Notta
07 Mar 2009, 03:14 AM
Nor does Obama's change fund creation of new lines. But it means that scientists who until now have had to rely on private donations to work with these newer stem cell lines can apply for government money for the research, just like they do for studies of gene therapy or other treatment approaches.
The aim of the policy is to restore "scientific integrity" to the process, the administration official said.
"America's biomedical research enterprise experienced steady decline over the past eight years, with shrinking budgets and policies that elevated ideology over science. This slowed the pace of discovery and the search for cures," said Sean Morrison, director of the University of Michigan's Center for Stem Cell Biology.
More here (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OBAMA_STEM_CELLS?SITE=AP)
I used to have my 13-year-old students write a persuasive essay on using stem cells from fertilized eggs. Most of them could understand that a group of frozen cells, unwanted by the donors, were a boon to scientific research. Even my pro-life students thought that they should be used for something, rather than just keep them frozen indefinitely.
The ruling will bring one immediate change: As of Monday, scientists who've had to meticulously keep separate their federally funded research and their privately funded stem cell work - from buying separate microscopes to even setting up labs in different buildings - won't have that expensive hurdle anymore.
Next, scientists can start applying for research grants from the National Institutes of Health. The NIH already has begun writing guidelines that, among other things, are expected to demand that the cells being used were derived with proper informed consent from the woman or couple who donated the original embryo.
When I worked at the NIH, and traveled around the country doing workshops, I was told in no uncertain terms that, if asked about stem cell research, I was to say, "The NIH supports the President's views on stem cells."
Thank goodness science is being removed from politics, one step at a time. The repeal of Bush's changes to the Endangered Species Act was another step in the right direction.
The aim of the policy is to restore "scientific integrity" to the process, the administration official said.
"America's biomedical research enterprise experienced steady decline over the past eight years, with shrinking budgets and policies that elevated ideology over science. This slowed the pace of discovery and the search for cures," said Sean Morrison, director of the University of Michigan's Center for Stem Cell Biology.
More here (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OBAMA_STEM_CELLS?SITE=AP)
I used to have my 13-year-old students write a persuasive essay on using stem cells from fertilized eggs. Most of them could understand that a group of frozen cells, unwanted by the donors, were a boon to scientific research. Even my pro-life students thought that they should be used for something, rather than just keep them frozen indefinitely.
The ruling will bring one immediate change: As of Monday, scientists who've had to meticulously keep separate their federally funded research and their privately funded stem cell work - from buying separate microscopes to even setting up labs in different buildings - won't have that expensive hurdle anymore.
Next, scientists can start applying for research grants from the National Institutes of Health. The NIH already has begun writing guidelines that, among other things, are expected to demand that the cells being used were derived with proper informed consent from the woman or couple who donated the original embryo.
When I worked at the NIH, and traveled around the country doing workshops, I was told in no uncertain terms that, if asked about stem cell research, I was to say, "The NIH supports the President's views on stem cells."
Thank goodness science is being removed from politics, one step at a time. The repeal of Bush's changes to the Endangered Species Act was another step in the right direction.