Obama to Fund Research with 100% Failure Rate

Oregon Right to Life.org ^ | 03-09-09 | Oregon Right to Life

[Salvation]

	Obama to Fund Research with 100% Failure Rate   st1\:* Salem, OR - March 9, 2009 - “President Obama’s decision to lift the ban on using taxpayer dollars for embryonic stem cell research is deadly for human lives and completely unnecessary”, said Gayle Atteberry, Executive Director of Oregon Right to Life. “Ten years of research with embryonic stem cells has produced nothing but failure after failure, while research with adult stem cells and reprogrammed cells is finding cures and clinical successes on a regular basis,” Ms. Atteberry continued. President Obama’s executive order today reversed President Bush’s 2001 executive order banning federal funds for embryonic stem cell research. Bush issued the order because embryonic stem cell research involves the death of human life. Instead, President Bush put millions of dollars into adult stem cell research.  Studies with adult stem cells, published this year, show successful trials treating Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, and other diseases.  Cures and treatments for over 70 fatal and debilitating diseases have already been found! Contrary to success with adult stem cells, extensive research with embryonic stem cells, in America and around the world, for over ten years has not produced one human cure. Development of tumors in test animals has negated any progress made in animal trials. “President Obama has decided to direct taxpayer money on experimentation that has proven to be a failure. The President seems to hope that simply throwing money at the problem will fix it.  In the meantime, every failed experiment will cost more human lives.” Ms. Atteberry continued, “All citizens should demand their tax dollars be directed instead to research that continues to unlock cures to many of our most dreaded diseases.” Oregon Right to Life is Oregon’s largest and oldest organization dedicated solely to the protection of innocent human life from fertilization to natural death. ###

[Salvation]

Not on the Oregon Right to Life site yet, but I got it in an email.

[Salvation]

Right to Life Ping!

[chuck_the_tv_out]

“Research with 100% Failure Rate”

Yeah, but it’s OK, because they’re killing babies, and that’s a liberal cause.

[txnativegop]

Paying off the Democrat voters again!

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Apparently, he knows as much about science and medical research as the economy.

[Salvation]

**Apparently, he knows as much about science and medical research as the economy.**

LOL! So true!

[headstamp 2]

More taxpayer funds down a rathole.

[politicket]

Obama to Fund Research with 100% Failure Rate

I don't care if it's a 100% Succeess Rate - it's still an abomination.

[Abathar]

It was just pointed out to me today by an employee that the missile defense shield was a failure too, but with enough research it started to show progress.

“Bush can waste money on that, this is REAL science that helps people.”

Ever sat back, looked around come to the conclusion that you have to work with some real idiots?

[Mad Dawg]

We simply MUST be allowed to destroy humans. IF we don’t, people might start thinking there’s something intrinsically important about them.

[freeangel]

Is there really anything that 0 backs that doesn’t have a 100% failure rate?

[G8 Diplomat]

Abortion and stem cell research excede 9/11’s death toll EVERY DAY.

0bama & Co = domestic terrorists

[CASchack]

Obama is intent on driving us over the cliff on every front.

[silverleaf]

http://www.lifeissues.org/cloningstemcell/bradsarticle.html

[Retired Greyhound]

Embryonics have been very successful...at creating tumors.

[Venturer]

Yes, but the left ants it therefore Obama gives it to them. the left also believes in Global warming, hence Cap and Trade tax.

Just look around, Obama is predictable in some things.

[Sun]

My local tv station had a poll asking if we are FOR stem cell research. I called them and told them in the future call it EMBRYONIC stem cell research, because prolifers are not against adult stem cell research. The poll was 70% FOR stem cells, btw.

I think we ought to call talk shows and/or write letters to the editor to emphasize that there is a difference, plus the ETHICAL one actually WORKS!

[indylindy]

Most republicans anymore have lost sight of the fact that the control of the social agenda will guide the fiscal agenda.

The reason they keep losing is because they have abandoned any desire to stand up on the social agenda regarding morality or protection of the family.

Democrats have never, and have put foremost, the social agenda, in the wrong way, I might add. But at least they address it. The GOP is too weak to address and stand up for anything other than money. That is why they are losing. They mean nothing other than money. Everything else they concede on. Sorry GOP, all of this goes hand in hand. Liberal social policy begets bigger government and the abscence of morality. If you don’t believe it, just take a look at what is happening now.

We need to grow up and get a set.

[Mmmike]

It comes from the secularist ideology that we “learn” in govschool.

[indylindy]

Since when does a conservative surrender to that? I am tired of losing America. Are they all that stupid now?

[Don Corleone]

Obama HATES children. How in hell he ever had two of is own is a mystery.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

It was like a scene from The Omen III: The Final Conflict when he announced the funding for stem cell research and demonic cheering broke out among the mesmerized Obammunist followers. They sounded possessed. Or like maniacal girls at a Jonas Brothers concert. It was frightening. Cheering, clapping, and screaming with delight....Howling.

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[AliVeritas]

Yet he wants to socialize healthcare and put the hammer on pharma, so there’ll be no funds for R&D and the patient wouldn’t be able to get the cure/treatment through his plan anyway... if ESRC worked.

It’s all about death.

You better believe grandmas and those ‘who don’t contribute in a positive way (their/doctors determination), will get the merciful death Schiavo did... thirteen days worth.

[wagglebee]

Pinged from Terri Dailies

[Salvation]

**it’s still an abomination.**

Absolutely!

[Salvation]

Hope your remarks were sarcasm!

[Salvation]

I saw something on that somewhere!

[SentForth5]

This usurper destroys everything he touches...the economy, human life, the Constitution...he’s a wrecking machine and he hates America. Just sayin’....

[ducdriver]

What gives Zero the right to make these decisions?

[Salvation]

Didn’t Bush turn this eight years ago by announcing that there would be no more embryonic stem cell research? Or is my memory failing me?

[mware]

Actually Bush only banned further federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, (except with about 30 strains that had already been used.)

Private funding is and has been permitted.

[redgolum]

And so the slide continues.

See you in the catacombs.

[ducdriver]

Didn’t Bush turn this eight years ago by announcing that there would be no more embryonic stem cell research? Or is my memory failing me?

No. He said no federal funding of it.

[Mad Dawg]

Not so much sarcasm, as an effort to state the opposition’s POV. Really, I think that’s what it comes down to. It can’t be that embryonic stem cell research is all that important; other developments suggest it’s a dead end, uh, so to speak.

But they cannot allow any law that suggests that a human embryo has civil rights, because it might impinge on a woman’s right to commit infanticide. The mere possibility of such an impingement is intolerable to them.

My latest theory is that it all comes out of the so-called scientific thinking of the 19th century (the same thinking that justified racism and slavery) and utilitarianism, a movement which trashed education by suggesting that the goal of education is NOT to make free adults but to make economically contributing adults.

Humans, in this view, are only worth what others think they are worth — the value theory of economics applied to embryos, fetuses, and humans in general.

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

[reagan_fanatic]

[SumProVita]

Obama is a very sick man spiritually and we need to pray for his conversion and for our country.

[Notwithstanding]

---

Benefits of Stem Cells to Human Patients

Adult Stem Cells v. Embryonic Stem Cells

Adult Stem Cells	Embryonic Stem Cells
Cancers: Brain Cancer Retinoblastoma Ovarian Cancer Skin Cancer: Merkel Cell Carcinoma Testicular Cancer Tumors abdominal organs Lymphoma Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Acute Myelogenous Leukemia Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia Juvenile Myelomonocytic Leukemia Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia Cancer of the lymph nodes: Angioimmunoblastic Lymphadenopathy Multiple Myeloma Myelodysplasia Breast Cancer Neuroblastoma Renal Cell Carcinoma Various Solid Tumors Soft Tissue Sarcoma Ewing’s Sarcoma Waldenstrom’s macroglobulinemia Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis POEMS syndrome Myelofibrosis Auto-Immune Diseases Diabetes Type I (Juvenile) Systemic Lupus Sjogren’s Syndrome Myasthenia Autoimmune Cytopenia Scleromyxedema Scleroderma Crohn’s Disease Behcet’s Disease Rheumatoid Arthritis Juvenile Arthritis Multiple Sclerosis Polychondritis Systemic Vasculitis Alopecia Universalis Buerger’s Disease Cardiovascular Acute Heart Damage Chronic Coronary Artery Disease Ocular Corneal regeneration Immunodeficiencies Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Syndrome X-linked Lymphoproliferative Syndrome X-linked Hyper immunoglobulin M Syndrome Neural Degenerative Diseases and Injuries Parkinson’s Disease Spinal Cord Injury Stroke Damage Anemias and Other Blood Conditions Sickle Cell Anemia Sideroblastic Anemia Aplastic Anemia Red Cell Aplasia Amegakaryocytic Thrombocytopenia Thalassemia Primary Amyloidosis Diamond Blackfan Anemia Fanconi’s Anemia Chronic Epstein-Barr Infection Wounds and Injuries Limb Gangrene Surface Wound Healing Jawbone Replacement Skull Bone Repair Other Metabolic Disorders Hurler’s Syndrome Osteogenesis Imperfecta Krabbe Leukodystrophy Osteopetrosis Cerebral X-Linked Adrenoleukodystrophy Liver Disease Chronic Liver Failure Liver Cirrhosis Bladder Disease End-Stage Bladder Disease	NONE

[Notwithstanding]

http://www.stemcellresearch.org/

[wagglebee]

Excellent list!

[Notwithstanding]

 

Do we still need embryos and cloning?   

Answering Common Claims about induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), an ethically unproblematic alternative to human embryonic stem cells (hESCs).

 

 

Claim 1: Good science demands that we investigate all avenues of inquiry.

Response: “Good” research respects both scientific and ethical standards. iPSC research meets every mark of good science and has the following ethical advantages: it does not destroy human embryos; it does not use human oocytes; and it does not alienate a large part of the country’s citizens by engaging in research that they find deeply immoral.

Claim 2: Politicians should continue to pursue federal funding for the use of so-called “left over” IVF embryos despite the recent advance of iPSCs.

Response: Direct reprogramming to create iPSCs provides a scientifically feasible and promising alternative to research that requires destroying human embryos. Even President Clinton’s bioethics commission concluded that embryo destruction posed a moral problem and was “justifiable” only if there were no alternatives.

“In our judgment, the derivation of stem cells from embryos remaining following infertility treatments is justifiable only if no less morally problematic alternatives are available for advancing the research. But as we have noted, ES cells from embryos appear to be different in scientifically important ways from AS cells and also appear to offer greater promise of therapeutic breakthroughs. The claim that there are alternatives to using stem cells derived from embryos is not, at the present time, supported scientifically. We recognize, however, that this is a matter that must be revisited continually as science advances.”

- National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Ethical Issues in Human Stem Cell Research (Sept. 1999), Volume I, p. 53 (boldface added).

Claim 3: Scientists still need to compare iPSCs to hESCs.

Response: Yes, but this does not require cloning or destroying human embryos to make more hESC lines. At least 21 viable lines of human embryonic stem cells are available for federally funded research to make these comparisons. The currently eligible and available cell lines are listed here: http://stemcells.nih.gov/research/registry/eligibilityCriteria.asp.

Furthermore, the primate system permits the best in-depth platform for comparative studies. From rhesus macaque monkeys, primate pluripotent stem cells are available from all conceivable sources: IVF embryos, naturally conceived embryos (removed from the Fallopian tube after fertilization), SCNT-cloned embryos, parthenoids and soon iPS cells.

Claim 4: We don't know if iPSCs are really equivalent to ESCs.

Response: Dr. James Thomson, the first scientist ever to isolate, culture and characterize human embryonic stem cells in 1998, and author of one of the two iPSC studies, found that iPS cells “meet the defining criteria” for embryonic stem cells “with the significant exception that the iPS cells are not derived from embryos.”

Mouse iPSCs have passed the strictest possible scientific tests for being functional equivalents of mouse ESCs. Tests for human cells are more limited, but human iPSCs have met all the available criteria for being the functional equivalent of hESCs. This can be established with greater certainty through comparisons with the existing hESC lines eligible for federal funding, which have been used in the vast majority of human ESC studies throughout the world.

Claim 5: We don't know whether iPSCs or hESCs will be better for research.

Response: There are at least three significant reasons why iPSCs are better for RESEARCH:

• First, patient-specific iPSCs are available “here and now,” compared to the merely theoretical prospects of stem cells from human embryo cloning. Direct reprogramming is the ONLY way to derive pluripotent cells from specific adult patients (i.e. patient-specific stem cells) for research on human genetic diseases at this time.
  
  
• Second, direct reprogramming makes multiple iPSC lines from an individual patient’s skin cells without any additional cost or effort – an enormous scientific advantage. Obtaining iPSCs does not require access to a fertility clinic, simplifying the requirements for research, and these cells are easier to produce than hESCs, so more scientists will work with them and research will advance much more quickly.
  
  
• Third, because iPSCs do not involve human embryos or human eggs, they will be subject to significantly simpler regulatory requirements. iPSCs are fully eligible now for funding by the NIH, and in fact the Wisconsin iPSC study was partly funded by the NIH.

Claim 6: We don't know whether iPSCs or hESCs will be better for therapies.

Response: Currently, there are no clinical trials for either hESCs or iPSCs, because several problems remain to be overcome in terms of safety (cancer risk) and efficacy (ability to differentiate into useful cell types). However, if these obstacles can be overcome, there are at least two significant reasons why iPSCs may be better for THERAPIES:

• iPSCs are patient specific, a huge advantage for therapeutic use, compared to hESCs “left over” from fertility clinics that are not patient-specific and would require immune suppression.
  
  
• iPSCs do not use human eggs, making it possible to develop therapies without imposing significant medical risks on women (who must be given hormones to produce numerous eggs per cycle for egg donation).

Claim 7: iPSCs can make tumors and convert to cancer cells.

Response: Multiple scientific studies show that all pluripotent cells, including hESCs, form tumors (teratomas) and can convert to cancer cells. The risk of tumor formation may, at this time, be higher in iPSCs than in embryo-derived stem cells because the genes used for reprogramming remain inserted in the cell. However, leading stem cell biologists are optimistic that they can modify the iPS technique to eliminate any added risk of tumor formation. Dr. Douglas Melton, co-director of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, predicts this problem will be “solved quickly, maybe within a year or so” (AP, 22 November 2007), also noting: “Anyone who is going to suggest…that it won’t work is wrong” (New York Times, 21 November, 2007). Rudolf Jaenisch, a leading stem cell researcher at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts concurs, stating: “I don't think it is a big hurdle” (Washington Post, 21 November 2007).

The risk of tumor formation that is NOT due to the reprogramming procedure but common to all pluripotent stem cells can theoretically be addressed by converting pluripotent stem cells into mature cells that do not form tumors and can be transplanted safely to patients. It is important to understand that the efficient conversion of pluripotent stem cells to transplantable cells useful in the clinic is not yet possible for any human cell type, although much progress has been made. Thus, no immediate therapies should be expected from human pluripotent stem cells, either embryo derived or iPSC.

For more information: 

Dr. Maureen L. Condic, Associate Professor, Neurobiology and Anatomy, University of Utah School of Medicine:  mlcondic@neuro.utah.edu. 

Provided by the Bioethics Defense Fund, www.bdfund.org, and the Westchester Institute for Ethics & the Human Person, www.westchesterinstitute.net.

[Notwithstanding]

http://www.stemcellresearch.org/index.html

[wagglebee]

Thanks for both of these!

[IYAS9YAS]

Funny how things work. Kill innocent human life in the quest to create a cure, and get death in the form of cancer.

[Salvation]

Good one.

[Salvation]

Wow! This needs to have its own thread!