On 7/19/06, Larry Lyons wrote:
> > What's tech have to do with it.
>
> Everything. A state of the art stem cell research lab is beyond bleeding 
> edge. We just spent over 3/4's of a million on one PCR robot alone.

The tech department builds to specifications, they don't determine the
worthiness of the application.

> > I said what make you think the US Government is going to create some
> > kind of miracle cure
>
> Look up most of the major medical and biological breakthroughs in the last 40 
> years, they were either done by government scientists with the National 
> Institutes of Health or an affiliate, or funded directly by the NIH. Given 
> their track record, I'd say its a better than even chance that the government 
> via its research arm will come up with more than one miracle cure.
> >

I believe you and admit I'm way out of my league here, but aren't the
biotech's and the drug companies the ones laying out the bulk of the
research money for the major breakthroughs?


> > > The 22 lines you are going on and on about have been said to have
> > issues with contamination or just aren't able to be used for stem cell
> > research.
> >
> > I read that they are easily deconaminated.
>
> And what about such factors as the mouse cell contamination, or the 
> tumoricity. Those cannot be removed from the 22 cell lines. Moreover of the 
> cell lines many have lost viability and do not replicate beyond 2 or 3 times. 
> Thats nowhere near enough to be useful. Also many of the cell line now have a 
> tendancy to become cancerous now. That cannot be easily correct.

Stem-cell pioneer James A. Thomson has shown how to remove the animal
materials. I'm not sure about the other issues you mention but more
than 85 percent of the research being done worldwide uses these lines.

> > > 136 researchers huh, wow, that's ridiculous that you even quoted
> > that number. There are more researchers at 1 university.
> >
> > All doing stem cell research and they all need there own samples?
> > Then
> > how many do you need and where will they all come from?
>
> If your facility is receiving any government funding you cannot do stem cell 
> research except with one of the approved lines, otherwise you lose all 
> federal funding. Even if that money has nothing to do with the research in 
> the first place.

http://stemcells.nih.gov/StemCells/Templates/StemCellContentPage.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRORIGINALURL=%2finfo%2ffaqs%2easp&NRNODEGUID=%7bA604DCCE-2E5F-4395-8954-FCE1C05BECED%7d&NRCACHEHINT=NoModifyGuest#post8901
6. I am a university research administrator. One of our NIH-funded
investigators would like to use a cell line that was created after
August 9th, 2001, and it is not eligible for research using federal
funds. What should I tell the investigator who wants to work with
these cells in his laboratory?
Institutions need to provide clear instructions to investigators who
conduct research that is "unallowable" under federal research funding
policy. In laboratories where there is both federal and non-federal
funding, investigators and their staffs must separate allowable and
unallowable activities in such a way that permits the costs incurred
in the research to be charged consistently to the appropriate funding
source. In your example, for instance, the time and effort of
laboratory personnel working on the stem cell line created after
August 9, 2001, may not be charged to any federal grant. Acquisition
of equipment, use of cell and tissue culture supplies in the project,
and travel to a conference to discuss or present this work likewise
may not be federally supported.


> > > Do you have any idea how many scientific heads we have lost because
> > they are able to go to other countries to do the research.
> >
> > No, please share. What governments are spending the amount of money
> > ours is on this research?
>
> England is currently spending about 5 times the amount the US spends, China 
> far more. Even tiny Singapore is spending about twice as much as the US. I'm 
> not sure about the EU or India, but from what I understand their spending is 
> in the hundreds of millions for next year.

I read the EU is banning it, then I read further and found China was
spending close to 250 million and Britain around 180 million. An
interesting point is, American scientists have published 46 percent of
articles on the subject and the rest divided amongst 17 other
countries. With all that money invested they might catch up eventually
but it might all change in two years. Also, California is kicking in 6
billion dollars.

> > > I think you need some perspective.
> >
> > Well since I'm not a scientist your probably right but I was refering
> > to G's clainm that thousands will die because of this.
>
> Look how many people die from Parkinson's disease every year, or diabetes. 
> Tens of thousands, if not more. You do need some perspective on this.

This is pure speculation, there isn't any proof anything will come of
this. Meanwhile the adult lines and cord cells already show progress.
I do not doubt the potential, just saying it's a big wish.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting,
up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four 
times a year.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/message.cfm/forumid:5/messageid:211483
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5

Reply via email to