AdultStemCell.com

Mike Selvon asked:


Several studies have indicated that the human body may have regenerative properties if given the right circumstances. For example, a child under ten years old may be able to regrow a lost fingertip if the wounds aren’t stitched up to prevent the regrowth.

If the membrane surrounding one’s rib is left intact, a damaged rib can regenerate. Scientists also speculate that livers and kidneys have some regenerative abilities as well. To further study this realm of science, we must rely on stem cell research. However, there is much stem cell controversy blocking the path to enlightenment.

In an embryo that is just three days old, stem cells are found that will later transform into the heart, lungs, skin, tissues, bone marrow, muscle and brain. Advocates of stem cell research believe that there may be a way to generate replacement cells for parts of the body lost through injury, disease or aging. What makes stemcells different than blood, muscle or nerve cells is their innate ability to replicate for months in a laboratory setting. Scientists are hopeful about the potential for long term rejuvenation using these self-renewing human stem cells.

In addition to embryonic stem cell research, there is also adult stem cell research being done. Undifferentiated adult stem cells are found amid similar cells and they exist to repair damaged tissue. Scientists are examining where adult stem cells are naturally found in the body, as well as which factors control the differentiation and proliferation of these stem cells. Stem cells can be harvested easily from the adult human body and this branch of research does not involve the destruction of a human embryo, so there is much less stem cell controversy surrounding adult cells.

While stem cell research has been full of controversy in America, other nations, notably Iran, have nothing against stem cell research at all. “Policies that may be classified as liberal in the American political system seem to be common sense to Iranian politicians,” explains Hassan Ashktorab of the Howard University Cancer Center in Washington, DC. While George W. Bush banned research on fetal stem cells, Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei embraced the modern science. While human cloning is still condemned in Iranian culture, they believe it is their duty to do their best to prevent illness and protect human life.

Lawrence Ebert asked:


Stem cells, undifferentiated cells which have the ability to turn into specific cell types, hold promise to beneficially impact health problems such as diabetes, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases, stroke, heart attack and spinal cord injury. Before his death, Christopher Reeve was a strong advocate of research in stem cells.

There has been controversy about certain types of stem cells. There are three sources of stem cells, of which one type, cells derived from early stage human embryos, has caused political division, because the creation of an embryonic stem cell “line” requires the destruction of a human embryo. Because of this, President Bush in 2001, stated his intention to “allow federal funds to be used for research on existing stem cell lines, where the life and death decision has already been made,” but no federal funds would be available for new stem cell lines. This choice has been debated. The television show “60 Minutes” reviewed the issue twice in the month of February 2006, on February 12 and on February 26.

In the state of New Jersey, the debate has been roughly on partisan lines, with Democrats favoring funding of stem reseach, and (some) Republicans opposed. However, there is a separate division as to “what kind” of stem cell research. Hedging its bets, New Jersey has proposed spending $150 million on cutting-edge research on stem cells, including the controversial embryonic stem cells, $50 million on research on less controversial research focused on stem cells from cord blood, placentas and other human tissue, and $50 million on a center directed to commercial applications and clinical trials of adult stem cells.

The area of commercial applications has created unanticipated problems in the brave new world of large-scale state-funding of research. A legal opinion in 2005 prepared for California State Treasurer Angelides suggested that tax-exempt bonds could not be used to fund research wherein the state would share in money generated by the research (specifically sharing in payments by people who used patents generated by the state-funded research). A meeting of stem cell people in March 2006 revealed a new problem. The holders of patents which already exist in the area want future researchers (such as those in California) to pay them for doing research utilizing their patents. Ironically, the demand was made by one state (Wisconsin’s WARF) against another state (California’s CIRM). With the announcement that South Korea will proceed with patent applications of the disgraced researcher Woo Suk Hwang, one realizes that there are likely to be many patent holders in the field, all seeking to cash in on the large amounts of money being made available by states such as California, New Jersey, Maryland, Connecticut, and Illinois. An important message to appreciate is that money from state-funding of stem cell research intended to create new horizons in medical treatment may be directed to paying off holders of already-created rights.

Some of the problems may be resolved. A recent decision by the Supreme Court (Merck v. Integra) defines a large safe harbor for those conducting research needed to obtain federal regulatory approval (e.g., FDA approval). This research exemption may moderate the impact of claims such as those by Wisconsin against California. However, expectations of tangible results on a short time scale may be unrealistic. One may question whether state funding will produce any FDA approved embryonic stem cell therapy in ten years. Patents issued in the next few years may be “too soon” in time because commercialization of embryonic stem cell work is a long way off. This is an exciting time in a promising area, but with the unknowns one must recognize that there will be bumps in the road.

Don Margolis asked:


Due to Adult Stem Cell research, doctors are now being able to increasingly treat diseases that were previously untreatable. Pulmonary Hypertension is the latest disease to be added to this growing list.

Earlier this year, Karl Wagner, 46, of Macon, Georgia was believed to be the first person in the world to receive Adult Stem Cell therapy for pulmonary hypertension.

Karl had been suffering since being diagnosed with primary pulmonary hypertension. He was taking medication, but despite the medication, he was still having violent chest pains, heart palpitations, and fatigue. His constant shortness of breath kept him on oxygen all the time. He couldn’t play with his daughters. The doctors at Mayo Clinic gave Karl about 3 more years to live.

Luckily, Karl came across a doctor who predicted that Adult Stem Cells would be beneficial to pulmonary hypertension. Karl decided to try it as he didn’t have anything to lose.

In February, 2008, Karl had a small amount of blood drawn from his arm. The stem cells in the blood were separated and then cultured and multiplied. One week later, Karl had the Adult Stem Cells implanted.

9 months later, Karl has made a 180 degree turn for the better. Before the stem cell treatment, Karl’s pulmonary artery mean pressure was 41mmHg (severe pulmonary hypertension) Now, his pressure is at 24 mmHg which is considered normal.

Karl’s quality of life has changed as well. Karl takes his daughters to school every morning and then goes to work all day. He is off almost all of my medications and says he feels 10 times better than he did before. He says he feels great.

The doctor who treated Karl said that the Adult Stem Cells created new blood vessels which replaced the damaged blood vessels in his lungs. Since treating Karl, the doctor has treated more patients with pulmonary hypertension with similar results.

Joseph C. asked:


Therapies using stem cells have at least forty years since the first bone marrow transplant was performed in 1969 by Edward Donnall Thomas, Nobel Prize for medicine in 1990, based on a research he carried out since the fifties. But we now know that bone marrow transplants are in fact hematopoietic stem cell grafts. 4239 transplants were performed in France, just in 2007.

The idea of using umbilical cord blood stem cells is old, an article published in one of the world’s leading general medical journals, “The Lancet”, was considering this possibility since 1939 and the first attempt to treat a patient suffering from cancer by transfusion dates from 1963. But only in 1988 the team of Professor Eliane Gluckman at Saint-Louis hospital could establish the protocol followed now, in operating the first successful transplant to treat a child suffering from Franconi disease. Therapies derived from cord blood, either to treat bone marrow diseases or reconstitute the dermis, require the involvement of the state which must act as a driving force, otherwise its liability could be one day potentially involved due to the lack of information provided.

Existing Therapies

The first successful therapeutic efforts based on umbilical cord blood were focused on blood diseases. In a second time, advances in knowledge of the different types of stem cells and their function will undoubtedly allow soon, the development of new therapies with the ability to repair the dermis of irradiated people and those with big burns.

Current Therapies Related to Blood Diseases

Hematopoietic stem cells from cord blood can favorably replace bone marrow cells for several reasons. Firstly, the greater immaturity of cord blood stem cells provides a more effective transplant. On the other hand, the chances to find a sample of cord blood compatible with a patient which has no parental relationship with the donor, are significantly higher than those of finding a bone marrow donor for an allogenic transplant.

The statistics given by Professor Gregory Katz-Benichou for the United States show that a third of patients waiting for bone marrow transplantation, have to find a donor outside their families and less than a third of them (9% of total patients) found a compatible donor. Conversely, all the investigations made in order to establish the number of cord blood transplants available worldwide were successful. Thus all patients undergoing a cord blood transplant are finding compatible grafts.

Over 20 000 people have been transplanted since 1988 and it is not surprising that cord blood transplants are growing each year at the expense of bone marrow. In 2007, cord blood transplants accounted for 27% of allogenic transplants performed in France.

Sebastian Blackstone asked:


This election season, Catholic issues have begun to take center stage. With Gov. Sarah Palin’s strong stance on life, Nancy Pelosi’s quotation of the doctors of the Church, Joe Biden’s “private conviction” on abortion, and the Catholic bishops unequivocal public statements, things are just heating up. It is important to reflect on where candidates stand on the issues important to Catholics.

There’s a great comparison of the candidates on the five non-negotiable issues for Catholics at ecatholichub.net/si/vote-2008/compare-candidates. They examine the candidates positions on abortion, euthanasia, embyronic stem-cell research, human cloning and homosexual “marriage.”

First of all: abortion. Barack Obama has affirmed time and again his support for abortion and even infanticide, if his record in the Illinois State Senate is considered. Mr. Obama has stated that he does not considered unborn infants to be persons “entitled to the kinds of protections” found in the Constitution. The National Association the Repeal Abortion Laws has stated they look forward to working with a “pro-choice Obama White House.”

John McCain, on the other hand has taken a pro-life stance on the abortion issue. In the 2000 primary campaign for president, he advocated changing the platform of the Republican party to insist on exceptions from an abortion ban for cases of rape and incest-which disagrees with Catholic teaching. But Mr. McCain has stated that Roe v. Wade ought to be overturned and famously, that life begins “at the moment of conception.” John McCain has staked out for himself the pro-life real estate in America for the 2008 election, while Mr. Obama has done the opposite.

Second, euthanasia. Barack Obama stated that he regretted his vote to allow the family of Terri Schiavo to take their case to the federal courts to prevent her imminent death. He also stated that he thinks the state Oregon “did a service for the country” by passing a pro-assisted suicide referendum. Mr. Obama’s position directly opposes the Catholic teaching that euthanasia or “mercy-killing” is wrong in all cases. Mr. McCain also expressed regret about the way the Senate handled the Terri Schiavo case. However, he has yet to stake out a firm position on this issue.

Third, embryonic stem cell research. Both Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain voted “yes” on Senate Bill 5, which provided federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. President Bush vetoed this bill. The Catholic Church has repeatedly issued teachings against embryonic stem cell research because it holds that human life begins at conception.

Fourth, human cloning. Barack Obama co-sponsored a Senate Bill 1520 that would allow for human cloning of embryos, but would not allow the embryos to be maintained alive for more than 14 days. But John McCain has stated again and again that he is “strongly opposed” to human cloning. McCain’s view lines up with Church teaching on this issue.

Finally, homosexual “marriage.” Barack Obama voted against the Marriage Protection Amendment and has stated that he would oppose any efforts banning gay marriage. John McCain stated his support for marriage between one man and one woman, yet he is open to allowing gay couples to enter into some type of civil unions or partnerships. The Catholic bishops in the United States have made many public statements that marriage between a man and a woman is the fundamental building block of society and ought not to be re-defined by political bodies.

After briefly noting each of these five important Catholic issues, neither Barack Obama nor John McCain shines as a “Catholic” candidate. However, Obama’s consistent opposition to Church teaching on every one of these issues make him less worthy of the Catholic vote. But John McCain will stand with Catholics in opposing abortion, euthanasia, human cloning and gay marriage. John McCain is the best choice of the two for American Catholics voting in 2008.

Alvin Toh asked:


Cord blood, also called placental blood, is the blood that remains in the placenta and umbilical cord following birth, after the umbilical cord is cut. Generally, this blood is disposed of with the placenta and umbilical cord. There is much controversy regarding the use of stem cell research as it pertains to the use of embryos. However, there have been new scientific breakthroughs in the field of stem cell research using cord blood stem cells from living babies.

A team of South Korean researchers, headed by Prof. Kang Kyung-sun of Seoul National University, has successfully grown pancreatic beta cells from umbilical cord blood stem cells of newborn babies. The stem cells are able to secrete insulin, the hormone necessary for treatment of diabetes. The ability of cord blood stem cells to differentiate, or change into other types of cells in the body is a new discovery that holds great promise for improving the treatment of some of the most common diseases including diabetes. This achievement would be highlighted by The Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, the U.S.-based weekly, that documents breakthrough papers in biotechnology.

Similar breakthroughs have been achieved by scientists throughout the world. Researchers at the University of Newcastle, in Dublin, produced a ‘mini liver’ from cord blood stem cells. The technique will be developed to create a full-sized, fully functioning liver. Tissues from mini-livers will be used to test new drugs. Researchers are hopeful that within five years, pieces of the tissue can be used to repair damaged livers and within 15 years, actual liver transplants may be done using lab-grown livers made from cord blood. This is a significant achievement that can potentially develop treatments for liver diseases.

In a study published by the University of Minnesota, researchers discovered that some umbilical cord blood cells possess similar characteristics to primitive stem cells. According to Walter Low, Ph.D., senior investigator of the study and professor of Neurosurgery and the Stem Cell Institute at the University of Minnesota, this major discovery is crucial to understanding how cord blood stem cells can restore brain function after injury such as in stroke. In a laboratory test, cord blood stem cells were transplanted into rodents with controlled strokes. The results: some limb function was restored and the size of brain lesions was reduced. Cord blood stem cells developed into neuron-type cells, similar to those found in the brain. They also stimulated nerve fibers in the brain, thus the regained function in rats. This finding will significantly help advance the development of stroke research.

Stem cell technology has been advancing forward in leaps and bounds. The breakthroughs in cord blood stem cell research can substantially speed up the development of treatments for life-threatening diseases and debilitating conditions. Cord blood stem cell research avoids much of the controversy and problems associated with embryonic stem cell research.

J Lindgren asked:


Today is an age where the value of human life is becoming disregarded more and more. Our society’s youngest members are viewed as a mere commodity for the use in research and the development of cures for various diseases. One of the most vulnerable members of our human race is referred to as “excess” embryos or “frozen tissue” in vitro fertilization clinics. They are only regarded as “potential” human beings. Even pro-life members of Congress have wavered on this issue of gathering embryonic stem cells from frozen embryos that would be discarded anyway.

There has been a great deal of controversy surrounding the use of the taxpayer’s money to support the research of embryonic stem cells. The Castle-De-Gette bill which was passed in the House of Representatives (2005) wanted to override the President’s ban concerning federal funding for embryonic stem cell research on lines as stem cells after August of 2001. Many have the opinion that these embryos are only potential human beings and that they should be used to find ways to cure disease. Republican Majority Leader Tom De Lay stated that this bill would use funding by the taxpayers for the dismemberment of distinct, living human beings. This is, in fact, a very good analysis of the process of what we now call embryonic stem cell research. The frozen embryos we speak of are first and foremost human life.

On the same day that Congress passed a bill that was going to aim at using the money from taxpayer’s to fund the destruction of embryos that had been frozen from in vitro fertilization clinics, President Bush was welcoming into the White House families who had adopted these so called excess embryos.

In 1997 Nightlight’s Snowflakes Frozen Embryo Adoption started its program. It was able to match 230 genetic families with approximately 145 adopting families. To date, 81 babies have been born and more are expected. This shows that these “excess” frozen embryos are the smallest people in our society today, and they should be respected just as any other member of society is respected.

President Bush’s stance has always been that embryonic stem cell research does, in fact, destroy human life. He said, that, while he had increased the funding for research regarding adult stem cells, he believed that the Castle-de-Gette bill would create new ways to destroy human life. Of course, proponents of embryonic stem research would argue that the potential human life embryos are majorly contributing to society in that the focus is being made to cure diseases such as Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, and heart disease. However, each and every human life is a most precious gift of matchless value.

Mike Selvon asked:


Adult stem cell research has advanced in leaps and bounds over the past decade. What was once viewed as inflexible, unable to proliferate and set in its ways has now been found to revert back to its earlier state. New evidence suggests that taking an adult stem cell from bone marrow or the spinal cord can become a blank slate like fetal stem cells, rather than possessing the sole ability to produce more bone marrow or more spinal cord tissue only. As a result of this finding, scientists hope to create more effective treatments for a wide range of degenerative diseases and disabling injuries.

The adult stem cell shares two characteristics with the fetal stem cell. They can both replicate to create identical copies of themselves for extended periods of time, thus are self-renewing. Additionally, they can morph into other cell types and perform specialized functions. While it was previously believed that adult stem cells were set in their ways and committed to becoming a particular cell type, it’s recently been discovered that they are, in fact, much more flexible than was ever imagined.

One of the most exciting adult stem cell discoveries occurred in 2008 when researchers at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California coaxed mouse brain stemcells to differentiate into support cells and function with the surrounding neuronal network. When pampered in a Petri dish, scientists found that they could encourage oligodendrocyte cells to form the fatty myelin sheath that speeds up the transfer of electrical signals along the axons.

They could also stimulate cellular growth in the hippocampus; the brain’s center for memories and learning. Scientists hope this research can provide a breakthrough in the treatment of multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s, stroke and epilepsy.

There are a few challenges to working with the adult stem cell. If used outside the body, scientists must take great care to ensure the culture is 100% germ-free and pure. In many studies using mice, the cultures have been only 80% pure. As an organism ages, there are a number of factors that could jeopardize the purity of the stem cell sample, such as exposure to toxins, disease or DNA errors, for instance.

Great care must also be taken to ensure that cells replicate as needed and don’t go crazy to form cancerous tumors. Since the immune system is trained to attack any foreign invaders, any stem cell transplants may be subject to intense scrutiny, even if it is derived from one’s own cells. Despite these challenges, there is much to be excited about in the field of adult stem cell research.

Eric Schultz asked:


The Republican Party is known for its social conservatism and economic libertarian policies. The Grand Old Party (GOP) in general favors the conservative platform on major issues but does every Republican subscribe to these beliefs and policies. Read on to find the many faces within the conservative Republican Party .

Religious Right : These conservatives are a major force within the GOP and most of its members are fundamentalist Protestants, Evangelicals, traditionist Catholics and Mormons. They oppose abortion, legalizing same-sex marriage and embryonic stem-cell research. Neoconservatives : They support interventionist foreign policy and pre-emptive military action against designated enemy under certain circumstances. They are the strongest supporters of the war on Iraq. Social conservatives : They believe in promoting traditional moral values to preserve and improve society. Fiscal conservatives : They favor large reductions in overall taxation, reduced domestic spending and limited government regulation. Paleoconservatives : They are generally conservative on social issues but favor protectionist policy in international trade and isolationist foreign policy. Libertarian conservatives : They favor free-markets and minimal social controls and generally support gay rights, abortion and stem-cell research. Moderates : They tend to be somewhere between the fiscally conservative and socially liberal. While sharing the economic views of other Republican with regards to balanced budget, free trade, lower taxes, etc., they differ in their support for gay rights, abortion irights, gun control, environmental regulation, federal funding of education, fewer restriction on immigration and illegal immigration, abolition of death penalty civil rights laws, leagalization of drugs, stem-cell research, anti-war policies, etc. Log Cabin Republicans : They are a group of gay Republicans who favor gay rights. They are at loggerheads with the religious heads and are sometimes referred to as ‘closet libertarians’ for the socially liberal and fiscally conservative views. Liberals : Also called ‘Rockfeller Republicans” refers to the groups which supported the new sequence of reform and measures initiated by President Franklin D. Roosevelt during 1933-38t to bring the United States out of the Great Depression.

Whew, that a huge variety of Republicans! Which faction does your candidate belong to? Find out his political views and beliefs before casting your precious vote.

Stacey Costa asked:


The buzz is continuing in earnest; mainstream media is reporting more and more on the advancements of the use of Adult Stem Cells to regenerate damaged tissue in humans, dogs and horses. Regenerative labs, research facilities and Stem Cell clinics are starting to get noticed by the world. It’s a wonderful thing that there is finally a shift toward fixing the root cause of a health issue instead of just treating the symptoms. One of the issues however is the cost of undergoing a typical Stem Cell therapy program can be a little overwhelming in these difficult economic times.

Stem Cell treatments for animals can range anywhere from $1500 to $5000, the good news is the procedure can be done here in the USA and some insurance companies may even cover some of the cost. Treatment for humans however, is a different story. Since our draconian government has taken power over anything dealing with a medical procedure or medicine in general in this country and doesn’t allow it in the United States on humans, one must travel outside the country to try and save their lives, so the cost can be a real hardship because insurance companies will not cover these procedures. Typical costs associated with just one Stem Cell treatment can range anywhere from $10,000.00 to $30,000.00 not including airfare, lodging and meals. That amount of money buys you an injection of approximately 1-2 million stem cells.

The basics of the procedure is to cultivate Adult Stem Cells from the patients own bone marrow, blood or fat tissue then the cultivated stem cells are re injected back into the patient so that they may rebuild the damaged tissue. There is now however a new class of product on the nutritional supplement market labeled “Stem Cell enhancers” which support the body’s natural renewal system by promoting approximately a 25% increase (about 3-4 million) of Adult Stem Cells from the bone marrow within 45 minutes of consuming 2 capsules at a cost of about .80 ¢ so at this point it becomes a matter of simple economics, a 6 to 12 month supply for about $700.00 to $900.00 for 3-4 million Stem Cells every 2 capsules or $10,000.00 to $30,000.00+ for 1-2 million Stem Cells 1 time?

Colum Fitzroy asked:


People suffering from Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s, ALS (or Lou Gehrig’s disease), spinal cord injury, cerebral palsy, etc., are hopeful that stem cell research will soon provide a cure for their disease or condition.

Everyday, headlines announce yet another astounding scientific breakthrough involving stem cells.
Unfortunately, most of these eye-opening discoveries are taking place at the animal research level, among mice, rats, etc.

In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration carefully regulates the development and application of new treatments for diseases and disorders. It uses a scientific process that begins with animal studies and extends methodically through various levels of clinical trials involving humans.

Only then, when the treatment has proven both safe and effective, does the FDA allow release of the new drug or treatment to the marketplace for use by doctors.

But desperate patients are anything but patient when it comes to waiting for stem cell-based treatments. They are listening to the pitches of clinics and hospitals outside of the United States that promise cures using stem cells.

The result is that medical tourism (also called health tourism) for stem cell treatments has become a huge growth industry, populated with quacks, snake oil salesmen, and charlatans.

They take advantage of the fact that stem cell therapy is virtually unregulated in certain countries. Overly optimistic patients and their families spend many thousands of dollars for mostly unproven treatments, and for travel, accommodations, etc.

The provider Web sites are full of testimonials from supposedly satisfied patients. However, none of the providers offer scientific evidence of their treatments’ success. And none spend any time discussing their failures.

The simple fact is: anyone promising effective treatments for any disease or disorder using stem cells today (other than those involving blood cancers and certain other blood disorders) is flat out lying.

A physician-researcher at the Duke University Medical Center told me, “We blood and marrow transplant specialists have been using cells derived from bone marrow, peripheral mobilized blood, and umbilical cord blood for many years in the treatment of a number of fatal diseases including leukemia, lymphoma, immune deficiencies, bone marrow failure syndromes and a number of inherited metabolic disorders.”

Another researcher at the Washington University School of Medicine echoed that observation: “Hematopoietic stem cells have been in use in the clinic since 1957 in the context of bone marrow transplants. They have been used to cure immunodeficiency, sickle cell anemia, and to rescue patients from high doses of chemotherapy. Other types of stem cells, such as mesenchymal stem cells are in clinical trials now.”

But beyond that, frankly, there is no scientifically proven stem cell-based treatment for human diseases and disorders.

There are some clinical trials involving humans underway as well. All of this is certainly cause for optimism. But patience is the appropriate watchword. We’re still a long way from treatments and cures.
A noted stem cell researcher the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine told me in a recent interview that he is frustrated at not being able to help patients right now.

“As a physician-scientist who sees patients almost every day who need replacement tissues and organs, it is frustrating not to be able to provide what they need,” he said. “On the other hand, I see great promise in the science of regenerative medicine and know that with a national commitment to succeed, we will make advances that can solve many of these problems.”

That is the voice of reason.

Unfortunately, though people should know that treatments and cures are a long way away, they generally don’t. Or they ignore reasoned voices out of a desperate need to help a sick or disabled child or other loved one. And that leaves a hole that scam artists can drive a truck through.

What desperate patients don’t need is to be robbed of thousands of dollars by unscrupulous “medical professionals” out to make a quick buck.

So, be warned. At this point in time, most of the stem cell-based treatments and cures being offered in foreign countries are utterly bogus.

The right path to clinical success in stem cell research, at least in countries like the United States, Canada, the UK, France, etc., involves rigorous adherence to scientific method and FDA approval. Anyone who has skipped that process is nothing more than a quack.

Yvonne Perry asked:


The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act Round One:

In 2001, President Bush released federal funds for research using stem cells leftover from in-vitro fertilization attempts prior to August 9, 2001.

The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act Round Two:

Congresswoman Diane DeGette of Colorado is a staunch supporter of blastocyst (embryonic) stem cell research. Ms. DeGette is part of a coalition that passed H.R. 810 (the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act) in the House over the objections of GOP leaders, Bush and social conservatives.

H.R. 810 was then passed by Congress in 2006 with a vote of 63 to 37. That’s only 4 votes short of a 2/3 majority.

Supporters held their breath while they hoped and prayed that federal funds would be released for research on hundreds of new lines of in-vitro blastocyst stem cell to be used for research regardless of the date they were fertilized.

Influenced by the opinion of politicians and members of the religious community, President Bush made a decision to veto H.R. 810. This had a heartbreaking impact on members of our society who have physical and medical disabilities hoping for treatments derived from the research on these microscopic cells.

The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act Round Three:

Congresswoman DeGette and Representative Mike Castle reintroduced the bill as “H.R. 3″ or S. 5 in 110th Congress in January 2007. The bill is set to go before the Senate soon, but President Bush has declared that he will veto this bill once again. However, if the bill passes the Senate with a 2/3 majority (67), Bush’s veto will fail.

As citizens, we must do something to help pass the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act in the Senate! We need the Stem Cell Research Enhancement to pass because:

Scientists need higher quality of stem cells to work with. Many of the “Bush-approved” lines have been contaminated with mouse feeder cells and cannot be used for research that might provide treatment for humans. The newer cell lines would not have animal feeders.

The technology used for harvesting blastocyst stem cells has improved greatly since August 2001. The bill, S. 5, will give researchers access to higher quality cultures than those fertilized prior to August 9, 2001. The newer cells renew more quickly for reproducibility and would include diversity in race and genetic types.

We need to turn the vote of just one Senator. We are one vote away, so please take a few minutes to send the sample letter found at http://stemcellbattles.com to your Senator.

A new book titled Right to Recover: Winning the Political and Religious Wars over Stem Cell Research in America is being published in the summer of 2007. Visit www.right2recover.com for more information about stem cell research.