Print
$271 Million for Research on Stem Cells in California
by NY Times
Thanks to Catalin for the link.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/us/08stem.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1210346037-pWLnir86B78uZZzuXlR92g
$271 Million for Research on Stem Cells in California
By ANDREW POLLACK
LOS ANGELES — California has awarded $271 million in grants to build 12 stem cell research centers in the state, even as one of the political rationales for the building program might soon disappear.
The awards, announced here Wednesday, represent the largest chunk of money awarded at one time by California's taxpayer-backed stem cell program, which is slated to spend about $3 billion over about a decade.
The universities and research institutes that are receiving the money have said they would spend an additional $560 million on the laboratory construction, money they are trying to raise from donations. The resulting total of $831 million would add nearly 800,000 square feet of research space to house 2,200 scientists.
One reason the buildings are needed is that the Bush administration now prohibits federal financing of research using any human embryonic stem cells derived after August 2001, because creating such cells entails the destruction of human embryos. That has meant that work involving newer stem cell lines cannot share even a microscope with a project that is federally financed.
At the University of California, San Francisco, for instance, stem cell scientists had to work in rented space off-campus for many years. In December 2002, a huge storm caused power failures in the Bay Area, destroying cell lines that were being grown in incubators. Had the work been conducted on campus, backup generators would have kept the incubators operating.
"Several years of work literally went down the drain," said Dr. Arnold Kriegstein, director of the university's stem cell program. The university will now receive $35 million to build a $95 million research center.
But the restrictions might be lifted by a new president as early as next year. All three main presidential candidates have expressed support for expanded financing of human embryonic stem cell research.
"Now that the money is flowing, those federal restrictions are going to be removed," said Jesse Reynolds, a policy analyst at the Center for Genetics and Society in Oakland, which supports stem cell research but has at times criticized the California project.
Robert N. Klein, the chairman of the board of the California program, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, argued Wednesday that the state could not take for granted that federal restrictions would be lifted. Mr. Klein said Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican nominee, had expressed opposition to some types of stem cell research.
Moreover, Mr. Klein and university representatives say that even if the restrictions are lifted, new laboratory space will be needed to expand research and to recruit scientists, who are already flocking to California because of the research financing.
Some officials also said the construction would provide an economic stimulus at a time of a weak economy and a huge state budget deficit. The stem cell program, approved by voters in 2004, is financed by bonds and is largely immune to state budget-cutting pressures.
Alan Trounson, the president of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, said the new buildings would allow scientists to work together, accelerating the development of medical treatments.
Proposition 71, the 2004 ballot initiative that authorized the program, limits spending on buildings to 10 percent of the total $3 billion.
Most of the major universities and research institutes in the state, including 9 of the 10 University of California campuses, will get money for new buildings.
Stanford University will get the biggest award, nearly $44 million, to build a $200 million stem cell center.
The University of California, San Diego, teamed up with the nearby Burnham Institute for Medical Research, the Salk Institute and the Scripps Research Institute. The team will receive $43 million for its building.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/us/08stem.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1210346037-pWLnir86B78uZZzuXlR92g
$271 Million for Research on Stem Cells in California
By ANDREW POLLACK
LOS ANGELES — California has awarded $271 million in grants to build 12 stem cell research centers in the state, even as one of the political rationales for the building program might soon disappear.
The awards, announced here Wednesday, represent the largest chunk of money awarded at one time by California's taxpayer-backed stem cell program, which is slated to spend about $3 billion over about a decade.
The universities and research institutes that are receiving the money have said they would spend an additional $560 million on the laboratory construction, money they are trying to raise from donations. The resulting total of $831 million would add nearly 800,000 square feet of research space to house 2,200 scientists.
One reason the buildings are needed is that the Bush administration now prohibits federal financing of research using any human embryonic stem cells derived after August 2001, because creating such cells entails the destruction of human embryos. That has meant that work involving newer stem cell lines cannot share even a microscope with a project that is federally financed.
At the University of California, San Francisco, for instance, stem cell scientists had to work in rented space off-campus for many years. In December 2002, a huge storm caused power failures in the Bay Area, destroying cell lines that were being grown in incubators. Had the work been conducted on campus, backup generators would have kept the incubators operating.
"Several years of work literally went down the drain," said Dr. Arnold Kriegstein, director of the university's stem cell program. The university will now receive $35 million to build a $95 million research center.
But the restrictions might be lifted by a new president as early as next year. All three main presidential candidates have expressed support for expanded financing of human embryonic stem cell research.
"Now that the money is flowing, those federal restrictions are going to be removed," said Jesse Reynolds, a policy analyst at the Center for Genetics and Society in Oakland, which supports stem cell research but has at times criticized the California project.
Robert N. Klein, the chairman of the board of the California program, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, argued Wednesday that the state could not take for granted that federal restrictions would be lifted. Mr. Klein said Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican nominee, had expressed opposition to some types of stem cell research.
Moreover, Mr. Klein and university representatives say that even if the restrictions are lifted, new laboratory space will be needed to expand research and to recruit scientists, who are already flocking to California because of the research financing.
Some officials also said the construction would provide an economic stimulus at a time of a weak economy and a huge state budget deficit. The stem cell program, approved by voters in 2004, is financed by bonds and is largely immune to state budget-cutting pressures.
Alan Trounson, the president of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, said the new buildings would allow scientists to work together, accelerating the development of medical treatments.
Proposition 71, the 2004 ballot initiative that authorized the program, limits spending on buildings to 10 percent of the total $3 billion.
Most of the major universities and research institutes in the state, including 9 of the 10 University of California campuses, will get money for new buildings.
Stanford University will get the biggest award, nearly $44 million, to build a $200 million stem cell center.
The University of California, San Diego, teamed up with the nearby Burnham Institute for Medical Research, the Salk Institute and the Scripps Research Institute. The team will receive $43 million for its building.
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Friday, May 9, 2008 | PermalinkComments 1 - 37 of 37 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #177524 by lozzer on May 9, 2008 at 8:30 am
The great thing is that every single country which is very anti-stem cell research will be on their knees one day begging for stem cell influenced medicine.It's gonna make Canada very rich. Other Comments by lozzer
3. Comment #177527 by Nentuaby on May 9, 2008 at 8:41 am
Every once in a while, we Californians are reminded of just why we put up with our outsize state and local governments. Our officious a*holes at least approach life from a reality-based perspective instead of the religious claptrap the ones in Washington are all so fond of.Other Comments by Nentuaby
4. Comment #177534 by thewhitepearl on May 9, 2008 at 8:57 am
All I have to say is WHOO HOOO! Other Comments by thewhitepearl
5. Comment #177546 by 82abhilash on May 9, 2008 at 9:24 am
I live in California and am mighty damn proud it, for now.Other Comments by 82abhilash
6. Comment #177554 by someonefree on May 9, 2008 at 9:43 am
The great thing is that every single country which is very anti-stem cell research will be on their knees one day begging for stem cell influenced medicine.It's gonna make Canada very rich.Canada is looking better and better these days, comparing to US. I live in NYC so perhaps I shouldn't complain given the situation in the rest of US.
Other Comments by someonefree
7. Comment #177576 by leviticus on May 9, 2008 at 10:21 am
Well thank goodness California has found a way to help bring the U.S. back up to par in stem cell research, as we have fallen far behind not only Canada but the many Asian countries that already have established stem cell programs. Other Comments by leviticus
8. Comment #177583 by jmrunning3 on May 9, 2008 at 10:33 am
This is wonderful news! I'm so glad California has the foresight to self-finance and proceed with this in spite of Bush and Co.'s dogmatic federal disapproval.I simply cannot fathom the argument about "destroying human embryos". Aren't they frozen in the first place? One would think that to be mightily uncomfortable for those little things. Also, weren't they conceived and kept alive wholly outside the womb? God can't even claim do that, therefore theological arguments shouldn't apply in the first place.
Congratulations, CA!
Other Comments by jmrunning3
9. Comment #177590 by mordacious1 on May 9, 2008 at 10:39 am
First, CA can still receive Federal grants on top of what we are already spending. B) If we can get the facilities and the scientists here before everyone else, it will put us in a prime position to corner the market. The only downside is, that CA, NY, MA tend to drain the rest of the country of people with brains, and we know what that leads to.Other Comments by mordacious1
10. Comment #177598 by mcashin on May 9, 2008 at 10:42 am
1 in 9 people in the US live in California, a fact that is often overlooked as politicians pander to the tiny but influential states in the rest of the country. Whenever my state takes action counter the policy of the Federal government (fuel efficiency standards, health care reform, marijuana reform- just to list what happened THIS week), I have hope for the whole country. California is the spearhead of progress in the United States, and this stem cell funding is an outgrowth of that.Other Comments by mcashin
11. Comment #177601 by Logicel on May 9, 2008 at 10:47 am
Way to go, CA! The Constitution and the great scientific achievements are the two aspects I love best about America. My heart has been broken listening to all the damage that Bush and his degenerates have done to science in America in the last years. Other Comments by Logicel
12. Comment #177620 by Nova on May 9, 2008 at 11:23 am
jmrunning3 typed:I'm so glad California has the foresight to self-finance
No thanks to the federal government - did you know that for every $1 California gives to the Union it only gets 80 cent back? It is normal for the rich parts of a country to help the poor - the former West Germany even has an explicit tax to help the former East Germany - but it annoys me because that 20 cent goes to progress stopping theocratic states like Texas and Utah (funny the more religious states are usually the poorest, looks like God is skint).
Other Comments by Nova
13. Comment #177634 by RSP on May 9, 2008 at 11:55 am
Christopher Reeve will be psyched about this several years ago.Other Comments by RSP
14. Comment #177649 by shemp333 on May 9, 2008 at 12:13 pm
It's about time.... This is WAY overdue. I hope to see about future fruits from this research. Other Comments by shemp333
15. Comment #177674 by bluebird on May 9, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Open up your Golden Gates, California here they (scientists) come!
Meanwhile, back at the ranch (Missouri), the battle continues:
http://sanantonio.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/2008/05/05/daily7.html
Other Comments by bluebird
16. Comment #177687 by SamKiddoGordon on May 9, 2008 at 1:33 pm
I have 160 acres 2.5 hrs north of Edmonton Alberta Canada for anyone interested in heading north. Not just Canada is #1, Alberta is #1 in CanadaOther Comments by SamKiddoGordon
17. Comment #177703 by good day sunshine on May 9, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Moving to California this fall for college, and I couldn't be more excited. Gotta love the enlightened states.Other Comments by good day sunshine
18. Comment #177724 by Darwin's badger on May 9, 2008 at 2:50 pm
This almost atones for the Red Hot Chili Peppers. Other Comments by Darwin's badger
19. Comment #177738 by moderndaythomas on May 9, 2008 at 3:14 pm
A nice first step.
Perhaps somebody's tired of seeing the foreign students take their education back to their countries where they can actually practice some science.
Other Comments by moderndaythomas
20. Comment #177745 by mjwemdee on May 9, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Bravo California! However, as a Brit who is rather ignorant of US state politics, I had to smile at the irony of this progressive step being made only months before a new presidency might have facilitated it anyway. Good to know that other countries besides the UK fall victim to this sort of political idiocy.
Other Comments by mjwemdee
21. Comment #177751 by Andrew Stich on May 9, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Great news! Could explain to me in detail, in comprehensive terms, the exact methods that go into stem cell research? I remember something about extracting DNA from a given person and using it as a basis for the production of new stem cells, which will work especially well if used on the person who provided the DNA, but that could be innaccurate/fatally incomplete. Could someone more knowledgable than me comment on it please?"I have 160 acres 2.5 hrs north of Edmonton Alberta Canada for anyone interested in heading north. Not just Canada is #1, Alberta is #1 in Canada"
Cool, another Edmontonian. I thought I was the only one.
Other Comments by Andrew Stich
22. Comment #177756 by Podaar on May 9, 2008 at 3:55 pm
12. Comment #177620 by Nova
Interesting statements you've made.
theocratic states like Texas and UtahOpinion or do you have evidence?
funny the more religious states are usually the poorestOpinion or do you have evidence?
I'd love to see your evidence, if you have it.
Other Comments by Podaar
23. Comment #177773 by scooternyc on May 9, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Podaar, actually this Pew Research shows a significant lack of income and education among those that have strong religious beliefs.
http://religions.pewforum.org/comparisons
You can further research for yourself that the United States in general is second to last, before Turkey, in nations that don't believe in Evolution, which has obvious scientific implications.
Sadly, the level of education is no more than high school, at 50% of the national total it's disturbing.
Also, in this research, places like Texas are at greater percentages of the evangelical slant. utah shows a strong percentage, as well.
http://religions.pewforum.org/maps
Check it out for yourself and see what your thoughts are on the data. It's highly disturbing when you compare what has happened to Persia all these centuries ago by admonishing mathematics, thus science, and only seeking their version of their god; it really has stunted their evolutionary process. Now they're just insane but with oil - dangerous combination.
Other Comments by scooternyc
24. Comment #177783 by mordacious1 on May 9, 2008 at 5:26 pm
scooternyc: I was suprised that the unaffiliated in Utah (16%) was roughly the same as MA (17%), that's a good sign I think.Other Comments by mordacious1
25. Comment #177800 by scooternyc on May 9, 2008 at 6:00 pm
mordacious1 - well, sadly, none of its good, but you have managed to find the silver lining, I admit and concur. LOL! Other Comments by scooternyc
26. Comment #177807 by Bonzai on May 9, 2008 at 6:08 pm
The terminator rules!Other Comments by Bonzai
27. Comment #177856 by dragonfirematrix on May 9, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Below is a quote from the article, which displays such the disgusting attitude of our religiously radicalized president, George W. Bush."One reason the buildings are needed is that the Bush administration now prohibits federal financing of research using any human embryonic stem cells derived after August 2001, because creating such cells entails the destruction of human embryos. "
Bush does not mind spending trillions on religious wars that kill countless innocent fully grown embryos (people), but Bush considers it immoral to hurt that GD tiny embryo. In my opinion, the radicalized religious right wants that embryo raised to an adult-hood so Bush and his radicalized conservative Neanderthals can kill the grown cell in another religious war.
Bush, your god is a total failure. I do not believe in gods, but for argument sake, it is your god who senselessly kills millions with terrorizing, torturous, natural disasters alone, not to mention starvation and decease, the hate and wars waged by your Abrahamic religions, and almost countless other horrors against humanity.
I am sixty and have degenertive disks in my upper spine, which cause pain and weakness. It sure would be nice to grow some new disks from stem cells and implant them in my spine replacing the faulty ones.
Science rocks. Science is the truth, the light, and the way. No man comes unto the truth except by proof. Bring on the embryonic stem cell research.
Other Comments by dragonfirematrix
28. Comment #177880 by ksskidude on May 9, 2008 at 9:55 pm
As an individual with a spinal cord injury, this is fantastic news. The best news is still yet to come, and that will be when idiot GWB is finally out of office and the next President of the USA will finally start funding the research as it should have been.
But bewarned middle America, the Religious Right wants to ban this research in Missouri, and make it illegal for patients to one day even get cures from it.
Other Comments by ksskidude
29. Comment #177891 by Podaar on May 9, 2008 at 10:55 pm
23. Comment #177773 by scooternyc
Interesting. From the data it looks like; if you want a good education and income level, being Hindu is a good start. :)
Utah and New York have the same level of religiousness, but Texas is quite high.
Oregon appears to be America's utopia of freedom from religion at 27%.
Thanks for the info! I'll be very interested in the 'theocracy' evidence when it arrives.
Other Comments by Podaar
30. Comment #177951 by scooternyc on May 10, 2008 at 3:51 am
Well, "theocracy" evidence I'm not sure. ;)
However, I think a case can be made that the greater the level of religiosity the more likely it is that an implicit theocratic culture exists whereby bigotry and ignorance abound.
Personally, I take no issue with anyone wanting to believe in their version of god to which they derive personal subjective morals to live life.
I do take issue when those beliefs infringe on the civil liberties of others.
In the case of this subject, research, which does not infringe on the civil liberties of another, is being thwarted by nothing more than someone's personal subjective philosophy of life rooted in a concept of behaving as though he or she thinks they know something.
To assign "soul" to an embryo is to stretch the religious philosophy, but philosophy it is, nonetheless and subjective at that.
It's a blastocyst and does not possess a soul. To assign it such, one would have to prove "a god" followed by "their specific god" further revealed that it is "his word" that deems this blastocyst a soul.
Then we've only scratched the surface of opening the discussion for dialogue, it doesn't render the decision over.
All life is equal across the board, deciding one life is more important over another is subjective.
Religion decided that embryos are more important. That's fine, for them.
Again, if an individual doesn't want her embryos used for this research, then deem it so. However, deciding that others need follow that same choice is infringing on the civil liberties of others and is against our Constitutional Law.
Other Comments by scooternyc
31. Comment #178001 by Podaar on May 10, 2008 at 8:14 am
Comment #177951 by scooternyc
I agree with everything you posted in 177951. I'm not sure what it has to do with Nova calling Utah and Texas theocracies, but it is on topic. :)
Other Comments by Podaar
32. Comment #178033 by scooternyc on May 10, 2008 at 10:11 am
Well, the religious wish to impose their personal subjective philosophy onto others, to the extent that abortion is abhorrent to them, this includes using embryos for stem cell research as they believe that conception is the moment when god infuses the soul and life begins.
Such claims are extreme but are nonetheless inhibiting this important research.
To make a claim by which you infringe on the civil liberties of others compels the religious to prove their claim by which they are implicitly attempting to take ownership, of not just our nation, but our behavior, as well.
If, however, you're being sarcastic and I'm approaching this much to seriously, then you're right, it has nothing to do with the subject and I'm simply typing for practice. ;)
Other Comments by scooternyc
33. Comment #178107 by Nova on May 10, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Podaar typed:Utah and New York have the same level of religiousness, but Texas is quite high.In the case of Utah it isn't the amount of religiosity that counts, its the fact its so unified, New York has much more diverse religion than vastly Mormon Utah (about 69 percent according to http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761577046_6/Utah.html#s58) with such unity the religious are far more powerful (in addition Mormonism is a comparatively strict and demanding type of Christianity). I didn't mean theocracy in the legal sense I meant in the sense that thats what its sometimes like in practice, with people in Texas being afraid to come out as atheist for fear their businesses will lose customers.
Oregon appears to be America's utopia of freedom from religion at 27%.
Thanks for the info! I'll be very interested in the 'theocracy' evidence when it arrives.
Other Comments by Nova
34. Comment #178118 by Podaar on May 10, 2008 at 2:27 pm
32. Comment #178033 by scooternyc
It was me being off topic. I was just pointing out that your being on topic wasn't addressing Nova's theocracy point that I took exception too. For what its worth, I agree with you and think you spoke elequently to your points.
[edit]Oh, and I've never heard of the Mormon leadership speak out against stem cell research. The voting practices of Utah Mormons would lead you to believe they are against it though. I'll have to research to find out if they have an official theological position.[/edit]
33. Comment #178107 by Nova
didn't mean theocracy in the legal sense I meant in the sense that thats what its sometimes like in practice...I thought that was what you meant, but it's nice to hear you spell it out. Living in Utah, I'd have to agree with you that it can feel like a theocracy...at times. However, in practice Utah is much less restrictive than it appears on the surface. While I wish Mormon theology would get flushed down the toilet of bad ideas, at least they don't (theologically and in practice) deny evolution.
Other Comments by Podaar
35. Comment #178172 by Dr Benway on May 10, 2008 at 5:13 pm
"One reason the buildings are needed is that the Bush administration now prohibits federal financing of research using any human embryonic stem cells derived after August 2001, because creating such cells entails the destruction of human embryos. "The frozen embryos in IVF clinics are destroyed when they're not implanted. Strangely, no one cries.
Other Comments by Dr Benway
36. Comment #178192 by riandouglas on May 10, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Dr. Benway: The frozen embryos in IVF clinics are destroyed when they're not implanted. Strangely, no one cries.
Baby Jesus cries!
It is interesting that that point doesn't seem to enter the debate, even as an after thought "...abortion is murder. Oh, and destroying IVF embryo's is murder too."
Something to do with weight of numbers, or selective ignorance?
Other Comments by riandouglas
37. Comment #178671 by Mr. Grape on May 11, 2008 at 9:56 pm
By mjwemdee "Bravo California! However, as a Brit who is rather ignorant of US state politics, I had to smile at the irony of this progressive step being made only months before a new presidency might have facilitated it anyway.Good to know that other countries besides the UK fall victim to this sort of political idiocy. "
For the past decade America has literally been 50/50 when it comes to republicans and democrats. I would not feel comfortable in leaving the future of stem cell research in the states, to a coin toss. Especially when the next candidates to be ok with the research is a black man and a woman. Call me cynical, but there is no way in hell america will be electing them. Plus, CA is being smart by making it the "capital" of stem cell research. Lots of bright minds will be flocking here.
To quote another member, "I live in California and am mighty damn proud it, for now."
Other Comments by Mr. Grape
Upcoming Events:
About this site
Mailing List Signup: Enter your email
Go to The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
Richard Dawkins Articles | Comments | Tour Journal
Atheist Resources | Local Groups
Debate Points | Latest Responses
Links:
Quotes of Note:
"Most people can't bear to sit in church for an hour on Sundays. How are they supposed to live somewhere very similar to it for eternity?"
Mark Twain
"I think it is not helpful to apply Darwinian language too widely. Conquest of nation by nation is too distant for Darwinian explanations to be helpful."
Richard Dawkins
"They said God was on high and he controlled the world and therefore we must pray against Satan. Well, if God controls the world, he controls Satan. For me, religion was full of misstatements and reaches of logic that I just couldn't agree with."
Gene Roddenberry
"Certainly I see the scientific view of the world as incompatible with religion, but that is not what is interesting about it. It is also incompatible with magic, but that also is not worth stressing. What is interesting about the scientific world view is that it is true, inspiring, remarkable and that it unites a whole lot of phenomena under a single heading."
Richard Dawkins
"No doubt soaring cathedrals, stirring music, moving stories and parables, help a bit. But by far the most important variable determining your religion is the accident of birth."
Richard Dawkins
Other Recommended Reading
Letter to a Christian Nation
Sam Harris
The End of Faith
Sam Harris
Richard Dawkins
Alan Grafen, Mark Ridley
Before the Dawn
Nicholas Wade
Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters
Donald R. Prothero
More Books
Adjust font size: 
"If this book doesn't change the world -- we're all screwed."
-Penn (Penn & Teller)
The God Delusion
by Richard Dawkins
Over 1.5 million copies sold
DVDs
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'AAI 2007 Conference' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Original Program' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
1. Comment #177519 by robotaholic on May 9, 2008 at 8:22 am
I could definitely live with California being the Stem Cell Capital of the worldOther Comments by robotaholic