STEM CELL NEWS

May 24, 2001

you can obtain stem cells from umbilical cords (cord stem cell), is this an issue for Bush as well as embryos? Can you obtain them from embryonic fluid? The embryos are being aborted anyway, correct? How are religious group s justifying it (just out of plain curiousity)? I used to work in bone marrow transplant research, but I never heard any ansers to these questions. Does anybody know?

- Waverley >>> pbower@... 05/24/01 12:41PM >>> This is being forwarded from the Parkinson's Listserv: --------------- Subject: Re: Stem Cell Research - Letter Received Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 23:59:37 -0700 From: Murray Charters < Murray_Charters@... > > > On 02/12/01, I sent an e-mail to President Bush requesting his support > of Federal funding for stem cell research. Today, I received a letter > of response, dated May 18. > > The letter from President Bush outlined his support of medical research. > He mentioned his proposal to double the funding for National Institutes > of Health medical research. He said he has called for an extension of > the Research and Development tax credit to encourage companies to > continue research. > > Then, he said, "I oppose Federal funding for stem-cell research that > involves destroying living human embryos." He went on to say he > supports innovative medical research, including research using adult > stem cells. > > The bottom line: strong support of medical research, opposition to > Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. > > Dave Bergford > 59 now / 58 dx. / 55 onset Hi Dave and Hi All, Please Read this article.... >From the Los Angeles Times Fat may yield useful stem cells Breakthrough could eliminate the controversial use of fetal tissue in quest to treat disease and repair injury By H. Maugh II Times Staff Writer Originally published April 10, 2001 http://www.sunspot.net/news/health/bal-stem10.story?coll=bal%2Dhealth%2Dheadlines Now go to Medline Search page and enter the names of the researchers (Hedrick, Longaker, Guilak, and Katz) one at a time and see what kind of research papers turn up. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query Yep, that's what I think..... These guys are researching skin, and tissue, and cartilage, and fat, and liposuction.... It's their forte.. They are "plastic surgeons"? Now go to this article.... Another Step Closer to Growing New Brain Cells for Parkinson's Patients In Animal Study, Cells Appear Normal; Could Lead to Parkinson's Treatment By Dan Ferber, PhD WebMD Medical News Reviewed by Dr. Charlotte E. Grayson Feb. 16, 2001 http://my.webmd.com/condition_center_content/prk/article/1728.72667 Now go to Medline Search page and enter the names of the researchers (Isacson, McKay) one at a time and see what kind of research papers turn up. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query Yep, that's right... These guys are scientests who have dedicated their lives and their life work to solving the mysteries of a group of chronic neurologic disorders. They are representitive of the research I'm encouraged will result in better understanding of Parkinson's, Diabetes, Alzheimers etc. and research that may lead to better treatments, reversal of progression, or even a cure! Now, I'm no expert. I have no medical or scientific background or training. (Just a red-necked mechanic with Parkinson's) But, by , if I was in charge of placing the NIH funds, I would not put all the money on the lipo-suction boys. I wouldn't be putting the fate of 1.5 million Americans with Parkinson's in their trust. I sure wouldn't be calling on them to do MY brain surgery! I'm just appalled that more folks aren't up in arms over what seems to this red-necked mechanic to be a gross distortion of fact. The lipo-suction boys and fat cells simply do not make embryonic stem cell research unnecessary and redundant no matter what spin the LA Times writer may put on them. It is understandable that the anti-embryonic stem cell groups would seize upon the headline and use it to their advantage. But, The LA Times oughta be ashamed of themselves. The scientific advisors to the President should also be ashamed of themselves if they don't relay the truth in this matter. Do the learned professionals on this List feel we should abandon embryonic stem cell research in favor of this fat cell stuff? I don't think so! Now if W. Bush wants the lipo-suction boys to do HIS brain surgery, why, that's his business. I wish I could tell him how I feel about his position, but I'm a Canadian with no representation in DC... Obviously, I am very concerned. After all, a cure is a cure... and abandoning (or worse yet, banning) promising research is abandonment and the unkindest denial. I'd like to hear from the experts on this... Best regards ............ murray

May 24, 2001

No the embryos discussed here are not being aborted... the word aborted

as I understand it means that there is a termination in a pregnancy.

There has been no pregnancy. The so called embryos referred to are

actually fertilized eggs that have been frozen and later are being discarded

when infertile couples decide that they no longer want to go through more

in-vitro fertilization and implantation procedures. The fertilized

egg will not become an embryo unless it is implanted into the uterus of

a human female and begins to grow there. These fertilized eggs are

routinely frozen and saved for future IVF attempts by a couple. Those

who support use of these frozen fertilized eggs believe that if they will

be discarded anyway then they should be used to obtain stem cells for research

provided the couple who "own them" have signed an appropriate donor

form.

Regards,

Pam

Waverley Beauchamp wrote:

you can obtain stem cells from

umbilical cords (cord stem cell), is this an issue for Bush as well as

embryos? Can you obtain them from embryonic fluid? The embryos are

being aborted anyway, correct? How are religious group s justifying

it (just out of plain curiousity)? I used to work in bone marrow

transplant research, but I never heard any ansers to these questions.

Does anybody know?- Waverley

>>> pbower@... 05/24/01 12:41PM >>>

This is being forwarded from the Parkinson's Listserv:

---------------

Subject:

Re: Stem Cell Research - Letter Received

Date:

Wed, 23 May 2001 23:59:37 -0700

From:

Murray Charters < Murray_Charters@...

>

> On 02/12/01, I sent an e-mail to President Bush requesting his

support

> of Federal funding for stem cell research. Today, I received a

letter

> of response, dated May 18.

>

> The letter from President Bush outlined his support of medical

research.

> He mentioned his proposal to double the funding for National

Institutes

> of Health medical research. He said he has called for an extension

of

> the Research and Development tax credit to encourage companies to

> continue research.

>

> Then, he said, "I oppose Federal funding for stem-cell research that

> involves destroying living human embryos." He went on to say he

> supports innovative medical research, including research using adult

> stem cells.

>

> The bottom line: strong support of medical research, opposition to

> Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

>

> Dave Bergford

> 59 now / 58 dx. / 55 onset

Hi Dave and Hi All,

Please Read this article....

>From the Los Angeles Times

Fat may yield useful stem cells

Breakthrough could eliminate the controversial use of

fetal tissue in quest to treat disease and repair injury

By H. Maugh II

Times Staff Writer

Originally published April 10, 2001

http://www.sunspot.net/news/health/bal-stem10.story?coll=bal%2Dhealth%2Dheadlines

Now go to Medline Search page and enter the names of the

researchers (Hedrick, Longaker, Guilak, and Katz) one at a

time and see what kind of research papers turn up.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query

Yep, that's what I think..... These guys are researching skin,

and tissue, and cartilage, and fat, and liposuction....

It's their forte.. They are "plastic surgeons"?

Now go to this article....

Another Step Closer to Growing New Brain Cells

for Parkinson's Patients In Animal Study,

Cells Appear Normal; Could Lead to Parkinson's Treatment

By Dan Ferber, PhD

WebMD Medical News

Reviewed by Dr. Charlotte E. Grayson

Feb. 16, 2001

http://my.webmd.com/condition_center_content/prk/article/1728.72667

Now go to Medline Search page and enter the names of the

researchers (Isacson, McKay) one at a

time and see what kind of research papers turn up.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query

Yep, that's right... These guys are scientests who have

dedicated their lives and their life work to solving the

mysteries of a group of chronic neurologic disorders.

They are representitive of the research I'm encouraged will

result in better understanding of Parkinson's, Diabetes,

Alzheimers etc. and research that may lead to better

treatments, reversal of progression, or even a cure!

Now, I'm no expert. I have no medical or scientific

background or training. (Just a red-necked mechanic

with Parkinson's) But, by , if I was in charge

of placing the NIH funds, I would not put all the money

on the lipo-suction boys. I wouldn't be putting

the fate of 1.5 million Americans with Parkinson's in

their trust. I sure wouldn't be calling on them to do MY

brain surgery!

I'm just appalled that more folks aren't up in arms

over what seems to this red-necked mechanic to be

a gross distortion of fact.

The lipo-suction boys and fat cells simply do not make

embryonic stem cell research unnecessary and redundant

no matter what spin the LA Times writer may put on them.

It is understandable that the anti-embryonic stem cell groups

would seize upon the headline and use it to their advantage.

But, The LA Times oughta be ashamed of themselves.

The scientific advisors to the President should also be ashamed

of themselves if they don't relay the truth in this matter.

Do the learned professionals on this List feel we should abandon

embryonic stem cell research in favor of this fat cell stuff?

I don't think so!

Now if W. Bush wants the lipo-suction boys to

do HIS brain surgery, why, that's his business.

I wish I could tell him how I feel about his position, but I'm

a Canadian with no representation in DC... Obviously, I am

very concerned. After all, a cure is a cure... and abandoning

(or worse yet, banning) promising research is abandonment

and the unkindest denial.

I'd like to hear from the experts on this...

Best regards ............ murray

May 24, 2001

Thanks Pam,

So these fertilized eggs have never "taken" inside a womb. Additionally, they are confirmed to be life potentials, meaning the sperm has penetrated the egg and a change is taking place with the egg. Now this makes much more sense. I am so glad to get a straight answer : ) Those couples pay a lot for the fertilization process- are they not charged for those they do not use?

side note: aborted means termination of pregnancy whether it is sponataneouss (miscarriage) or induced

- Waverley

>>> pbower@... 05/24/01 02:40PM >>>No the embryos discussed here are not being aborted... the word aborted as I understand it means that there is a termination in a pregnancy. There has been no pregnancy. The so called embryos referred to are actually fertilized eggs that have been frozen and later are being discarded when infertile couples decide that they no longer want to go through more in-vitro fertilization and implantation procedures. The fertilized egg will not become an embryo unless it is implanted into the uterus of a human female and begins to grow there. These fertilized eggs are routinely frozen and saved for future IVF attempts by a couple. Those who support use of these frozen fertilized eggs believe that if they will be discarded anyway then they should be used to obtain stem cells for research provided the couple who "own them" have signed an appropriate donor form.

Regards, Pam Waverley Beauchamp wrote: you can obtain stem cells from umbilical cords (cord stem cell), is this an issue for Bush as well as embryos? Can you obtain them from embryonic fluid? The embryos are being aborted anyway, correct? How are religious group s justifying it (just out of plain curiousity)? I used to work in bone marrow transplant research, but I never heard any ansers to these questions. Does anybody know?- Waverley >>> pbower@... 05/24/01 12:41PM >>> This is being forwarded from the Parkinson's Listserv: --------------- Subject: Re: Stem Cell Research - Letter Received Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 23:59:37 -0700 From: Murray Charters < Murray_Charters@... > > > On 02/12/01, I sent an e-mail to President Bush requesting his support > of Federal funding for stem cell research. Today, I received a letter > of response, dated May 18. > > The letter from President Bush outlined his support of medical research. > He mentioned his proposal to double the funding for National Institutes > of Health medical research. He said he has called for an extension of > the Research and Development tax credit to encourage companies to > continue research. > > Then, he said, "I oppose Federal funding for stem-cell research that > involves destroying living human embryos." He went on to say he > supports innovative medical research, including research using adult > stem cells. > > The bottom line: strong support of medical research, opposition to > Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. > > Dave Bergford > 59 now / 58 dx. / 55 onset Hi Dave and Hi All, Please Read this article.... >From the Los Angeles Times Fat may yield useful stem cells Breakthrough could eliminate the controversial use of fetal tissue in quest to treat disease and repair injury By H. Maugh II Times Staff Writer Originally published April 10, 2001 http://www.sunspot.net/news/health/bal-stem10.story?coll=bal%2Dhealth%2Dheadlines Now go to Medline Search page and enter the names of the researchers (Hedrick, Longaker, Guilak, and Katz) one at a time and see what kind of research papers turn up. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query Yep, that's what I think..... These guys are researching skin, and tissue, and cartilage, and fat, and liposuction.... It's their forte.. They are "plastic surgeons"? Now go to this article.... Another Step Closer to Growing New Brain Cells for Parkinson's Patients In Animal Study, Cells Appear Normal; Could Lead to Parkinson's Treatment By Dan Ferber, PhD WebMD Medical News Reviewed by Dr. Charlotte E. Grayson Feb. 16, 2001 http://my.webmd.com/condition_center_content/prk/article/1728.72667 Now go to Medline Search page and enter the names of the researchers (Isacson, McKay) one at a time and see what kind of research papers turn up. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query Yep, that's right... These guys are scientests who have dedicated their lives and their life work to solving the mysteries of a group of chronic neurologic disorders. They are representitive of the research I'm encouraged will result in better understanding of Parkinson's, Diabetes, Alzheimers etc. and research that may lead to better treatments, reversal of progression, or even a cure! Now, I'm no expert. I have no medical or scientific background or training. (Just a red-necked mechanic with Parkinson's) But, by , if I was in charge of placing the NIH funds, I would not put all the money on the lipo-suction boys. I wouldn't be putting the fate of 1.5 million Americans with Parkinson's in their trust. I sure wouldn't be calling on them to do MY brain surgery! I'm just appalled that more folks aren't up in arms over what seems to this red-necked mechanic to be a gross distortion of fact. The lipo-suction boys and fat cells simply do not make embryonic stem cell research unnecessary and redundant no matter what spin the LA Times writer may put on them. It is understandable that the anti-embryonic stem cell groups would seize upon the headline and use it to their advantage. But, The LA Times oughta be ashamed of themselves. The scientific advisors to the President should also be ashamed of themselves if they don't relay the truth in this matter. Do the learned professionals on this List feel we should abandon embryonic stem cell research in favor of this fat cell stuff? I don't think so! Now if W. Bush wants the lipo-suction boys to do HIS brain surgery, why, that's his business. I wish I could tell him how I feel about his position, but I'm a Canadian with no representation in DC... Obviously, I am very concerned. After all, a cure is a cure... and abandoning (or worse yet, banning) promising research is abandonment and the unkindest denial. I'd like to hear from the experts on this... Best regards ............ murray

May 24, 2001

Yes you are correct that the sperm has penetrated the egg and the cells

are starting to divide... however this still does not become an embryo

capable of becoming a human unless it is exposed to hormones produced inside

the womb. When fertilization occurs naturally in the fallopian tubes

it takes up to 10 days for the fertilized egg to travel down the tubes

and implant on the wall of the uterus. More often than not the fertilized

egg does not implant as the uterus may not be receptive for implantation

and the woman menstruates as usual never knowing she could have potentially

been pregnant. In IVF the fertilized eggs are reintroduced to the

uterus after only 2 days have passed.

My understanding of IVF is that you pay for each procedure which includes

harvesting of eggs, fertilization in vitro, and then the implantation procedure.

On top of that are fertility drugs that induce ovulation and additonal

drugs to make the womb receptive to implantation. Depending on the

fertility clinic they will attempt to implant more than one fertilized

egg at a time as not all of them will implant and this increases the chances

of having at least one baby. Some clinics have a limit that they

will only attempt to implant 2 or 3 and no more... if there are additional

fertilized eggs available then they can be frozen and used later.

I don't know if they have to pay to keep them around in the frozen state,

this might be included in the initial fee for their first attempt.

For their second or subsequent attempts having these frozen eggs would

eliminate the harvesting step in the procedure which would be significantly

less stressful on the woman.

For more info on IVF see http://www.beachcenter.com/ART/ivf.shtml

Regards,

Pam

Waverley Beauchamp wrote:

Thanks Pam, So

these fertilized eggs have never "taken" inside a womb. Additionally,

they are confirmed to be life potentials, meaning the sperm has penetrated

the egg and a change is taking place with the egg. Now this makes

much more sense. I am so glad to get a straight answer : )

Those couples pay a lot for the fertilization process- are they not charged

for those they do not use? side note: aborted

means termination of pregnancy whether it is sponataneouss (miscarriage)

or induced - Waverley

>>> pbower@... 05/24/01 02:40PM >>>