Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: SCREAM in Memory of Stan

  1. #1
    Banned Faye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    6,839

    Arrow SCREAM in Memory of Stan

    The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (SCREA) passed the U.S. House of Representatives last May, and has been delayed in the Senate ever since. President Bush is against it, and has promised to use his first-ever veto to try and shut it down. Naturally we want to override that veto, and we might actually get the 2/3 majority a veto override requires. But first it had to be brought to the floor—without tricks.

    Senator Bill Frist promised a hearing, and we expect him to keep his word. He also came out in support of the bill, and that is an important promise too. But as Ronald Reagan once said, we must “trust, and verify”. How Senator Frist brings HR 810 to the floor is extremely important.

    For instance, if SCREA is attached to the Brownback bill criminalizing Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT, sometimes called therapeutic cloning), that would change everything. Instead of supporting it, we would have to oppose it.

    SCREA may be proposed in a “package”, a bunch of bills proposed, all national stuff.

    Some will be decoys.

    These bills are toys, nothing more, distractions: useless for cure, and dangerous because they may be mistaken for the real thing. Their real purpose is to provide opponents of the research with an excuse to vote against embryonic stem cell research. That way, they can say to their voters, “See? I supported stem cell research!” even while attacking it.

    Like the cord blood bill, recently passed with great fanfare--talk about a useless toy!

    Even its supporters hardly bother to pretend otherwise. Remember how the bill was supposed to provide $15 million a year for four years for umbilical cord blood (adult stem cell) research? There were all those nice photographs and press conferences of wide-grinning politicians, including some of the most virulent enemies of research.

    But when the noise quieted, and the cameras turned away, the funding for the first year was quietly cut from $15 million to $4 million, and for the next year—nothing. All that bill was really good for was the press conference.

    Now I do not object to umbilical cord blood research, or other forms of adult stem cell research. Hey, if it works, great. But I personally consider it weak, and see no promise in it. It is absolutely not a substitute for embryonic stem cell research.

    Embryonic stem cells can become any cell in the body. Adult stem cells—not. Embryonic cells can multiply rapidly. Adult stem cells—not.
    Embryonics hold their shape, staying what you want them to be. Adult stem cells—not.

    Despite an overwhelming advantage in funding, and a head start of thirty years, adult stem cells just do not have the possibilities of embryonic.

    There will be probably half a dozen stem cell bills offered to the Senate, most likely in mid-May, the anniversary of when House Resolution 810 passed the House.

    Here is a good guess as to the bills predicted, two by two.

    Two bills will probably be useless/harmless like the cordblood bill. Some may offer untried alternatives as a substitute for embryonic. It is important to recognize, these so-called “alternatives” are legal already. Nobody is trying to criminalize them. Maybe some will actually be helpful, who knows? But should we trade embryonic stem cell research, which is solid and real and reliable-- for a vague possibility, which might or might not work, possibly, perhaps, someday, maybe?

    Two bills will be dangerous: the anti-chimera law, and the anti-SCNT law, both proposed by Senator Sam Brownback, (R-KS), and both attempting to ban the research throughout America. Interestingly, Senator Brownback’s stand on SCNT was recently repudiated by his own state. In a major poll, Kansans overwhelmingly supported Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer, 70% in favor, of the research the Senator wishes to ban.

    And two bills are definitely good. (Neither one contains money, which is a shame. But money is tight, and we cannot expect everything we ask for.)

    One will make reproductive cloning (the bad stuff, trying to make babies) against the law, without criminalizing the good stuff, Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT, for stem cells). This will be the Orrin Hatch/Dianne Feinstein bill, or a similar version of it.

    And the other bill?

    The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (SCREA), is a cautious increase in the number of allowable stem cell “lines”, or colonies of stem cells. It is as careful and modest a bill as can be imagined. But it is real. It would allow new stem cell lines to be made from leftover embryos which would otherwise be destroyed.

    There is no excuse for voting against the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (SCREA). No alternatives, no amendments, just S-C-R-E-A…MM. Mandatory in May.

    I scream, you scream, we all scream for SCREAMM.

    SCREAMM, plus the SCNT one—these must be supported with all our strength. The others are either dangerous criminalizations of research, (which has never been done before in America), or useless substitutes, existing solely to deny votes to the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act.

    http://www.stemcellbattles.com/

    "There’s far too much unthinking respect given to authority,” Molly Ivins explained; “What you need is sustained outrage.”
    Kerr, Keirstead, McDonald, Stice and Jun Yan courageously work on ESCR to Cure SCI.

    Divisiveness comes from not following Christopher Reeve's ESCR lead.
    Young does ASCR.
    [I]I do not tear down CRPA, I ONLY make peopl

  2. #2
    Banned Faye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    6,839

    About Stan

    Stan came up with the idea of starting up SCREAM ( Stem Cell Research Education and Awareness Movement ). Sadly he passed away from ALS just a couple of weeks after he began posting here on CC.

    Please see http://carecure.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19191&page=6&highlight=Stan+SCREA M

    "There’s far too much unthinking respect given to authority,” Molly Ivins explained; “What you need is sustained outrage.”
    Kerr, Keirstead, McDonald, Stice and Jun Yan courageously work on ESCR to Cure SCI.

    Divisiveness comes from not following Christopher Reeve's ESCR lead.
    Young does ASCR.
    [I]I do not tear down CRPA, I ONLY make peopl

  3. #3
    Thanks for posting that Faye.

    After reading it, you gotta think about how different the powers to be on this web-site approach esc research from which was posted on stemcellbattles.com

    These bills are toys, nothing more, distractions: useless for cure, and dangerous because they may be mistaken for the real thing. Their real purpose is to provide opponents of the research with an excuse to vote against embryonic stem cell research. That way, they can say to their voters, “See? I supported stem cell research!” even while attacking it.

  4. #4
    Banned Faye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    6,839
    Stan posted as bluecat on CC in the weeks prior to his death in 2004 here:

    http://carecure.org/forum/showpost.p...8&postcount=48

    He left behind a wife and a 2 year old daughter.

    Many good people run out of time........

    "There’s far too much unthinking respect given to authority,” Molly Ivins explained; “What you need is sustained outrage.”
    Kerr, Keirstead, McDonald, Stice and Jun Yan courageously work on ESCR to Cure SCI.

    Divisiveness comes from not following Christopher Reeve's ESCR lead.
    Young does ASCR.
    [I]I do not tear down CRPA, I ONLY make peopl

  5. #5
    In an August 2004 poll conducted by Wilson Research Strategies, 53 percent of respondents said that they opposed “using tax dollars to pay for the kind of stem cell research that requires the killing of human embryos,” while only 38 percent supported it.

    Despite the polls, lawmakers in Congress want to overturn President Bush's limits on federal funding of research destroying human life.

    Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist told Bloomberg News that he's trying to figure out how to allows votes on competing bills that would either overturn Bush's limits or prohibit all forms of human cloning without having the debate become "a wedge issue that divides Republicans."

    Frist said he wants "to be able to consider a range of bills and amendments'' during any bioethics debate.

    Kansas Republican Senator Sam Brownback, a leading pro-life lawmaker, said he thinks he has enough votes to uphold a filibuster against a bill to overturn Bush's limits.
    From LifeNews.com.
    ...it's worse than we thought. it turns out the people at the white house are not secret muslims, they're nerds.

  6. #6
    Banned Faye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    6,839

    Sabotage

    Regarding Don Reed's words:
    These bills are toys, nothing more, distractions: useless for cure, and dangerous because they may be mistaken for the real thing. Their real purpose is to provide opponents of the research with an excuse to vote against embryonic stem cell research. That way, they can say to their voters, “See? I supported stem cell research!” even while attacking it.
    Sabotage of Specter's stem-cell bill feared
    Wednesday, July 13, 2005
    By Maeve Reston, Post-Gazette National Bureau


    WASHINGTON -- As the Senate prepares to vote on House-passed legislation that would loosen President Bush's restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, Sens. Arlen Specter and Tom Harkin are fighting off an alternate approach by administration officials and some conservative Republican senators.

    Specter, R-Pa., and Harkin, D-Iowa, view the option as a bid to derail support for their proposal by offering a measure to provide funding for new techniques still in early stages of development, but potentially more ethically palatable to some lawmakers.

    The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, for which Specter and Harkin are Senate sponsors, cleared a major hurdle in May when it passed the GOP-dominated House with strong bipartisan support. That legislation would expand the number of embryonic stem-cell lines available to scientists by providing federal money for research on embryos left over from fertility treatments at in-vitro clinics, as long as the embryos would otherwise be discarded and the couple have given their consent.

    But because Bush has threatened to veto that legislation, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and fellow Republican Sens. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Johnny Isakson of Georgia are crafting a bill they are referring to as the "third way" on stem-cell research -- one that Specter and Harkin fear could siphon off support from their bill.

    Frist has not revealed details of the "third way" legislation. But aides expect that it will permit funding for new techniques that scientists are exploring to harvest embryonic stem cells without destroying embryos -- methods that were debated by scientists and ethicists whom Specter invited to testify before a Senate subcommittee yesterday morning.

    One technique that several conservative senators are touting would let scientists extract a cell or several cells from an embryo (as one might for a biopsy) -- for development into an embryonic stem-cell line -- without destroying the embryo.

    But Dr. James F. Battey, director of National Institute of Health's stem-cell task force, testified at the hearing that the technique so far has reportedly been successful only in creating mouse stem-cell lines.

    Several other methods that the scientists and ethicists discussed were extracting stem cells from "dead embryos" left over from fertility treatments, reprogramming cells to coax them into functioning the way embryonic stem cells would, and a method known as Altered Nuclear Transfer -- a complicated procedure that involves removing an adult cell's nucleus and implanting it into an altered egg cell, so that stem cells are created without actually creating an embryo.

    Techniques such as those were cited in a recent report by the President's Council on Bioethics, but scientists and ethicists testifying yesterday emphasized that many are still unproven.

    Harkin said he believed that the interest in those techniques arises mainly from those interested in defeating the Specter-Harkin legislation, sponsored in the House by Reps. Mike Castle, R-Del., and Diana DeGette, D-Colo. Harkin said he believed that the White House was causing much of the pressure.

    "The method we're discussing hasn't been published in a single scientific journal, it hasn't been cleared for peer reviews; it's only been tried in mice," Harkin said. "We're a long way from proving it works in human embryos. "I'm all for these alternative methods; let's go ahead and pursue them," he said, "but not as a substitute -- not as some way of stopping what we're about to do.".........

    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05194/536923.stm
    Last edited by Faye; 03-23-2006 at 02:47 PM.

    "There’s far too much unthinking respect given to authority,” Molly Ivins explained; “What you need is sustained outrage.”
    Kerr, Keirstead, McDonald, Stice and Jun Yan courageously work on ESCR to Cure SCI.

    Divisiveness comes from not following Christopher Reeve's ESCR lead.
    Young does ASCR.
    [I]I do not tear down CRPA, I ONLY make peopl

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Faye
    Regarding Don Reed's words:
    Yep, I mentioned the possibility last month.

    I am interested in this "third way," though.
    Last edited by Steven Edwards; 03-23-2006 at 03:29 PM.
    ...it's worse than we thought. it turns out the people at the white house are not secret muslims, they're nerds.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by howboutdis
    I depise the fact that you still get your thrills out of continually posting articles that suggest we should not mess with "harming" embryos, while my dad, a strong supporter of esc research was banned from this site. He did not attack anyone, but if you look closely at the posts from the powers to be he was attacked because they are more concerned about clinical trial networks and the CR bills. Since when should CareCure have a preference? I find it self serving to the authority on CareCure that my dad was banned.
    *yawn*

    Let's pretend you really are Bob's son for a moment.

    1) Quit listening to him & form your own conclusions. How old are you anyway?

    2) Think realistically. Like your dad, you're not paralyzed. I don't care if your brother is or not; he avoids ANY discussion here.. why? Look, it's been said a billion times over: we want an effective treatment ASAP. ESCR, aside from its theoretical potential, is not easy to advocate for considering the current state of affairs *if* its main source of embryos have any ties to "harmful" means of obtaining them. Am I saying to neglect/avoid/ignore ESCR support? NO. I'm just saying that a lot of energy advocating for that and that alone would be wasted when there are other avenues with greater potential, all things considered.

    3) Try reading some of your dad's posts. First, show me where he's actually done something to support ESCR aside from making noise here. Second, if you can't find any beligerence and attacks in the words he has written, you're blind.

    Is your whole family this whiny? Show up at the rally & we'll talk more. It might even be nice to meet you guys if you're *really* sincere about all this.

  9. #9
    Banned Faye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    6,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Pruett
    *yawn*

    Look, it's been said a billion times over: we want an effective treatment ASAP. ESCR, aside from its theoretical potential, is not easy to advocate for considering the current state of affairs *if* its main source of embryos have any ties to "harmful" means of obtaining them. Am I saying to neglect/avoid/ignore ESCR support? NO. I'm just saying that a lot of energy advocating for that and that alone would be wasted when there are other avenues with greater potential, all things considered.

    Is your whole family this whiny? Show up at the rally & we'll talk more. It might even be nice to meet you guys if you're *really* sincere about all this.
    Scott, thank you for once again towing the CareCure line even including words like yawn and whiny!

    I don't think it was EVER said to only advocate for ESCR, though I must say the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act may be far more attainable than you make out,......... as the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act is not stuck in committee like the CRPA is.

    "There’s far too much unthinking respect given to authority,” Molly Ivins explained; “What you need is sustained outrage.”
    Kerr, Keirstead, McDonald, Stice and Jun Yan courageously work on ESCR to Cure SCI.

    Divisiveness comes from not following Christopher Reeve's ESCR lead.
    Young does ASCR.
    [I]I do not tear down CRPA, I ONLY make peopl

Similar Threads

  1. Viagra For The Brain - Rollipram/PDE4 Inhibitors
    By Steven Edwards in forum Cure
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-21-2003, 11:48 AM
  2. Better Memory May Not Be Out of Reach
    By Max in forum Health & Science News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-16-2002, 12:51 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-29-2002, 04:54 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-11-2002, 11:06 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-04-2002, 05:38 PM

Posting Permissions

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