Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 49 of 49

Thread: Why are embryonic stem cells important?

  1. #31

    The Cord Blood Stem Cell Act of 2005 is very interesting. This bill's purpose is:
    To amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a National Cord Blood Stem Cell Bank Network to prepare, store, and distribute human umbilical cord blood stem cells for the treatment of patients and to support peer-reviewed research using such cells.
    Look at the sponsors of the senate bill: Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mr. DODD, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. HARKIN, and Mr. SPECTER) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

    Look at the sponsors of the house bill: Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. DAVIS of Alabama, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. TOWNS, Mr. NORWOOD, Mrs. CHRISTENSEN, Mr. WAMP, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. BURGESS, Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD, Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia, Ms. ESHOO, Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky, Mr. RYUN of Kansas, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. WELDON of Florida, and Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

    The bill requires the Secretary of Health to shall enter into contracts with qualified cord blood stem cell banks to asisst in the establishment, provision, and maintenance of a National Cord Blood Stem Cell Bank Network that contains at least 150,000 units of human cord stem cells. The bank will acquire, type, test, preserve, and store donated units of human cord blood. Up to 10% of the cord blood inventory will be made available for peer-reviewed research.

    The Bank will have a board of directors and establish a national cord blood stem cell registry. The bill authorizes the appropriation of $15 million and "such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 1007 through 2010."


  2. #32

    That is an interesting bill. The fact that Senator Brownback and Representative Weldon are both sponsors of the bill indicates that a bill such as the one I outlined below would receive broad support.

    An interesting abstract came out today:

    <A HREF=" st_uids=15843428" TARGET=_blank>Dedifferentiation of Adult Human Myoblasts Induced by CNTF In Vitro.

    Chen X, Mao Z, Liu S, Liu H, Wang X, Wu H, Wu Y, Zhao T, Fan W, Li Y, Yew DT, Kindler PM, Li L, He Q, Qian L, Wang X, Fan M.</A>

    Department of Neurophysiology, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Beijing 100850, China; Institute of Space Medical Engineering, Beijing 100094, China; Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100083, China; Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15213; Department of Anatomy, School of Basic Medical Science, Hong Kong Chinese University, Satian, Hong Kong; Peking University Stem Cell Center, Beijing 100083, China; China Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Tianjing 300050, China; Department of Physiology, Capital Medical University, Youanmen, Beijing 100054, China.

    Monitoring Editor: Marianne Bronner-Fraser Ciliary neurotrophic factor (CNTF) is primarily known for its important cellular effects within the nervous system. However, recent studies indicate that its receptor can be highly expressed in denervated skeletal muscle. Here, we investigated the direct effect of CNTF on skeletal myoblasts of adult human. Surprisingly, we found that CNTF induced the myogenic lineage-committed myoblasts at a clonal level to dedifferentiate into multipotent progenitor cells--they not only could proliferate for over 20 passages with the expression absence of myogenic specific factors Myf5 and MyoD, but they were also capable of differentiating into new phenotypes, mainly neurons, glial cells, smooth muscle cells, and adipocytes. These "progenitor cells" retained their myogenic memory and were capable of redifferentiating into myotubes. Furthermore, CNTF could activate the p44/p42 MAPK and downregulate the expression of myogenic regulatory factors (MRFs). Finally, PD98059, a specific inhibitor of p44/p42 MAPK pathway, was able to abolish the effects of CNTF on both myoblast fate and MRF expression. Our results demonstrate the myogenic lineage-committed human myoblasts can dedifferentiate at a clonal level and CNTF is a novel regulator of skeletal myoblast dedifferentiattion via p44/p42 MAPK pathway.
    Suzanne, if you're following this thread, would you mind contacting the researchers at the listed universities for me? Sadly, although I intend to learn Mandarin, I have not yet followed through with the intention. If you could, I would truly appreciate it. 谢谢.

    Obtaining perfect genetic matches of neurons derived from your own muscle tissue? This is the type research I would like to see funded with the bill suggested below. It's non-controversial and can move forward without being hindered.

    ...what a wonderful world, this could be

  3. #33
    PA Senator Now Pushes Stem Cell Research
    Arlen Specter Introduced Bill To Allow Therapeutic Cloning

    Apr 22, 2005 7:32 am US/Mountain
    WASHINGTON (AP) Sen. Arlen Specter is pushing legislation to expand stem cell research with the perspective of a man fighting a deadly illness.

    The Pennsylvania Republican has Hodgkin's disease, a cancer of the lymph system, and is being treated with chemotherapy. He and two colleagues introduced a bill Thursday that would allow for what is often referred to as therapeutic cloning.

    "I've got a new hairdo, which you can all observe, and that is indicative of a problem which may well be helped by stem cell research if it were to go forward," said Specter, referring to the loss of most of his hair.
    The rest of the story points out that Senator Orrin Hatch, Dianne Feinstein, and Specter introduced a bill that would criminalize "reproductive cloning" but would allow "therapeutic cloning". The bill has not yet been posted.

    In the meantime, Representative Johnson (Connecticut), Castle, Boswell, Christensen, Lee, Ramstad, Sanchez introduced the HR1650H Stem Cell Research Investment Act of 2005 which allow tax credits to holders of "stem cell research bonds".

    Representative Millender-McDonald introduced HR162 Stem Cell Replenishment Act of 2005 to "authorize th use of Federal funds for research on human embryonic stem cells irrespective of the date on which such stem were derived, and for other purposes.

    Representative Stearns introduced the opposite bill HR222H Human Cloning Research Prohibition Act which prohibits "expenditure of Federal funds to conduct or support research on the cloning of humans, and to express the sense of the Congress that other countries should establish substantially equivalent restrictions." The bill refers specifically to "human somatic cell nuclear transfer". Interestingly, the bill requests that the Director of the National Science Foundation to review the implementation of the Act and its impact on research and to provide recommendations for changes to the Act. This seems to be a 5-year moratorium.

    Senator Brownback introduced S659IS entitled Human Chimera Prohibition Act of 2005 which amends Part I of title 18 of the U.S. Code to prohit human chimera, defined as:
    (1) HUMAN CHIMERA- The term `human chimera' means--
    `(A) a human embryo into which a non-human cell , or any component part of a non-human cell , has been introduced;
    `(B) a human embryo that consists of cells derived from more than 1 human embryo, fetus, or born individual;
    `(C) a human egg that has been fertilized by a non-human sperm;
    `(D) a non-human egg that has been fertilized by a human sperm;
    `(E) a human egg into which a non-human nucleus has been introduced;
    `(F) a non-human egg into which a human nucleus has been introduced;
    `(G) a human egg or a non-human egg that otherwise contains haploid sets of chromosomes from both a human and a non-human life form;
    `(H) a non-human life form engineered such that human gametes develop within the body of a non-human life form; or
    `(I) a non-human life form engineered such that it contains a human brain or a brain derived wholly or predominantly from human neural tissues.
    `(2) HUMAN EMBRYO- The term `human embryo' means an organism of the species Homo sapiens during the earliest stages of development, from 1 cell up to 8 weeks.

    `Sec. 302. Prohibition on human chimeras

    `(a) In General- It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly, in or otherwise affecting interstate commerce--
    `(1) create or attempt to create a human chimera;
    `(2) transfer or attempt to transfer a human embryo into a non-human womb;
    `(3) transfer or attempt to transfer a non-human embryo into a human womb; or
    `(4) transport or receive for any purpose a human chimera.
    `(b) Penalties-
    `(1) IN GENERAL- Whoever violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
    `(2) CIVIL PENALTY- Whoever violates subsection (a) and derives pecuniary gain from such violation shall be subject to a civil fine of the greater of $1,000,000 and an amount equal to the amount of the gross gain multiplied by 2.'.
    [This message was edited by Wise Young on 04-22-05 at 08:59 PM.]

  4. #34
    Wise Young


    posted 04-22-05 06:22 PM

    Please understand that I am continuing to push as fast as I can to get more treatments for chronic spinal cord injury into clinical trials.
    Yay Wise,
    What kind of Chronic treatments have you been working on that are ready for clinical trial?

  5. #35

  6. #36
    Senior Member Schmeky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    West Monroe, LA, USA
    Please understand that I am continuing to push as fast as I can to get more treatments for chronic spinal cord injury into clinical trials. It is so frustrating.
    We know this. How you put up the crap I'll never know. You da'man!!

  7. #37
    Senior Member poonsuzanne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Hong Kong, China
    Originally posted by Steven Edwards:

    Suzanne, if you're following this thread, would you mind contacting the researchers at the listed universities for me? Sadly, although I intend to learn Mandarin, I have not yet followed through with the intention. If you could, I would truly appreciate it. 谢谢.
    Hi Steven,

    Do you mean you want me to find the contact info of the researchers at the listed Universities in China and Hong Kong? If so, I will begin with HK Chinese University. It would be the easiest one for me! Please kindly email me regarding this at Thanks!


  8. #38
    Hope, thanks. As the NIH page shows, nearly two dozen bills concerning stem cells were introduced from 2001-2003. As I pointed out below, in 2005 alone, 8 bills have been introduced.

    Supporting Stem Cell Research
    • Cord Blood Stem Sem Cell Act of 2005 H.R.596, S.681.IS establishing a national umbilical cord blood bank network and appropriating $15 million in 2006 for this purpose.
    • Stem Cell Replenishment Act of 2005 H.R.162 authorizing use of federal funds for human embryonic stem cells irrrespective of the date that the cells were derived so that not less than 60 stem cell lines are scientifically fit for distribution for research purposes.
    • Stem Cell Research Investment Act of 2005 H.R.1650 allows tax credit for stem cell bonds defined as a bond in which 95% of proceeds of such a bond are to be used for interdisciplinary scientific research relating to stem cells, therapy development relating to stem cells, and develoopment of pharmacologies and treatments through clinical trials relating to stem cells.
    • Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005 S.471, HR.810.IH allows the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct and support research that utilized human embryonic stem cells derived from human embryos donated from in vitro fertilization clinics, that would never be implanted in a woman.

    Prohibiting Stem Cell Research
    • Human Cloning Research Prohibition Act H.R.222 amends the Public Service Act to prohibit human cloning, defined as human asexual reproduction accomplished by introducing nuclear material from somatic cells into fertilized or unfertilized oocytes. This would prohibit federal funding of cloning research.
    • Human Chimera Prohibition Act of 2005 S.659 prohibits the creation of human chimera defined the production of a human embryo into which a non-human cell or any component of a cell has been introduced, a human embryo that is derived from more than one human embryo, fetus, or individual, a human egg fertilized by non-human sperm or non-human egg fertilized by a human sperm, eggs containing haploid sets of chromosome from both human and non-human sources, non-human life form that can produce human gametes, a non-human life form that contains a human brain or brain derived predominantly from human neural tissues.
    • Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2005 S.658.IS, H.R.1357.IH would criminalize human cloning, defined as the introduction of human genetic material into any egg and producing cells or an organism that is virtually identical genetically.
    • Right to Life Act H.R.552 would provide equal protection for the right to life of each born and preborn human person.


  9. #39

    Exactly. 多�. (My apologies for using Mandarin below. I mistakenly thought you lived in Beijing.) I will send you an e-mail shortly.

    -Steven a diamond, in the rough

  10. #40

    Bipartisan Group of U.S. Senators Introduces Bill To Expand Federal Funding for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research

    23 Apr 2005

    A bipartisan group of US senators on Thursday introduced a bill... (S 658) that would ban human reproductive cloning and loosen federal restrictions on funding for human embryonic stem cell research, Reuters Health reports (Rovner, Reuters Health, 4/21). Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) introduced the Human Cloning Ban and Stem Cell Research Protection Act of 2005, saying they will "push harder" this year than in past years to pass the bill and expect increased support from their colleagues, according to the AP/San Diego Union-Tribune (Werner, AP/San Diego Union-Tribune, 4/21). President Bush's embryonic stem cell policy -- which he announced on Aug. 9, 2001 -- limits federal funding for embryonic stem cell research to stem cell lines created on or before that date. Critics of Bush's policy have said that the embryonic stem cell lines available for federally funded research are not biologically diverse, are contaminated with nonhuman material and are useless for research into possible cures for degenerative diseases. However, opponents of the research say it is immoral because it destroys human embryos (Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, 3/25).

    Bill Details
    The bill would make human reproductive cloning a crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison or fines of up to $1 million or three times the profit resulting from the violation, according to a Feinstein release. The bill also would allow for embryonic stem cell research with informed consent from embryo donors and prohibit the purchase or sale of unfertilized eggs. Under the measure, research also would be prohibited on embryos older than 14 days (Feinstein release, 4/21). The bill also would task NIH with helping to establish ethical guidelines for embryonic stem cell research, according to the AP/Union-Tribune (AP/San Diego Union-Tribune, 4/21).

    Sponsors' Comments
    According to Feinstein, the bill is necessary because many "prominent scientists" are leaving the United States for countries where more research funding is available and private research is being conducted without "sufficient" ethical guidelines, Reuters Health reports (Reuters Health, 4/21). "American scientists have gone to other countries, ... [a]nd there has been a chilling effect in this country, where scientists are worried about taking on cutting-edge research," Feinstein said, adding, "There is no question that this country needs an effective stem cell policy -- both to provide federal funding for viable stem cell lines and to provide federal ethical guidelines. Passing this legislation would go a long way to filling the void" (Feinstein release, 4/21). Specter said that the bill's supporters "may well be to the point where we have 60 votes" needed to break a potential filibuster in the Senate. Hatch added that public opinion on stem cell research is "moving their way," according to Reuters Health. "As I travel across my home state of Utah, more and more Utahns, whether they are pro-life or not, come up to me and say, 'Orrin, we're with you on this. You're doing the right thing'" (Reuters Health, 4/21).

    from You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at The Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report is published for, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation . © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.

  11. #41

    The article is really worth reading. These women are a force unto themselves.

    By Kate Sullivan Foley/ Correspondent
    Friday, April 22, 2005

    Embryonic stem cell research shouldn't be optional, according to Benita Ross.

    "Imagine there is a way to treat juvenile diabetes, Parkinson's, or Alzheimer's disease. How can we, as a society, when science is teetering on finding these ways, how can we say no? How can we deny what could be life-changing and life-saving? We can't," said Ross, a Canton resident.

    With 300,000 members of Hadassah advocating in every congressional district in the country, Ross, president of the Southern New England Region of Hadassah, is not alone in her thoughts and efforts.

    Hadassah is the largest women's, largest Jewish and largest Zionist organization in the United States. Its purpose is to enhance the quality of American and Jewish life through education, promotion of health awareness, social action and advocacy, volunteerism, personal enrichment and growth for its members.
    In Israel, Hadassah is at the forefront of embryonic stem cell research through the pioneering work at the Goldyne Savad Institute of Gene Therapy. The national organization owns six stem cell lines and was second in the world to derive embryonic stem cell lines for research.
    Nationally, Hadassah, according to Ross, made the decision to enlist the support of every U.S. chapter.
    To the State House
    On March 2, Sharon-Stoughton Hadassah members joined approximately 150 Hadassah members from across the state on Beacon Hill. The members threw their support behind a bill to legalize embryonic stem cell research. The women met with 55 lawmakers including Sen. Brian A. Joyce, D-Milton, and Lou Kafka, D-Stoughton. Speaker Sal DiMasi and Senate President Robert Travaglini were both supportive of the bill, which ultimately passed 35 to 2, according to Ross.
    "The tissue (researchers) are using is not anything viable. An egg on its own is nothing; it is not something that could ever be a person," said Ross. "If in the case of juvenile diabetes, a (researcher) can transfer genetic material into that egg, then it could have a positive therapeutic impact on the pancreas." [continue]

  12. #42,00.html

    Getting beyond the quarrels over stem cells
    By Kathryn Jean Lopez
    April 23, 2005

    These days it's common to hear that ''conservative'' or ''pro-life'' policy toward stem cells is a disservice to folks like the late President Ronald Reagan who suffered from Alzheimer's. Quite a bit of the media coverage about the new pope, Benedict XVI, has emphasized that he's against stem cell research. In a recent Washington Post article, Ivy Reyes, who had stopped by a Manhattan church to say a prayer for pontiff, emphasized to a reporter: ''I'm hoping he can find a balance with the science.''

    If you follow the media's lead, we are to believe that the pope, like President Bush, is against stem cell research. But neither of them is against stem cell research. Actually, I don't know anyone who is against stem cell research. And I would know, because I agree with the Vatican and the U.S. president on this topic.

    My posse is against embryonic-stem cell research, and against cloning to create embryos for use in stem cell research (or any research). But we're not against stem cell research.

    Embryonic stem cell research is not the only hope for mankind, as we are typically led to believe. The prospects of adult stem cell and umbilical cord stem cell research are repeatedly ignored by media and activists who could use both to promote funding of and research in stem cell projects and totally avoid the ethical chaos that comes with working with human embyros.

    Earlier this year, Bishop Donald W. Wuerl of Pittsburgh, put his church's view clearly in a pastoral letter on human life: ''Adult stem cell research ... has been described as the most promising advance in medical science in the last decades. The Catholic Church is not opposed to the development of these therapies and remedies for a host of ailments and deficiencies that afflict the body. Stem cell research using stem cells from ethical sources is a continuation of the work that has been done for millennia by physicians and researchers seeking cures for illness and healing for the sick.''

    Sigh... deeper down in the article, the author of this article wrote:

    Senator Kerry didn't have much of a response, and most folks glossed over it and moved on. His running mate, meanwhile, would later shamelessly use the death of Christopher Reeve to play snake oil salesman: ''If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve will get up out of that wheelchair and walk again.''
    I sincerely hope that the author understands what she is saying with the above statement, that people who are in wheelchairs should not hope to get out of their wheelchairs again.

  13. #43
    quote Wise: "Please understand that I am continuing to push as fast as I can to get more treatments for chronic spinal cord injury into clinical trials. It is so frustrating."

    Thanks Wise, for all your effort to find a way of reversing this tragic condition.

    The combo treatments you are wanting to test in China sound promising.

    [This message was edited by Chris2 on 04-24-05 at 02:35 AM.]

  14. #44
    I just came across a very thoughtful interview of Chris Mooney, a science policy jouranlist for the Washington Post, on the subject of embryonic stem cells. He says it better than I can.

  15. #45
    Banned Faye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Jacksonville, FL
    Originally posted by Wise Young:

    I just came across a very thoughtful interview of Chris Mooney, a science policy jouranlist for the Washington Post, on the subject of embryonic stem cells. He says it better than I can.

    Thank you Dr. Young.
    The interview covers it all in a very understandable way. The last two questions are a very interesting view on the ESC debate as it continues:
    Washington, D.C.: How important is federal funding to stem cell research? Can't a lot of the research be done through private funding?

    Chris Mooney: Here I think you have to begin by reflecting on this nation's long tradition, especially since World War II, of investing in scientific research that can have a domestic (and not just military) benefit. Most obviously, federal funding allows research to go forward, and allows us, as citizens, to enjoy the benefits of that work. But in controversial areas like embryonic stem cell research, federal funding also ensures--crucially--public accountability in the way that taxpayer funds get dispersed. The federal government can set ethical standards, and refuse, for example, to fund research where excess embryos are being wasted or where there's no clear scientific benefit.

    So while some of this research can perhaps be done with private funding, I think we have to ask, 'Do we really want the private sector running this field?' I would suggest that we do not. I believe that precisely because this is such a controversial area, we need public oversight of the work and high ethical standards. Incidentally, a great model for this is provided by Great Britain, where the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority provides tough oversight of research proposals while also allowing meritorious and ethical research to proceed.

    Alas, it now seems that in the U.S., states rather than the federal government are going to be setting and enforcing ethical standards. This could result in a crazy quilt, and we simply have to hope for the best. Earlier I quoted David Magnus and Arthur Caplan. I'd like to do so again on this point: "California has a unique opportunity to set the standards for how stem-cell research will be conducted," they note. I think the people in charge of this in California know that, and know that they'd better not blow it.


    New York, N.Y.: Has stem cell research been politicized differently or more than other types of research? I.e. is there a model for how this may play out?

    Chris Mooney: The model, I think, has got to be fetal tissue research. This was a big issue during the late Reagan years and throughout the first Bush administration. Neither would allow federal funding of this work, if I recall correctly. Then Clinton allowed it, and today there's simply no ethical debate any more. We have accepted the use of fetal tissues in research. I suspect that soon we will accept the use of discarded IVF embryos, donated for research, in precisely the same way.
    ~ It is so much easier to mentally label and put paralysed people aside than to delve into why medicine hasn't yet found a way to repair the damaged spinal cord - ICCP ~

  16. #46
    Senior Member alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Baltimore, MD
    Dr. Young,

    The gentleman with whom I've been having the discussion that prompted this thread says that 3,500 embryonic stem cell samples derived from approved lines are available, but aren't being used by researchers.

    He also says that not all of the approved lines are contaminated by mouse feeder cells, and the contaminated lines are still useful for research, thus there's no need for government to fund creation of new ESC lines.

    What's your take?


    There's a fungus among us, and I'm not lichen it!

    Nerve Center Telnet BBS -

  17. #47

    The cells are from Wisconsin. Many laboratories are using studying these contaminated cell lines. They cannot be used to treat humans.

    He is mistakened about the lack of contamination. All the exposed stem cell lines have been exposed to mouse feeder cells because in 2001 there was no other way to grow these cells. The methods to grow the cells without mouse feeder cells did not become widely used until 2004.

    Fred Gage tested all 22 stem cell lines and found that all of them were additionally contaminated by the use of bovine serum which adds an animal carbohydrate moiety to the outer surface of the cells, an antigen that makes the cells particularly immunogenic and that most humans already have antibodies against such antigens and therefore will reject the cells if they are transplanted, even if they were able to match histocompatability antigens.

    A prominent NIH scientist (I cannot name him but this may be a big story soon) recently studied all 22 approved cell line and found that they are all aneuploid (abnormal chromosal count or other deficits). He apparently has not been able to obtain permission from NIH to publish this work. The fact that he has not been able to get permission to publish the work is really shocking many scientists. Combined with the current pressure against senior NIH scientists to divest all stock in any biomedical companies, this will result in many more NIH scientists leaving the institute.

    Finally, if the government would allow scientists to study the 100 or so human embryonic stem cell lines, some of which now were isolated without mouse feeder cells or contact with animal serum, the research would go much further. Yet, the Bush administration refuses to budge on this issue.

    So, why are so few U.S. scientists applying to the NIH for funds to study embryonic stem cell research? At the present, most of the $25 million of grants have been awarded to centers that have the lines and the money is being used to maintain and characterize the cell lines.

    Many scientists, such as myself, saw the writing on the wall about human embryonic stem cell research about two years ago. It was not going to change any time soon and most scientists left for greener pastures elsewhere. I chose to start studying umbilical cord blood cells. Others chose to study bone marrow stem cells. Many are studying animal fetal stem cells and a few are studying mouse embryonic stem cells. By the way, nobody has yet succeeded in growing out rat embryonic stem cells and therefore there are no such studies.


    [This message was edited by Wise Young on 05-02-05 at 09:02 AM.]

  18. #48
    Senior Member alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Baltimore, MD
    Thanks again for the quick response.


    There's a fungus among us, and I'm not lichen it!

    Nerve Center Telnet BBS -

  19. #49
    Alan, you might be interested in the conversation that this official Senate record that went on between the Senate Health & Human Service Appropriations Subcommittee and NIH officials concerning mouse feeder cells contamination of the NIH cell lines. The hearing was held on May 22, 2003, nearly two years after President made his announcement. Apparently, Elias Zerhouni (the Director of NIH) made a statement before the testimony that he thought that there were five NIH approved human embryonic in Sweden that had not been exposed to mouse feeder cells. Upon further questioning, it turned out that this was probably not true. I think that it is still not true that any of the approved cell lines have not been contaminated with mouse feeder cells. While methods might be available to grow the cells without feeder cells, the cells were exposed. Also, the cells had been exposed to bovine serum as well.

    Attached Images Attached Images

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts