Page 1 of 13 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 124

Thread: S.362 Stem Cell Research Expansion Act

  1. #1

    S.362 Stem Cell Research Expansion Act

    What do you guys think of this piece of legislation introduced by Sen Coleman? Is this something that helps us (who want more embryonic stem cell research)?
    Daniel

  2. #2
    Considering the source, I bet it is a diversionary tactic against SCREA.

    I didn't find the full text, but thomas.gov says it is to promote embryonic stem cell research without destroying embryos.

    Steven will know more about this, for sure. My instincts say this is probably not a great alternative for us.

    What do you think, Dan?

    Norm Coleman is conservative, although wikipedia says he used to be a liberal Democrat. It also says he opposes abortion because he lost 2 kids to a rare genetic disease. It seems to me we can usually extrapolate their feelings on esc research from their abortion positions. Wiki says he opposes esc research, supports asc and ucbsc.

  3. #3
    Banned Faye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    6,839

    You are Ill-Informed: This is a GOOD Coleman Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by betheny
    Considering the source, I bet it is a diversionary tactic against SCREA.

    I didn't find the full text, but thomas.gov says it is to promote embryonic stem cell research without destroying embryos.

    Steven will know more about this, for sure. My instincts say this is probably not a great alternative for us.

    What do you think, Dan?

    Norm Coleman is conservative, although wikipedia says he used to be a liberal Democrat. It also says he opposes abortion because he lost 2 kids to a rare genetic disease. It seems to me we can usually extrapolate their feelings on esc research from their abortion positions. Wiki says he opposes esc research, supports asc and ucbsc.
    Betheny, you are soooooooooo ill-informed:


    S 362 IS
    110th CONGRESS
    1st Session
    S. 362
    To expand the number of embryonic stem cell lines available for federally funded research .
    IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
    January 23, 2007


    Mr. COLEMAN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
    A BILL
    To expand the number of embryonic stem cell lines available for federally funded research .
    • Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.


    • This Act may be cited as the `Stem Cell Research Expansion Act'.

    SEC. 2. PROVISION OF FEDERAL FUNDING.


    • (a) In General- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Department of Health and Human Services may provide funding for the following:

      • (1) Research on embryonic stem cell lines that were created prior to January 23, 2006 that does not result in the use of Federal funding to destroy an embryo or embryos.

    "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

  4. #4
    I'm not sure what to think.


    I think it's been referred to committee at the moment.

    Latest Major Action: 1/23/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

    I think thomas has the full-text (it's really short).

    A BILL

    To expand the number of embryonic stem cell lines available for federally funded research.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the `Stem Cell Research Expansion Act'.

    SEC. 2. PROVISION OF FEDERAL FUNDING.

    (a) In General- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Department of Health and Human Services may provide funding for the following:

    (1) Research on embryonic stem cell lines that were created prior to January 23, 2006 that does not result in the use of Federal funding to destroy an embryo or embryos.
    Does this mean to expand the number of stem cell lines eligible for federal funding from the Bush 2001 policy (73 eligible, 22 usable) to significantly more (I've seen some sources mention as many as 200)? I thought this was a good thing.

    I don't understand the significance of the second part of the statement. Is this good for us or bad?
    Daniel

  5. #5
    Big surprise there.

    So you are in favor of it?

    I thought the research you promote incessantly destroyed embryos, Faye.

    This says it wants to expand the number of lines available for non-destructive research only. Or that is how it looks to me.

    I absolutely defer to your superior knowledge on matters of embryonic stem cell research, Faye. And that is not me being snotty. I truly do. You know FARRRR more on the subject than I do.

  6. #6
    Betheny,

    I see that Coleman has introduced several pieces of legislation related to stem cells. I can't tell if they are good or bad for us (who support ESCR) and that's why I'm asking.

    S.362
    Title: A bill to expand the number of embryonic stem cell lines available for federally funded research.

    S.363
    Title: A bill to provide increased Federal funding for stem cell research, to expand the number of embryonic stem cell lines available for Federally funded research, to provide ethical guidelines for stem cell research, to derive human pluripotent stem cell lines using techniques that do not create an embryo or embryos for research or knowingly harm human embryo or embryos, and for other purposes.
    Daniel

  7. #7
    He is proposing federal funding for escr, but only for alternatives to using blastocysts from IVF clinics. It looks like another diversion to the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act to me. He's talking about "ethical" escr...the kind we usually talk about wanting, he considers "unethical". Usually Faye objects to this diversionary approach. I think it is only bad if they use it as an excuse to continue blocking SCR Enhancement Act.

    "...One process, called altered nuclear transfer, would use an ovum (human egg) and a somatic cell (a skin cell, for example) to produce pluripotent stem cells. These stem cells function exactly like embryonic stem cells, but do not come from a human organism, and could never become one...


    ...In another process, scientists can derive embryonic stem cell lines from embryos that have died naturally...essentially making the stem cells the moral equivalent of organ donation from an already-deceased adult. "


    http://coleman.senate.gov/index.cfm?...th=1&Year=2007

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by dan_nc
    Betheny,

    I see that Coleman has introduced several pieces of legislation related to stem cells. I can't tell if they are good or bad for us (who support ESCR) and that's why I'm asking.
    Again, I defer to Faye for the final word. I only know how it looks to me.

  9. #9
    Banned Faye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    6,839
    One more time Betheny:

    A BILL

    To expand the number of embryonic stem cell lines available for federally funded research.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the `Stem Cell Research Expansion Act'.

    SEC. 2. PROVISION OF FEDERAL FUNDING.

    (a) In General- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Department of Health and Human Services may provide funding for the following:

    (1) Research on embryonic stem cell lines that were created prior to January 23, 2006 that does not result in the use of Federal funding to destroy an embryo or embryos.
    S362 is the GOOD Coleman bill!!!!

    No detours!!!!

    "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

  10. #10
    It provides funding for research on cell lines prior to Jan. 2006 that does not destroy embryos. Right??

    So is this what you want everybody to go to DC to lobby for?

Similar Threads

  1. A rebuttal to a stem cell research opponent in New Jersey
    By Wise Young in forum Funding, Legislation, & Advocacy
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-26-2006, 04:22 PM
  2. Replies: 80
    Last Post: 03-22-2006, 05:25 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-20-2004, 03:30 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-09-2002, 04:47 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-16-2002, 11:50 AM

Posting Permissions

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