http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

President to veto
embryonic stem
cell research bill
   WASHINGTON — Pushing back against the Democratic-led Congress, President Bush intends to veto a bill today that would have eased restraints on federally funded embryonic stem cell research — work that supporters say holds promise for fighting disease.
   At the same time, Bush will discuss at a White House event his efforts to encourage work that could make additional stem cell lines available for research, presidential spokesman Tony Fratto said Tuesday.
   The president has accused majority Democrats of recycling an old measure that he already vetoed and argued that the bill would mean American taxpayers would — for the first time — be compelled to support the deliberate destruction of human embryos.

http://www.timesunion.com

Quoted Text

Bush vetoes embryonic stem cell bill  
  
By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press
Wednesday, June 20, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Vetoing a stem cell bill for the second time, President Bush on Wednesday sought to placate those who disagree with him by signing an executive order urging scientists toward what he termed "ethically responsible" research in the field.
    
Bush announced no new federal dollars for stem cell research, which supporters say holds the promise of disease cures, and his order would not allow researchers to do anything they couldn't do under existing restrictions.

Announcing his veto to a roomful of supporters, Bush said, "If this legislation became law, it would compel American taxpayers for the first time in our history to support the deliberate destruction of human embryos. I made it clear to Congress and to the American people that I will not allow our nation to cross this moral line."

He vetoed similar embryonic stem cell legislation last July.

His executive order encourages scientists to work with the government to add other kinds of stem cell research to the list of projects eligible for federal funding -- so long as it does not create, harm or destroy human embryos.

Democrats dismissed Bush's veto as a moral affront, and his executive order as a meaningless gesture meant to trick people into thinking he had advanced stem cell research. They said they would hold votes to try to override the veto -- or at least give the issue more air time.

"We also intend to continue bringing this up until we have a pro-stem cell president and a pro-stem cell Congress," said one of the House's chief sponsors, Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo.

Senate Democrats were expected to begin the process by trying to attach embryonic stem cell legislation this week to a must-pass appropriations bill for the Labor and Health and Human Services departments. By the 2008 elections, they predicted, Bush's veto of new public funding for embryonic stem cell research would be a top priority of voters in the congressional and presidential elections.

Public opinion polls show strong support for the research.

Republican presidential hopefuls are split on the scope of federal involvement in embryonic stem cell research. Sen. John McCain of Arizona and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani have broken with Bush -- and the GOP's social conservatives -- in backing the expansion of federal funding for such research. At the Republican debate on May 3, Giuliani said he supported such an expansion with limits, "as long as we're not creating life in order to destroy it, as long as we're not having human cloning."

Rivals Mitt Romney and Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas oppose the expansion. As governor of Massachusetts, Romney tried to stop legislation that encouraged expanded embryonic stem cell research. His veto was overturned.

Most of the Democratic candidates have urged Bush to expand the research.

The president is "deferring the hopes of millions of Americans who do not have the time to keep waiting for the cure that may save or extend lives," said Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., said if she is elected president, she will lift restrictions on stem cell research.
This is just one example of how the president puts ideology before science, politics before the needs of our families," she said.
Scientists were first able to conduct research with embryonic stem cells in 1998, according to the National Institutes of Health. There were no federal funds available for the work until Bush announced on Aug. 9, 2001, that his administration would spend tax money for research on lines of cells that already were in existence.

Currently, states and private organizations are permitted to fund embryonic stem cell research, but federal support is limited to cells that existed as of Aug. 9, 2001. The latest bill was aimed at lifting that restriction.

Bush urged support of legislation sponsored by Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., which passed the Senate but has not yet been taken up by the House. Coleman says his measure supports federal funding for embryonic stem cell research methods that do not harm embryos. "It provides for ethically responsible stem cell research sooner rather than later," Coleman said.

Bush said his executive order directs the Health and Human Services Department to promote research into cells that -- like human embryonic stem cells -- also hold the potential of regenerating into different types of cells that might be used to battle disease and make them eligible for federal funding.

The order also renames the NIH's Embryonic Stem Cell Registry the Pluripotent Stem Cell Registry so that it reflects what the stem cells can do, instead of their origin. Pluripotent stem cells are ones that can give rise to any kind of cell in the body except those required to develop a fetus.

"Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical, and it is not the only option before us," said Bush, who appeared on stage with Kaitlyne McNamara of Middletown, Conn., who was born with spina bifida, and is benefiting from what he called "ethical stem cell research."

Sean Tipton, president of the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research, expressed anger and disgust at the veto and Bush's order.

"His executive order directing NIH to continue pursing alternate forms of research is nothing new since NIH has already been conducting this research for the past 20 years," Tipton said.

Thank you, Mr. Bush.  Finally, something you can get right.

Quoted from BIGK75

Thank you, Mr. Bush.  Finally, something you can get right.

Perhaps right for us...but not for all! Watch the dem's closely. Hillary already said that she would not veto stem cell research if she were elected. And for all of the people who have ill loved ones, that have been promised a remedy or cure through stem cell research...Hillary will get their votes.

Another pandering-feelgood-feel sorry for ya move....if "Frankenstein" were alive today what would he say???

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Panel’s bill eases
stem cell veto
   WASHINGTON — Members of Congress who want taxpayer dollars spent on embryonic stem cell research answered President Bush’s veto by advancing a spending bill Thursday that includes permission to do just that.
   The Senate Appropriations Committee’s 26-3 vote was only the first of several waves of Democratdriven efforts to reverse the effect of Bush’s veto a day earlier. It’s not clear that any part of the plan will succeed in directing more federal funding to the controversial research before the 2008 elections.
   With the gavels of Congress in their hands for the first time in a dozen years, Democrats can try to make Bush’s veto hurt any candidate who sides with him.
   “This will be an election issue in 2008 not just in the House, not just in the Senate, but in the presidential election,” said one of the House’s chief sponsors of the bill Bush vetoed, Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo. “We … intend to continue bringing this up until we have a pro-stem cell president and a pro-stem cell Congress.”

The veto is for embryonic stem cell use only there are other forms of stem cell that would not be vetoes. Pres Bush does not want a baby to have to die so that someone can use it's stem cells.

And I agree with the same, Shadow.

I agree as well....but there are others who view an embryo as nothing more than a bunch of cells. And the cells that they want to use, are 'discarded' ones. Ones that they would 'just throw out' anyways.

So that is their argument! Clearly NOT MINE!

Quoted from Shadow

The veto is for embryonic stem cell use only there are other forms of stem cell that would not be vetoes. Pres Bush does not want a baby to have to die so that someone can use it's stem cells.

What difference is it for a fetus to have to die so someone can use it's stem cells or if a fetus has to die so someone can go to college??

HMMMMMMMMM......Good point...gotta think about that one!

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

http://www.timesunion.com

Quoted Text

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Bush stem-cell veto message contradictory
   When George W. Bush vetoed the stem cell research bill for the second time [June 21 Gazette], he said: “Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical.” Obviously, in his twisted right-tobirth mind, American soldiers and Afghan and Iraqi men, women and children are not human lives. What is really disturbing is that he does not grasp the irony of this statement.
   Mr. Bush is an embarrassment to the United States, to mankind and to his god.
   NICK COUPAS
   West Glenville

Well Mr. Nick Coupas....It is expected that people will die during a war. It should not be expected for a child to be conceived and then killed, for 'whatever' reason. It just doesn't work that way. Mr. Coupas, you are clearly mixing apples and oranges here and are clearly out of touch with  morality.

And to think that this mind set actually votes for our future!

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Goodman wrong about embryo use for research
HAL D. ZENDLE Niskayuna

   I have to take issue with Ellen Goodman’s June 15 comments.
   Scientists are predicting that stem cells for treating patients will someday be obtained by taking a typical “adult” body cell (like a skin cell) and transforming it. Ms. Goodman maintains that in order to learn how to do this, we must first start with cells obtained by killing embryos.
   The “logic of science” suggests that Ms. Goodman is wrong. We should be able to learn how to modify adult cells for treating patients without involving embryos. Genetic “tricks” done to an embryonic cell should also be “do-able” to an adult cell, with a few minor twists and turns. This makes sense when you realize that any one individual’s adult cells have exactly the same DNA as the embryonic cells they came from (barring mutations).
   At the very least, modifying “grownup” cells to behave like “baby” cells is an avenue of research that should be explored, and one that would be eligible for federal funding since embryos are spared!

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Cloning pets is becoming feasible, but at what cost?
BY SARA TRACEY
Senior, Shenendehowa High School East

   Remember the childhood pet who shared your bed and was your everyday playmate? The one who was there, rain or shine, whenever you needed a wagging tail or a comforting purr. The friend you think about every once in a while, wishing you could see its furry face again?
   That may happen one day.
   Advances in cloning pets are being made and with that, the realization that one day you may be able to copy your pet. With just a little bit of your pet’s DNA, it is becoming feasible to duplicate the pet. Although, in the case of cats, it may not look 100 percent like your feline friend as a cat’s coat is only partly genetically determined — other factors during development influence fur color and pattern — according to researchers at Texas A&M University, where the first cat clone was created in 2001. The kitten was named “CC” for carbon copy, although it is not identical to its donor.
   In January of 2002, another domestic cat was cloned. Its two offspring, Baba Ganoush and Tabouleh, were paraded around New York City during the New York Cat Show at Madison Square Garden in 2004 and treated like celebrities.
   Dogs are harder to
clone, scientists say.
In 2005, however, in South Korea, a cloned Afghan hound was born. The first attempt in the United States to create an exact replica of a dog, a mutt named Missy, failed. Scientists hope dog clones will help them understand, research and come up with new treatments for serious human diseases, since dogs suffer very similar diseases as people.
HOW CLONING WORKS
   The process of cloning, according to Shenendehowa biology teacher Stephen Klein, involves using an egg from one creature and genetic material from the pet. For example, scientists could start with an egg from a dog, remove the nucleus and insert tissue carrying genetic information from your pet into the egg’s cytoplasm.
   If successful, the egg starts dividing and develops into an embryo. The embryo is then placed into the mother, or surrogate mother, and carried to term.
   Interest in copying the genetics of an animal grew when Dolly, a sheep, was cloned in 1996 in Scotland. Though the sheep had to be put to death last year because of a fatal lung virus, she sparked interest in the world’s cloning efforts.
   Even before Dolly was cloned, Hollywood’s imagination was sparked as movies such as “Jurassic Park” and “Multiplicity” were released in 1994 and 1996, respectively. Though these movies were entertaining, cloning experiments happened in fantasy films for good reason — cloning costs.
   The process of cloning a pet cat was being offered by Genetic Savings and Clone, a privately held company based in Sausalito, Calif., at a cost of $50,000. Evidently, copying cats was too expensive, as the company has since closed.
   “You have to be a little nuts, and superrich, to throw that kind of money into cloning a pet when $50,000 can go so far to educating, clothing, and feeding our own poor as well as the world’s poor,” says Klein.
   “I think people who do that could better spend their money on helping humans first — dogs, cats and chickens second,” said student Renae Townsend.
MORAL ISSUES
   Though some people object to the cost, others are livid about the ethical and moral issues raised. Humanitarians and animal-rights activists, such as the Humane Society of the United States, argue that shelters kill roughly 4 million animals every year. They feel cloning pets is wrong because there are more than enough animals available for adoption. There are others who oppose cloning on religious grounds.
   Even if you’re willing to spend the money to clone your favorite pet, chances are it won’t be the same as the original since the environment and other factors effect the pet’s personality.
   Let’s face it: Rex number two will never be as good as the original.

http://www.timesunion.com

Quoted Text

Paterson's article on stem cells raises concerns  

First published: Monday, July 2, 2007

Through the years I have appreciated the concern of our public servant Lt. Gov. David Paterson for his constituents. That is why his recent commentary on stem cells ("Stem cells' promise merits more," June 22) disappoints and disturbs me.
  
While it is true that embryonic stem cells have the potential to develop into all the body's cell types when left undisturbed in the womb, it may not be as true that they hold this capability in the laboratory. Ignoring the pluripotency of mesenchymal stem cells (bone marrow) and other reports of pluripotency in non-embryonic stem cells (nasal, umbilical cord, etc.) is deceptive and can be misleading to the public.

The lieutenant governor's article raises many concerns for me. As one who has been dedicated to the education of women for decades, I know that embryonic stem cell research suggests a need for a steady and plentiful supply of women's eggs. Ads in daily newspapers and college newspapers, as well as on TV and in the theater, encourage women to donate their eggs.

There is no public policy, consensus or regulation for this practice. Questions of risk and informed consent must be considered; there is potential for the exploitation of women.

The need for enhancements in stem cell research is irrefutable, as the lieutenant governor suggests. It is critical for the public to educate themselves regarding all the complexities of the biological, economic and social implications of embryonic cells and adult stem cells. Perhaps then the taxpayers can decide how to invest their dollars.

COLETTE MAHONEY, RSHM, Ph.D., President emeritus Marymount Manhattan College Tarrytown.

  

Quoted Text

What difference is it for a fetus to have to die so someone can use it's stem cells or if a fetus has to die so someone can go to college??

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

State may soon start funding stem cell research
BY BOB CONNER Gazette Reporter
Reach Gazette reporter Bob Conner at 462-2499 or bconner@dailygazette.net.

   The state hopes to start committing money for stem cell research this fiscal year, according to Dr. Lawrence Sturman, executive director of the new Empire State Stem Cell Board.
   The state’s fiscal year ends March 31, but Sturman said he does not expect all of the currently available $100 million to be committed by then, and the money would actually be spent later as research is done. In this year’s budget, the state pledged a total of $600 million over the next 10 years. Sturman, who is director of the state Health Department’s Wadsworth Center research laboratory, said Capital Region institutions such as Albany Medical College, the University at Albany and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute could wind up doing some of the work.
   Gov. Eliot Spitzer last week named his appointees to the board, which is composed of two committees, one on funding and the other on ethics, both chaired by Health Commissioner Dr. Richard Daines. The majority of each committee will be gubernatorial appointees. Daines will make the ultimate funding decisions subject, as other state contracts are, to review by the comptroller and attorney general, Sturman said.
   On Monday, Scott Reif, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, R-Brunswick, confirmed that Bruno’s two appointees to the ethics panel are the Rev. Thomas Berg and Dr. Colin Goddard.
   Goddard is CEO of OSI Pharmaceuticals, which on its Web site describes itself as “specializing in the discovery and development of innovative molecular targeted therapies.” In 2005, he was named the first recipient of the Biotechnology Leadership Award by the New York Biotechnology Association.
   Berg, a Roman Catholic priest, is director of the Westchester Institute for Ethics & the Human Person, and an opponent of embryonic stem cell research.
   The Spitzer administration and many scientists support embryonic research, which they say holds the most promise of finding cures for diseases. However, opponents say it commonly involves the destruction of human life.
   David Smingler, a spokesman for Sen. Hugh Farley, R-Niskayuna, said the senator was among those who recommended Berg to Bruno.
   Sen. Martin Golden, R-Brooklyn, who like Farley opposes embryonic research, said recent studies show promise of productive stem cell research without destroying embryos. This is both an ethical and a funding issue, Golden said, because conforming to federal guidelines could maximize federal aid. The Bush administration has placed restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
   Sturman said embryonic research will be one of a number of issues to be considered by the ethics committee. He noted that the federal restrictions do not amount to a prohibition, and said New York is one of the states where federal money is funding embryonic research.
   The state program, however, is not bound by the federal restrictions.
   Sturman said he did not know the position of the Spitzer appointees, including Daines, on embryonic stem cell research. Christine Pritchard, a spokeswoman for Spitzer, said there was no “litmus test” on the issue.
   The governor’s office released statements in support of his appointments from backers of embryonic stem cell research, including Susan Solomon, president of the New York Stem Cell Foundation, and Rabbi Dennis Ross, director of Concerned Clergy for Choice.
   Spitzer said in a statement that his appointees will “bring thoughtful leadership, scientific expertise, and ethical considerations to the advancement of stem cell research.”
   Dennis Poust, spokesman for the New York State Catholic Conference, said the conference is interested in the composition of the ethics committee, but declined further comment, saying it would be “imprudent” to discuss the conference’s strategy in opposing embryonic research.
   Phil Oliva, chief spokesman for Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco, R-Schenectady, said Tedisco’s appointee to the ethics panel will not support research involving the destruction of human embryos.
   The press office of Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan, did not respond to a question about whom he would appoint, but Silver has in the past criticized opponents of embryonic stem cell research.
   Sturman said the stem cell board and its committees would hold open meetings in different parts of the state.  

  
  
  

Here comes planet of the apes......Hitler's regime did this kind of thing in the camps--didn't they??

Quoted Text

In this year’s budget, the state pledged a total of $600 million over the next 10 years.

So Spitzer is spending our hard earned money BEFORE we even make it! And with everyone moving the hell out of this state, the few left will be paying out even more! And now Spitzer (the dems) have created this new Empire State Stem Cell Board. Spending more and more of our money on this foolish nonsense when we are already taxed to death. THIS IS JUST ANOTHER REASON TO KEEP ED KOSIUR OUT OF THE ASSEMBLY.

Guess I have to bring this in again...



Adult Stem Cells                                                                              Embryonic Stem Cells
Cancers:                                                                                         None

• Brain Cancer
  
• Retinoblastoma
  
• Ovarian Cancer
  
• Skin Cancer: Merkel Cell Carcinoma
  
• Testicular Cancer
  
• Tumors abdominal organs Lymphoma
  
• Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
  
• Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
  
• Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
  
• Acute Myelogenous Leukemia
  
• Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia
  
• Juvenile Myelomonocytic Leukemia
  
• Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia
  
• Cancer of the lymph nodes: Angioimmunoblastic Lymphadenopathy
  
• Multiple Myeloma
  
• Myelodysplasia
  
• Breast Cancer
  
• Neuroblastoma
  
• Renal Cell Carcinoma
  
• Various Solid Tumors
  
• Soft Tissue Sarcoma
  
• Ewing’s Sarcoma
  
• Waldenstrom’s macroglobulinemia
  
• Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis
  
• POEMS syndrome
  
• Myelofibrosis
  

Auto-Immune Diseases

• Diabetes Type I (Juvenile)
  
• Systemic Lupus
  
• Sjogren’s Syndrome
  
• Myasthenia
  
• Autoimmune Cytopenia
  
• Scleromyxedema
  
• Scleroderma
  
• Crohn’s Disease
  
• Behcet’s Disease
  
• Rheumatoid Arthritis
  
• Juvenile Arthritis
  
• Multiple Sclerosis
  
• Polychondritis
  
• Systemic Vasculitis
  
• Alopecia Universalis
  
• Buerger’s Disease
  

Cardiovascular

• Acute Heart Damage
  Chronic Coronary Artery Disease
  

Ocular

• Corneal regeneration
  

Immunodeficiencies

• Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Syndrome
  
• X-linked Lymphoproliferative Syndrome
  
• X-linked Hyper immunoglobulin M Syndrome
  

Neural Degenerative Diseases and Injuries

• Parkinson’s Disease
  
• Spinal Cord Injury
  
• Stroke Damage
  

Anemias and Other Blood Conditions

• Sickle Cell Anemia
  
• Sideroblastic Anemia
  
• Aplastic Anemia
  
• Red Cell Aplasia
  
• Amegakaryocytic Thrombocytopenia
  
• Thalassemia
  
• Primary Amyloidosis
  
• Diamond Blackfan Anemia
  
• Fanconi’s Anemia
  
• Chronic Epstein-Barr Infection
  

Wounds and Injuries

• Limb Gangrene
  
• Surface Wound Healing
  
• Jawbone Replacement
  
• Skull Bone Repair
  

Other Metabolic Disorders

• Hurler’s Syndrome
  
• Osteogenesis Imperfecta
  
• Krabbe Leukodystrophy
  
• Osteopetrosis
  
• Cerebral X-Linked Adrenoleukodystrophy
  

Liver Disease

• Chronic Liver Failure
  
• Liver Cirrhosis
  

Bladder Disease

• End-Stage Bladder Disease
  

(The above information was found at http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm)

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Stem cell discovery lauded Scientists’ breakthrough uses ordinary skin to create cells
BY RICK WEISS The Washington Post

   WASHINGTON — Researchers in Wisconsin and Japan have turned ordinary human skin cells into what are effectively embryonic stem cells without using embryos or women’s eggs — the two hitherto essential ingredients that have embroiled the medically promising field in a long political and ethical debate.
   The unencumbered ability to turn adult cells into embryonic ones capable of morphing into virtually every kind of cell or tissue, described in two scientifi c journal articles released Tuesday, has been the ultimate goal of researchers for years. In theory, it would allow people to grow personalized replacement parts for their bodies from a few of their own skin cells, while giving researchers a uniquely powerful means of understanding and treating diseases.
   Until now, only human egg cells and embryos, both difficult to obtain and laden with legal and ethical issues, could be used to create stem cells. And until this summer, the challenge of mimicking that process in the lab seemed almost insurmountable, leading many to wonder if stem cell research would ever wrest free of its political baggage.
   As news of the success by two different research teams spread by e-mail, scientists seemed almost giddy at the likelihood that their field, which for its entire life has been at the center of so much debate, may suddenly become like other areas of biomedical science: appreciated, eligible for federal funding and wide open for new waves of discovery.
   “These are enormously important papers,” said George Daley, a stem cell researcher at Children’s Hospital Boston, who was not involved in the work. Like others, he spoke with stunned elation reminiscent of scientists’ reactions in 1997 to the cloning of Dolly the sheep from a skin cell, the first proof that adult mammal cells could have their genetic clocks turned back.
   Their enthusiasm notwithstanding, scientists warned that medical treatments are not immediately at hand. The new method uses genetically engineered viruses to transform adult cells into embryo-like ones, and those viruses can trigger tumors.
   But the cells will be instantly useful for research purposes — “to move a patient’s disease into a petri dish,” as Daley put it. And some scientists predicted that with the basic secret now in hand, it could be a mere matter of months before virus-free methods for making the versatile cells are found.
   “This is a tremendous scientifi c milestone, the biological equivalent to the Wright brothers’ first airplane,” said Robert Lanza, chief scientifi c officer of Advanced Cell Technology in Worcester, Mass., a developer of stem cell therapies.
   Especially gratifying to stem cell researchers was that some of their biggest critics seemed mollifi ed.
   Richard Doerflinger of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said he was at a Vatican-sponsored meeting recently where the technique was described.
   “All the Catholic scientists and ethicists at the conference … had no moral problem with it at all,” he said. “This seems to be a way to get all the same uses that embryonic stem cells and cloning might be put to without the moral problem.”
   The White House released a statement praising the studies.
   “President Bush is very pleased to see the important advances in ethical stem cell research reported in scientific journals today. By avoiding techniques that destroy life while vigorously supporting alternative approaches, President Bush is encouraging scientific advancement within ethical boundaries.” the statement said.
   Another crucial vote of confi - dence came from James Battey, vice chairman of the National Institutes of Health’s stem cell task force, which oversees decisions about funding stem cell research.
   “I see no reason on Earth why this would not be eligible for federal funding,” Battey said. “I think it’s a wonderful new development.”
   Many teams had been racing to be first to create embryonic stem cells or their equivalents without embryos, building on a June report in which researchers found a way to do so in mice. Yet scientists around the world agreed that nobody deserved to win that race more than the two who did: James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin in Madison, who first isolated stem cells from five-day-old human embryos in 1998, and Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto University, who led the recent effort to obtain mouse stem cells without embryos.
   Thomson, a shy and laconic laboratory researcher whose discovery of embryonic stem cells made him the focus of religious opprobrium and repeated congressional hearings, expressed relief that he might now be able to work without being at the center of what had become America’s other abortion debate.
   “What a great bookend,” Thomson said in an interview. “Ten years of turmoil and now this nice ending. I can relax now.”  

  
  
  

Quoted from bumblethru

Perhaps right for us...but not for all! Watch the dem's closely. Hillary already said that she would not veto stem cell research if she were elected. And for all of the people who have ill loved ones, that have been promised a remedy or cure through stem cell research...Hillary will get their votes.

BigK Mr. Bumble-

One problem we have today with access to the internet/information and the ability to cut and paste- is becoming armchair intellectuals-

I recently had a converstion with a very young Phd working at the GE World Research lab. We talked about how many people seem to know alot about metabolism ( a student in pre med may take 1 class in just liver metabolism )-  But almost anyone now can tell you exactly why your a** is too big.

This Dr. , who mayjored in material science ( how temperature effects phosphorus )  told me she has friends - a husband  and wife doing stem cell research in London where it is legal.

It is so complicted she does not understand the process-

Im not sure where all the information is taking us but most of us really dont have a clue- we are scientific dillitants- if there is such a thing

Now  I know somone is gonna try and say something smart-

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Stem cell debate redux
First published: Sunday, November 25, 2007

It was in his very early months as President, before so much attention turned to terrorism and then war, that George W. Bush prevailed in blocking federal research on stem cells culled from human embryos.
With his typical self-assurance, the President has been insisting for six years now that scientists soon enough would find a better way, indeed a more moral way, to develop embryonic stem cells than a method that involves first the creation and then the destruction of embryos.

A promising breakthrough simultaneously announced last week by rival teams of scientists in Wisconsin and Japan makes Mr. Bush's position a much greater possibility. If skin cells can indeed be reprogrammed to mimic embryonic stem cells, a contentious debate is likely to have been resolved on the President's terms.

What's required now, though, is to see use of this method of stem cell generation as a possibility, not a certainty. Some of the genes used to reprogram skin cells are associated with cancer, for instance.

This development shouldn't undermine the so far unsuccessful efforts to extract stem cells from cloned human embryos. It would be premature to abandon what had been most scientists' preferred approach toward the generation of stem cells.

More than anything, last week's announcements should mark a truce in the politicization of science. Context is essential before opponents of embryonic stem cell research can effectively stop it on what they regard as moral grounds.

It's one thing to proclaim, as does the Rev. Tadeusz Pacholczyk of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, that it's "never necessary for laboratory researchers to cross fundamental moral lines in order for science and medicine to advance."

It's quite another, though, to suggest such research has been rendered obsolete. It's likely, actually, that the ability to reprogram skin cells wouldn't have been developed without embryo experiments.

Even now, Robert Lanza of the Massachusetts-based research firm Advanced Cell Technology likens the technique of getting skin cells to behave alike embryonic cells to "learning how to turn lead into gold."

"This is early stage research, and we should not abandon other areas of stem cell research," Mr. Lanza says.

As for where the politics of such science stands now, it's Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who stands among the genuine voices of reason.

"My own view is that science ought to be unfettered and that every possible alternative ought to be explored," he says. "You've got a life-and-death situation here, and if we can find something which is certifiably equivalent to embryonic stem cells, fine. But we are not there yet."

As it happens, Mr. Specter was the lead Republican sponsor of a stem cell research bill that Mr. Bush vetoed last year. He intends to keep pushing for such legislation, as he should.

THE ISSUE: A new technique is developed that doesn't require destroying embryos.

THE STAKES: Medical science is best served by pursuing both approaches.

  

Quoted from Sombody

Now  I know somone is gonna try and say something smart-

Yup....it's all snake oil......although I think I will research my family tree and see if it reaches to Mars or Jupiter.....

Quoted Text

Quoted from JoAnn
My husband had a stem cell transplant for his aggressive Non-Hodgkins lymphoma in 1999.  He was given injections so his body could produce more stem cells. They purged his stemcells before the transplant and froze them. About 1 month later he went into Albany Med where he had enough chemo to kill off all of his blood cells. They then thawed his frozen stemcells and they were re-introduced through IV.

He has been cancer free ever since.

Absolutely Amazing.  Mind boggling.

Quoted Text

Now  I know somone is gonna try and say something smart-

Nope, nothing smart here, I won't even pretend to know or understand.  Thats why they pay these researchers the big bucks.

Just don't clone Hillary Clinton. One is enough!

Quoted Text

Quoted from JoAnn
Just don't clone Hillary Clinton. One is enough!

Rephrase to read ONE IS TOO MUCH!!!

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Ellen Goodman
Stem-cell breakthrough no thanks to the president
Ellen Goodman is a nationally syndicated columnist.

   I have a friend who dedicated her first book to her husband “without whom this would never have been possible.” Years later, when the husband was gone, she used to fantasize about tweaking her dedication: “To my husband without whom this book would have been done five years earlier.”
   I thought of her as the Bush administration claimed credit for a bona fide breakthrough in biology. Two groups of scientists in Wisconsin and Japan have found a way to reprogram ordinary skin cells so they behave like embryonic stem cells. So it may become unnecessary to use embryos in this cutting-edge research.
   When the good news was announced, the White House had the gall — an Oval Office alternative for chutzpah — to claim the victory as theirs. “This is very much in accord with the president’s vision from the get-go,” said policy adviser Karl Zinsmeister. Without the slightest hint of irony, he suggested that their stalwart opposition actually fueled the scientists’ success. Next thing you know the president will nominate himself for the Nobel Prize in medicine.
   Let us pause and review Stem Cells 101. What scientists are trying to do is take an ordinary cell from the human body and persuade it to become, say, a heart muscle cell, or a brain cell, or a liver cell, to fix whatever ails us.
   The researchers did not study embryonic stem cells because they wanted to run a recycling center for leftovers from in vitro fertilization clinics. Nor did they have a passion for wedge issues. But the embryo could do what they were still unable to do: cause ordinary body cells to act like stem cells.
   This breakthrough was not the president’s “vision from the get-go” or any other go. First of all, the Bush administration bet on the wrong horse — adult stem cells. Second, the researchers couldn’t have gotten to step two without step one. They needed human embryos to learn how to do this without human embryos. They’ll still need embryos for some time, as both a benchmark and a way to judge whether stem cells from skin are effective and safe.
   Not only did the “vision” impede the science, the administration also slowed it by starving funding and scaring off researchers. So James Thomson, the biologist whose work forms the bookends of this research, offers this, um, dedication: “My feeling is that the political controversy set the field back four or five years.”
   Now he and other scientists are muting that political controversy. Pro-life Republicans have every reason to breathe a sigh of relief. The idea that a leftover frozen embryo had greater moral status than your aunt with diabetes didn’t wash with the general public. It was a losing battle for conservatives who are used to directing the culture wars. It even split pro-life politicians. Sen. Orrin Hatch ended up arguing with the absolutists: “People who are pro-life are also pro-life for existing life.”
   Democrats, on the other hand, may breathe a sigh of regret. The stem cell controversy gave pro-choicers an iconic image of their enemy: someone who put the embryo uber alles . It gave progressives a poster girl in Nancy Reagan — and a poster boy in Michael J. Fox. Stem cells were to the left what partialbirth abortion was to the right, a way to frame a touchy issue and look like the reasonable center.
   The issues that range around the stem cell debate will still be with us and with politicians. There remain more than 400,000 frozen embryos languishing in IVF clinics. As for the relative worth of an embryo and an “existing life“? There are likely to be ballot measures next year to give a fertilized egg the legal status of a human being.
   Indeed, the sleeper issue of this campaign may be the one found in a YouTube video called “Libertyville Abortion Demonstration.” There, prolife protesters at an abortion clinic are asked what punishment should be meted out to a woman who has an abortion if it becomes illegal. Their answers: “I don’t know.” “I’ve never really thought about it.” Candidates won’t get away so easily.
   Nevertheless, this is a moment when anyone who prefers a cure to a battle cry should celebrate. There is still a long way from reprogramming a skin cell to treating a disease. But we’ve come to think of scientists as people racing ahead of us, leaving behind huge moral potholes. This time, science may resolve the quandaries it created.
   So this success is dedicated to the scientists who freed themselves from the clutches of politics. But not to the president, without whom, well, this too would have been done years earlier.  

  
  
  

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

A solution on stem cell research — maybe

   The good news is that two groups of scientists have found a means of turning normal human skin cells into the medicinal gold mine of stem cells.
   But that doesn’t necessarily mean that the new method will finally prove to be as effective as the more elaborate embryo manipulation method that has been getting all the attention, not all of it positive.
   What we don’t yet know is whether the scientists have, by removing the touchy questions of cloning and embryos from the equation, wrestled this matter back into their realm, away from the politicians, the pundits and the push polls.
   If they have, wonderful. If they haven’t, then stem cell research will remain a difficult question that politicians shouldn’t be allowed to duck.
   — The Buffalo News  

  
  
  

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071212/sc_afp/healthscienceskoreacloning

Quoted Text

SKoreans clone cats that glow in the dark: officials
Wed Dec 12,



SEOUL (AFP) - South Korean scientists have cloned cats by manipulating a fluorescent protein gene, a procedure which could help develop treatments for human genetic diseases, officials said Wednesday.

In a side-effect, the cloned cats glow in the dark when exposed to ultraviolet beams.

A team of scientists led by Kong Il-keun, a cloning expert at Gyeongsang National University, produced three cats possessing altered fluorescence protein (RFP) genes, the Ministry of Science and Technology said.

"It marked the first time in the world that cats with RFP genes have been cloned," the ministry said in a statement.

"The ability to produce cloned cats with the manipulated genes is significant as it could be used for developing treatments for genetic diseases and for reproducing model (cloned) animals suffering from the same diseases as humans," it added.

The cats were born in January and February. One was stillborn while two others grew to become adult Turkish Angoras, weighing 3.0 kilogrammes (6.6 pounds) and 3.5 kilogrammes.

"This technology can be applied to clone animals suffering from the same diseases as humans," the leading scientist, Kong, told AFP.

"It will also help develop stemcell treatments," he said, noting that cats have some 250 kinds of genetic diseases that affect humans, too.

The technology can also help clone endangered animals like tigers, leopards and wildcats, Kong said.

South Korea's bio-engineering industry suffered a setback after a much-touted achievement by cloning expert Hwang Woo-Suk turned out to have been faked.

The government banned Hwang from research using human eggs after his claims that he created the first human stem cells through cloning were ruled last year to be bogus.

Hwang is standing trial on charges of fraud and embezzlement.

Umm....well....at least you won't trip over them at night?  And what is the new cat's half-life?

Maybe we can change this gene in people who are found guilty and sent to jail for crimes, that way if they decide to escape at night, we can track them down easier?

CLONING IS WRONG.

Cloning cats that glow in the dark?!?  Now what the hell does that have to do with humanity and medical breakthroughs? Well, unless you want to be genetically compromised so we can glow in the dark as well. RIDICULOUS!!!!!!

I wonder if the cloned domesticated cats still have the gene telling them that humans rule and that they are domesticated, or will it get lost in the process??? Would they evolve cloned, into wild cats???

evolution
science
religion

we are still standing in the dark fumbling.... :-/

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Stem-cell breakthrough makes politics moot

In his Dec. 28 letter, Hal D. Zendle is either totally unaware of, or has elected to ignore, the breakthrough in stem cell research. Two groups of scientists — one at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, the other at Kyoto University in Japan — have found a way to reprogram ordinary skin cells so they behave like embryonic stem cells. The president’s refusal to finance embryonic stem cell research has been removed from the political area by this scientific breakthrough. Mr. Zendle should take notice.
RAYMOND S. KUKFA
Niskayuna

Quoted Text

have found a way to reprogram ordinary skin cells so they behave like embryonic stem cells.

who is looking to crawl back into the womb????

Where is Ponce de Leon when ya need him????

http://www.ft.com

Quoted Text

Europe set for debate rerun on ‘Frankenfoods’
By Andrew Bounds in Brussels, Jeremy Grant in Washington and Clive Cookson in London
Published: January 11 2008

Europe is set for a rerun of the heated debate over genetically modified “Frankenfoods”, after regulators declared on Friday that meat and milk from cloned pigs and cows and their offspring were safe to eat.

The finding comes as GM foods are about to reignite trade friction between the US and European Union, with a deadline set to expire on Friday night by which the EU must comply with a World Trade Organisation ruling to allow imports of GM seeds.

While it could be years before meat and milk from cloned animals are on dinner plates in the EU, the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa) issued a “draft opinion” that such livestock and their products were as healthy and nutritious as their natural-born kin. “Healthy clones and healthy offspring do not show any significant differences from their conventional counterparts,” it said.

Efsa has invited views on its opinion before drawing up a definitive conclusion in May. Its deliberations come as the Food & Drug Agency in the US is expected to reach a final decision on the issue, possibly next week.

The developments would boost a handful of US biotechnology companies that have been working on cloning animals, mainly cattle, for the past four years. They say cloning would help farmers by increasing the availability of elite breeding stock.

Europe is already sharply divided over GM food, dubbed “Frankenfood” by opponents, with just one product – a pest-resistant maize – approved for cultivation. Austria and Hungary have banned even that and France is set to follow suit.

In the US, consumer acceptance of plant biotechnology in foods is high. Acceptance of biotechnologically altered animal produce is much lower, although a survey last year by the International Food Information Council showed that 61 per cent would purchase products derived from genetically engineered animals if they were FDA-approved.

In a sign of possible unprecedented congressional involvement in the process, Democratic senator Barbara Mikulski has called on the FDA to delay its final decision about cloning, pending further scientific tests. “We do not know enough about the long-term effects of introducing cloned animals, or their offspring, into our food supply. What’s the rush?” she asked.

Following Friday’s scientific report from Efsa, the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies expects to deliver its report on Wednesday about the ethical and practical effects of approving food from cloned animals.

The gulf between attitudes across the Atlantic on GM crops has already led to a trade spat with Washington, which won a WTO ruling in 2004 that the EU was illegally blocking GM produce.

European farmers said they were not seeking to use cloning but feared a loss of competitiveness if the US went ahead and imports were allowed. “It is essential to inform the consumers and citizens about the state of play already and not wait until this new technology is on the shelves,” said Pekka Pesonen, secretary-general of Copa-Cogeca, which represents them.

Friends of the Earth said the Efsa ruling was “unsatisfactory” because there was a shortage of scientific evidence.

I could go on about the scary risks regarding the eating genetically altered dna animal in the food chain. There are already problems with the meat that we eat that has been altered with hormones and antibiotics. Not to mention eating cows that have been fed cows which causes mad cow disease.

So now we will add animals with altered dna's to be ingested into our bodies. I wonder if we will be told BEFORE they hit the food chain and who or what country will be the first to be the guinea pigs! Looks like I'll be turning into a vegetarian soon!

We're just................................................ :X

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Lab-grown rat’s
heart starts beating
    WASHINGTON — Researchers seeking new treatments for heart disease managed to grow a rat heart in the lab and start it beating.
    “While it still sounds like science fiction, we’ve hopefully opened a new door in the notion that we can build these tissues and one day provide options for patients with end-stage disease,” said Dr. Doris Taylor, director of the Center for Cardiovascular Repair at the University of Minnesota. “We’re not there yet, but at least now we have another tool in our tool belt.”
    Taylor led the team whose research appeared in Sunday’s online edition of the journal Nature Medicine.
    Scientists have worked for years for ways to grow body parts. Many efforts have focused on heart valves as an alternative to the plastic or animal valves that wear out after being implanted in humans.

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

FDA says cloned
meat, milk safe
    WASHINGTON — Just over a decade after scientists cloned the first animal, the last major barrier to selling meat and milk from clones has fallen: The U.S. government declared this food safe Tuesday.
    Now, will people buy it?
    Consumer anxiety about cloning is serious enough that several major food companies, including the big dairy producer Dean Foods Co. and Smithfield Foods, say they aren’t planning to sell products from cloned animals.
    And the industry says most Americans would never eat a cloned animal for sheer economic reasons: At $10,000 to $20,000 per cloned cow — compared with $1,000 for an ordinary steer — they’re too valuable. They would be used primarily for breeding, to produce a steady supply of cattle that are particularly tender, for instance, or for prize dairy cows. It would be offspring of clones that consumers would eat.
    But it will be hard to tell which foods do contain ingredients originating from cloned animals. The Food and Drug Administration ruled that labels won’t have to reveal whether the food comes from cloned cows, pigs or goats, or the clones’ offspring, because those ingredients are no different than meat or milk from livestock bred the old-fashioned way.

Quoted Text

The Food and Drug Administration ruled that labels won’t have to reveal whether the food comes from cloned cows, pigs or goats, or the clones’ offspring, because those ingredients are no different than meat or milk from livestock bred the old-fashioned way.

Only because they cant track the stuff coming from other countries and can barely do it in our own country.......you cant label what you cant see/track.

Do we know how the RNA/DNA of the offspring will fare over generations? Does the RNA/DNA contain/miss certain 'keys' to procreation as it was meant to be?  :-/

If there is such a thing as antioxidants and free radicals that supposedly cause 'aging', cancer and the like, wouldn't it seem correct to assume that these cloned animals are 'inbreed' with all the diseases they were born with, kind of like free radicals? Or are these 'filtered' out?

Someone is telling a lie some where....... >:(

There is obviously big money to be made in this. However, wouldn't one think it would be cheaper for animals to procreate the 'natural' way instead of in a lab? Actually isn't it God's free gift?

As far as it being a health concern....I think it is a ticking time bomb, myself!

http://www.newsmax.com

Quoted Text

Scientists Make Human Embryo Clones
Thursday, January 17, 2008

Scientists in California say they have produced embryos that are clones of two men, a potential step toward developing scientifically valuable stem cells.

The new report documents embryos made with ordinary skin cells. But it's not the first time human cloned embryos have been made. In 2005, for example, scientists in Britain reported using embryonic stem cells to produce a cloned embryo. It matured enough to produce stem cells, but none were extracted.

Stem cells weren't produced by the new embryos either, and because of that, experts reacted coolly to the research.

"I found it difficult to determine what was substantially new," said Doug Melton of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute. He said the "next big advance will be to create a human embryonic stem cell line" from cloned embryos. "This has yet to be achieved."

Dr. George Daley of the Harvard institute and Children's Hospital Boston called the new report interesting but agreed that "the real splash" will be when somebody creates stem cell lines from cloned human embryos.

"It's only a matter of time before some group succeeds," Daley said.

Korean scientist Hwang Woo-suk claimed a few years ago that he'd created such cell lines, but that turned out to be a fraud.

Dr. Samuel Wood, a co-author of the new paper and chief executive of Stemagen Corp. of La Jolla, Calif., said he and his colleagues are now attempting to produce stem cell lines from the embryos.

The work was published online Thursday by the journal Stem Cells.

Scientists say stem cells from cloned embryos could provide a valuable tool for studying diseases, screening drugs and, perhaps someday, creating transplant material to treat conditions like diabetes and Parkinson's disease.

But critics raise objections. The process "involves creating human lives in the laboratory solely to destroy them for alleged benefit to others," said Richard Doerflinger, spokesman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Citing the earlier work in Britain, he also said that as a scientific advancement, the new work was "very limited."

Other objections to cloning include concerns about health risks and exploitation if large numbers of women are asked to provide eggs.

Those objections are one reason that an alternative route to stem cells made headlines last November. Scientists reported a relatively simple way to turn skin cells directly into stem cells. This direct reprogramming carries a theoretical risk of cancer for the recipients of tissue from these cells, however, and many scientists have urged that work continue on the cloning technique as well.

The cloning approach involves inserting DNA from a person into an egg, and then growing the egg into an embryo about five days old before extracting the stem cells. At that stage, the embryo is a sphere of about 150 cells.

In the new work, researchers took skin cells from Wood and another volunteer and produced three embryos with DNA matching the men's. Further DNA testing on one of these embryos strengthened the case that it was a clone, researchers said.

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Stem cell breakthrough isn’t end of the matter

    Re the Jan. 8 letter by Raymond S. Kukfa, “Stem-cell breakthrough makes politics moot,” I hope Mr. Kukfa is correct that the recent breakthrough in stem cell research (using altered skin cells) obviates the need to kill human embryos. This would certainly end the ethical and political controversy surrounding stem cells and is a suggestion I made in a letter printed July 1, 2007.
    A visit to the Internet, however, reveals that a strong contingent of leaders in the field still intend to pursue human embryonic stem cell research that kills embryos, despite this breakthrough that spares embryos. They claim they have legitimate reasons for continuing their efforts with embryos and actually plan on conducting both types of research.
    One of their arguments is that stem cells from embryos may be more appropriate for a given situation or treatment than altered cells from skin (and vice versa). In this sense, further study of embryonic cells is warranted because of the breakthrough! There is now a need to compare two alternatives to see which is most effective and when each is most effective.
    Problems with the new, breakthrough cells already is that they cause tumor-related deaths in mice and require more complex programming than embryonic cells.
    Unfortunately, I don’t think we’ve seen the last of research that kills human embryos, nor an end to the moral and political dilemmas this activity engenders — such as the debate whether to federally finance this research.
    HAL D. ZENDLE

http://www.timesunion.com

Quoted Text

Hope that stem cell research can cure diseases
First published: Sunday, February 10, 2008

After reading the article "Stemming effects of crippling ills" on Jan. 29, I wanted to congratulate you on a spectacular story. I did not know that we had a Neural Stem Cell Institute right here in the Capital Region.
It's so great to know that we could have people from this area who could find a cure for cancer or Alzheimer's disease. I also think it's fantastic that the institute joined dozens of other researchers and universities.
     
Stem cell research hits close to home for me because a close family friend has a daughter who has been blind from birth. They believe that stem cell research may be able to cure her blindness. I hope more people support the research and help them find cures for many diseases.
NICOLE ROSS Watervliet

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Breeders aiming to clone top bullfighting studs
BY DANIEL WOOLLS The Associated Press

    GUADALIX DE LA SIERRA, Spain — Alcalde, a hulking black bull, is quite the stud. He sires up to 40 calves a year, most of them top-grade fighters, even though in human terms he would be almost 80 years old and is nearing the end of his life.
    Victoriano del Rio, a fifth-generation breeder of fighting bulls, cringes at the thought of losing an animal with such good genes. So he is going to clone him — an unprecedented marriage of modern technology and the Spanish-speaking world’s ancient, beloved pastime.
    “I am extremely fond of this bull,” del Rio said at his ranch in this town outside Madrid, watching 16-year-old Alcalde graze with some of his latest offspring. “ He
has given us tremendous satisfaction.”
    While a bull in its prime can
sire as many as 80 calves a year,
Alcalde’s record is “exceptional”
for an animal of his advanced age, del Rio said.
    The Spaniard is not alone in the adventure. Rancher Jose Manuel Fernandez in Mexico plans to replicate Zalamero, another aging bull that achieved the rare feat of dodging death in the ring: In 1994, Zalamero put up such a relentless fight one autumn day that judges spared his life. Since then he has been a priceless stud.
    While Alcalde never fought in the ring, he comes from a prestigious bloodline and has proved to be a producer of champions.
— will be born in November or December. Alcalde’s clone would be born in May or June of 2009.
    Both breeders have hired Via-Gen, a cloning company based in Austin, Texas, to do the job. The technique is essentially the same one used in 1996 to copy the sheep Dolly, the world’s first cloned mammal.
    It involves inserting the nucleus of a somatic cell from the bull — any cell that is not a sperm cell — into a cow egg cell that has been stripped of its nucleus. The egg undergoes electrical and chemical stimulation to make it divide and grow into an embryo. This is then implanted in a surrogate cow to be carried to term.
    ViaGen spokesman Ben Carlson confirmed the orders from del Rio and Fernandez, but would not comment on pregnancies or expected birth dates.
    Carlson said the breeders would pay standard cattle cloning prices: $17,500 for the first calf, $15,000 for
VISION OF FUTURE
    Fernandez is so bullish on cloning he envisions a future in which an afternoon at the arena — usually three matadors taking on two bulls each — might involve six genetically identical twins created from the same beast.
    “What I am looking for is a path toward innovation in bullfighting,” Fernandez said from Mexico City. “We are trying to give the show greater quality.”
    If all goes as planned, Zalamero II — or several of them, because Fernandez is trying for four or fi ve the second, $12,500 for the third and $10,000 for the fourth and beyond.
    ViaGen has cloned about 300 mammals, including show pigs, rodeo horses and bucking broncos, since its founding in 2002. But this is the world’s first attempt at cloning the breed that takes on matadors in the deadly minuet of bullfighting, the breeders said.
    “It is a new field that is opening up before us,” said Eduardo Miura, breeder of a line of Spanish bulls so fierce the very word Miura has become part of the language: to act like a Miura is to become furious. He said breeders in Spain are generally supportive of del Rio’s cloning plans.
    But questions abound. It’s one thing to pass on a carbon copy of a fighting or stud bull’s DNA, quite another to expect the new animal to mimic its template.
    Only as much as 40 percent of an animal’s behavior is attributable to its genes, said Javier Canon, a geneticist at Madrid’s Complutense University who specializes in fi ghting bulls. External factors account for the rest.
    And even if the sons of a great fighting bull were always great fighting bulls themselves, there are much cheaper and more effective ways to harvest those valuable genes, such as using the father’s semen for artificial insemination.
    “If you ask me about this project from a technical point of view, in terms of genetic progress, it serves no purpose whatsoever,” Canon said.
    Even in its traditional mode, bull breeding is a slow, hit-or-miss business. Studs are crossed with cows carefully selected for feistiness through simulated fights in the ring, albeit without bloodshed. Then the rancher has to wait a few years for the resulting bull to grow up, and see if it has the right stuff.
    “Theoretically, two plus two are four. In this, when the time comes, it might not be four, but rather minus three. The results are very elastic,” Miura said from his ranch outside Seville. “Time will tell if Victoriano is right.”
CHANCE OF FAILURE
    “Indeed, it is an experiment,” del Rio said of his cloning project. “We are going to investigate. Investigation always carries with it the possibility that you are wrong.”
    A ViaGen team will come to Spain in a few weeks to collect skin samples from Alcalde — the name means mayor in Spanish — and take them back to Texas to start preparing embryos.
    Fernandez’s endeavor is at a more advanced stage; he said the embryos are already growing and will be implanted in cows this month in Mexico. Viagen is also in talks with other breeders in Spain.
    Fernandez says about 20 percent of Mexican breeders dismiss his project as unworkable, arguing the clones would not be on par with Zalamero. At age 18 — ancient for a bull — yet another calf of his was born recently.
    Fernandez says wait and see.
    “I imagine I am building a bridge, and they tell me, ‘Hey, that bridge is not going to work.’ So I say let me finish, and if I cross the bridge, then it is OK. It held. If it doesn’t hold, then you were right.”
    “At least we are trying,” Fernandez said of himself and del Rio. “We are not waiting around to see someone else do it. We are trying.”

VICTOR R. CAIVANO/THE ASSOCIATED PRES The bull Alcalde grazes in a field next to the town of Guadalix de la Sierra, Spain. Alcalde will be cloned to preserve his good genes for breeding fighting bulls.

.....And all for the 'love of money'! Pathetic!

http://www.abc.com

Quoted Text

US biotech company offers to clone man's best friend
Wed May 21, 10:58 AM ET


A US biotech company on Wednesday announced it will auction off the right for five dog owners to have their furry best friend cloned, with bidding starting at 100,000 dollars.

"BioArts International ... will sell five dog cloning service slots to the general public via a worldwide online auction," the California-based biotech start-up said in a statement.

Registration for the auctions opens Wednesday. Bidding in that first auction begins on June 18 at 1300 GMT and runs for 24 hours, BioArts says on its bestfriendsagain.com website.

BioArts is the only company in the world licensed to clone dogs, cats and endangered species, the company statement says.

It uses the same cloning method that gave the world Dolly the sheep, the first mammal to be cloned in July 1996 from an adult cell.

Dogs are arguably the most difficult mammal to clone, according to BioArts.

"We may or may not perform any additional commercial dog cloning services after this auction," the company says on its website.

Yeah,,,,go tell it to the shelters.....or how about the starving folks in ethiopia...clone some more sheep and plants for them and show them how.....auction that off to their governments....oh wait they are greedy pigs......and nothing will end up in their mouths----pause, I have to go fill up my gas tank and go to the grocery store......

what a mixed up world we live in.......

Everything has to end and everything has to die.