of stem cell lines. The President’s Executive Order allows Federal funding for research that utilize human embryonic stem cells but not for creation of those stem cells. The previous policy was no Federal funding for creation of stem cell lines and no Federal funding for research utilizing human embryonic stem cells, except for those cell lines created before 9 August 2001 - the new EO repeals that date. /Marg I was just trying to cause trouble. It kinda worked, but not as welll as I'd hoped. This won't increase or fund abortions (not that I'd be all that concerned if it did....) "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #35 March 11, 2009 QuoteQuoteOk, so if the new EO isn't allowing creation of new stem cell lines, the only thing it really does is create oversight by fed.gov - would you agree? No. Research using cells lines created (derived) after 9 August 2001 are now eligible. There are lots of problems with the existing cells line due to age and storage -- that, perhaps just as much as the Bush admin EO, drove the development of IPS. That seems contrary to what you said here: QuoteThe Dickey amendment (added annually to the HHS Appropriation bill) prohibits the use of Federal funds for destruction of an embryo, i.e., for creation of stem cell lines. The President’s Executive Order allows Federal funding for research that utilize human embryonic stem cells but not for creation of those stem cells. Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #36 March 11, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteOk, so if the new EO isn't allowing creation of new stem cell lines, the only thing it really does is create oversight by fed.gov - would you agree? No. Research using cells lines created (derived) after 9 August 2001 are now eligible. There are lots of problems with the existing cells line due to age and storage -- that, perhaps just as much as the Bush admin EO, drove the development of IPS. That seems contrary to what you said here: QuoteThe Dickey amendment (added annually to the HHS Appropriation bill) prohibits the use of Federal funds for destruction of an embryo, i.e., for creation of stem cell lines. The President’s Executive Order allows Federal funding for research that utilize human embryonic stem cells but not for creation of those stem cells. Research using new cell lines that have been created since 9Aug2001 is now eligible for federal funding *but* not research creating new cell lines by methods that destroy embryos. New cell lines created that involved destruction of embryos would have been created without use of federal funding; the Dickey Amendment also only covers federally funded research. And then there is the nascent technique developed in 2008 to derive cells lines without destroying embryos. Like the IPS cells, that may be useful. Under the Bush admin EO, no federally funded work was possible that used cell lines potentially derived by that technique. That's not funding the creation of new cells lines through destruction of embryos. No contradiction. Those are just the two main changes; there are a few other that are even more complex -- a couple that I don't get but that are meaningful for those who do research, particularly into degenerative neurological diseases. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #37 March 11, 2009 Ok, that helps - thank you. If I understand you correctly, any stem cell lines created since 2001 and any new lines created via private funding will be able to be used for federally-funded research, however, the Dickey Amendment and the EO still prevent federal funding from being used to create new lines and neither the Amendment nor the EO disallow the new stem cell creation technologies. Does that about cover it?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #38 March 11, 2009 QuoteOk, that helps - thank you. If I understand you correctly, any stem cell lines created since 2001 and any new lines created via private funding will be able to be used for federally-funded research, Yes. Research may be funded - doesn't mean it *will be* -- but research using those cell lines is not automatically excluded from NIH funding. Quote however, the Dickey Amendment and the EO still prevent federal funding from being used to create new lines It's my understanding the Dickey rider - if attached to subsequent HHS appropriation bills would prevent the creation of new cell lines through destruction of embryos. Non-destructive methods to create new cells line would be eligible. The DIckey amendment predates the 2001 EO *and* was attached to HHS appropriation bills after the 2001 EO. Iiirc, HHS funds are 3-yr money. Quoteand neither the Amendment nor the EO disallow the new stem cell creation technologies. The EO rescinds the previous EO. EOs can't rescind Congressional Law (which the rider became when the HHS appropriation bills were signed). /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #39 March 11, 2009 we could do with out it, costly and ineffectent. He should have flown Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 0 #40 March 11, 2009 QuoteI wonder if companies that supply truckloads of aborted fetuses will become the next hot stock pick. Or paying "mothers" to abort their fetuses. Let's start the Abortion farms now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,446 #41 March 11, 2009 > Let's start the Abortion farms now. What, will they have to shut down those incinerators that have been running so well till now? Perhaps that could be the new standard to rally behind - "SAVE THE FETUS INCINERATORS! Make sure embryos go to waste!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #42 March 11, 2009 Quote> Let's start the Abortion farms now. What, will they have to shut down those incinerators that have been running so well till now? Perhaps that could be the new standard to rally behind - "SAVE THE FETUS INCINERATORS! Make sure embryos go to waste!" No, they'll still need them after they harvest the stem cells, not that you need that much to incinerate an 8-cell blastocyst.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #43 March 12, 2009 QuotePerhaps that could be the new standard to rally behind - "SAVE THE FETUS HUMAN INCINERATORS! Make sure embryos human life goes to waste!" Fixed for accuracy. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
