domingo, 13 de julio de 2014

BioEdge: the latest news and articles about bioethics

BioEdge: the latest news and articles about bioethics



Bioedge

Michael Cook
Editor
BioEdge











Hi there,
In 2004 voters in California passed Proposition 71, a ballot measure which set up the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) and allotted US$3 billion in funding over ten years.
With California almost broke at the time, its prisons overflowing, its schools underfunded, its universities on a starvation diet, this was not an initiative which made a lot of sense – except that the Bush Administration was refusing to fund embryonic stem cell research. 
Californians were told that life-saving science was being held hostage to political conservatism and religious dogma. Embryonic stem cells and therapeutic cloning would cure diseases ranging from cancer to HIV/AIDS to mental health disorders. If the Feds wouldn't support it, California had to step forward. So 59 percent of voters supported the establishment of the CIRM. Why wouldn’t they? The official voter information guide said that “Proposition 71 is about curing diseases and saving lives”. Who could argue with that?
Ten years later, the CIRM is gearing up to ask voters for another $5 billion in 2016.
Unfortunately for the CIRM, the most impressive advances in stem cell science during that time happened elsewhere. It was a Japanese researcher who won the Nobel Prize for stem cell science.
And more importantly, there have been no cures. “Almost every country would be jealous of what they've got in California,” Christine Mummery, a scientist from the Netherlands, told Nature recently. The CIRM has great scientists, the best facilities, the most funding, hundreds of scientific articles. But says Dr Mummery, “they haven't cured a patient, which is the critique”.
The total cost to the Californian taxpayer will be $3 billion for research approved in 2004 plus $3 billion interest plus $5 billion in 2016 plus $5 billion interest. That's $16 billion. It seems like an expensive consolation prize for the CIRM's scientists for not having won a Nobel. My advice to Californians is: don't do it. 
Cheers,
Bioedge


This week in BioEdge
 







by Xavier Symons | Jul 12, 2014
Criticism of Lord Falconer's assisted suicide bill is mounting as the proposed legislation returns to the House of Lords. Public figures are arguing that it…







by Xavier Symons | Jul 12, 2014
A new article in the Journal of Medical Ethics suggests that medical authorities lessen informed consent requirements for perinatal sterilisation.







by Xavier Symons | Jul 12, 2014
Pro-euthanasia campaigner Phillip Nitschke is being investigated for his involvement in the death of 45 year old West Australian man. The Medical Board of Australia…







by Michael Cook | Jul 12, 2014
Would the device be safe and unhackable?







by Michael Cook | Jul 12, 2014
Not stigmatised by community, say researchers.







by Michael Cook | Jul 12, 2014
The CIRH puts its point of view.







by Michael Cook | Jul 12, 2014
He thought that the unfit should be sterilized.
BioEdge
Suite 12A, Level 2 | 5 George St | North Strathfield NSW 2137 | Australia
Phone: +61 2 8005 8605
Mobile: 0422-691-615

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario