Cool stem cell news
- Thread starter Onceler
- Start date
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
So essentially you are going to ignore that Clinton and Bush from 1997-2004 signed into law the exact same rider that prohibited embryonic stem cell research?... and they did so in the exact same manner.
I think you are ignoring this:
"In 1998, privately funded research led to the breakthrough discovery of hESC (Human Embryonic Stem Cells). This prompted the Clinton Administration to re-examine guidelines for federal funding of embryonic research. In 1999, the president's National Bioethics Advisory Commission recommended that hESC harvested from embryos discarded after in vitro fertility treatments, but not from embryos created expressly for experimentation be eligible for federal funding[3]. Even though embryos are always destroyed in the process of harvesting hESC, the Clinton Administration decided that it would be permissible under the Dickey Amendment to fund hESC research as long as such research did not itself directly cause the destruction of an embryo. Therefore, HHS issued its proposed regulation concerning hESC funding in 2001. Enactment of the new guidelines was delayed by the incoming Bush administration which decided to reconsider the issue."
I think that Clinton signed it because he had a republican congress and it was the best he could get, and I think he funded it anyway when the breakthrough came. And I think that bush ended that when he came in. I think that I think that, because that's what happened.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
1) I actually specified that no advances had been made with EMBRYONIC stem cells. (just for clarification)
2) Thank you for that article. Obviously I am way out of date. An article two days old and I missed it. I must be slipping. Seriously though, it is good to see and I do appreciate it.
Conservative Misinformation on Stem Cell Research
"Bush is the first president to federally fund stem cell research": President Bush has repeatedly claimed -- and news outlets have often uncritically reported -- that he is "the first president ever to allow funding" for human embryonic stem cell research. In fact, while Bush is the first president to preside over the flow of federal funds to such research, President Clinton was the first to approve federal funding for these purposes. Indeed, in August 2000, the Clinton administration released new guidelines through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) that allowed federally funded research on embryonic stem cells extracted in the private sector and established strict oversight of this research. These rules, however, had yet to be implemented when Clinton left office and were quickly suspended by the incoming Bush administration in favor of its own, stricter set of rules.
...in each year since 1996, Congress has passed a general ban on research in which human embryos are damaged or destroyed. But scientists realized the potential of stem cell research only in the late 1990s; Clinton's 2000 guidelines were a response to this newly-emerging field of research, as The Washington Post explained on August 24, 2000.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200408130009
http://mediamatters.org/items/200701110005
Thorn
Member
You're welcome.
Actually this work was done using (mouse) embryonic stem cells. The next step, they said, was to determine if this would also work using human embryonic stem cells. Testing in humans is still several years in the future.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
No, I did not ignore it. I addressed it specifically the first time you posted it. The key words again are "as long as such research did not itself directly cause the destruction of an embryo". As I stated previously, the research DOES currently directly cause the destruction of the embryo. It did increase the allotment for some lines of embryonic research in which the embryo was not destroyed.... which is why you see that the NIH spent money on Human embryonic research... EVEN under the Bush administration.
Up until 2005, Bush enacted everything the same way Clinton did. To blame it on the Rep Congress is a cop out.
That's actually false, but it's kind of gotten us off track of the original point anyway.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
You're welcome.
Actually this work was done using (mouse) embryonic stem cells. The next step, they said, was to determine if this would also work using human embryonic stem cells. Testing in humans is still several years in the future.
Well that is still a very positive step even though it is in a rodent.
-So, clinton signed an appropriations bill, with a republican amendmentment he could neither change, nor veto.
-the promise of stem cell research wasn't even apparent until 1998
http://mediamatters.org/items/200607260001?offset=20&show=1
-So, in 1999-2000, the Clinton admin developed rules and regulations to allow more federal funding for stem cell rescearch.
-Which Bush almost immediately negated when he came into office.
This was spin and diversion anyway.
How are 7 or 8 blue states funding stem cell research going to utilize the FULL intellectual and research capcity of the NATION? Please answer. Thanks!
-the promise of stem cell research wasn't even apparent until 1998
http://mediamatters.org/items/200607260001?offset=20&show=1
-So, in 1999-2000, the Clinton admin developed rules and regulations to allow more federal funding for stem cell rescearch.
-Which Bush almost immediately negated when he came into office.
This was spin and diversion anyway.
How are 7 or 8 blue states funding stem cell research going to utilize the FULL intellectual and research capcity of the NATION? Please answer. Thanks!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
What is false about it?
Cypress posted a whole bunch of really interesting links about the timeline and what happened back then. It was just developing then. It fell into bush's lap, and he immediately rescinded Clinton adminstration guidlines on funding which I doubt he would have bothered to do if they both "did the exact same thing".
But in the end, it's really not important. It wasn't the issue then that it is now. You and I have two different ideologies on this, I've already made mine clear, and the fact is, we won't be able to "prove" what a huge mistake this was, and how much it set this country back globally, for a few years yet.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
What... the timeline of Clintons decison to modify? That was in your quote Darla. There was a recommendation to change the Dickey amendment in 1999. Conveniently, Clinton did not propose a change until 2001...right as he was leaving office.... and if you read the damn thing, it STILL states that you cannot use the embryos if the embryos are destroyed by the research. The embryos are destroyed when the stem cells are taken out. Period. Clintons proposal was nothing more than window dressing that would not have accomplished anything until the time in which the embryos could be used without being destroyed.... which again is close.
I have already shown you that there was no decrease in funding. That the states funded research in a field they had never been involved in before. Genetics has been around for decades... yet they suddenly entered into the R&D on this particular issue when the fed said they would not. That is not coincidence.
Add to that the increase in private funding for basic scientific research. They only do that when they feel they HAVE to. Otherwise the private money tends to go to projects that have quicker payoffs.
this has NOTHING to do with philosophy. It has to do with the claim that somehow funding is lower than it would have been.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
"In 1999, the president's National Bioethics Advisory Commission recommended that hESC harvested from embryos discarded after in vitro fertility treatments, but not from embryos created expressly for experimentation be eligible for federal funding[3]. Even though embryos are always destroyed in the process of harvesting hESC, the Clinton Administration decided that it would be permissible under the Dickey Amendment to fund hESC research as long as such research did not itself directly cause the destruction of an embryo. Therefore, HHS issued its proposed regulation concerning hESC funding in 2001.
enough said.
enough said.
"Conveniently, Clinton did not propose a change until 2001...right as he was leaving office....
false.
I have addressed this over and over and over. Go back and look at my posts, I'm not retyping them. It most certainly is ideology. I have stated why. I'm not going to keep answering your posts over and over again, because you are ignoring my answers and making the same claims over again on the next page.
SF, I'm going to give you a medal for diversion and spin on this thread. I never would have guessed someone could have diverted this thread into multiple (false) claims about how Bush simply did what Clinton would have done anyway.
I've given you the National Academy of Sciences opinion. They're the foremost authorities on the nation's science. They agree with me, lorax, and darla. I've given you links to the UK's task force on stem cell research. They are laughing at us, and praying we don't ramp up federal spending. Because they think they can outcompete us, with their public committments to funding.
I've pointed out, that having a handful of progressive blue states funding research within their own state borders, is completely ineffective at utillzing and supporting the entire intellectual and research capacity of this nation.
And it all came back to Slick Willie being just as much to blame as Bush.
I applaud you. Best diversion ever.
