Skip to comments.
NIH chief: Stem cell ban hobbles science
news.yahoo.com ^
| Mar 19, 2007
| ANDREW BRIDGES
Posted on 03/19/2007 6:27:12 PM PDT by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-82 next last
1
posted on
03/19/2007 6:27:14 PM PDT
by
neverdem
To: neverdem
So Harkin and Arlen Sphincter were the only members of the subcommittee there to hear this baby killer testify. Wonder how many taxpayer dollars were wasted on this travesty.
To: neverdem
Why does "science" require "taxpayer funding?" That sounds like a Communist technique. Use private funding and then let the investors cash in on the results. Geeeesh! This isn't rocket science. Of course, if this "science" is just another Commie jobs program for artsy fartsy "scientists", "taxpayer funding" is probably the only solution.
3
posted on
03/19/2007 6:35:05 PM PDT
by
FlingWingFlyer
(When I was a kid, "global warming" was known as "the weather.")
To: neverdem
If this scheme had any real potential, private pharmaceutical companies would be spending their own money on research to make even more money.
Since they ain't, the consensus in the scientific community is that there is no potential to it.
So why are they so intent on frittering my money away on it?
4
posted on
03/19/2007 6:35:08 PM PDT
by
DuncanWaring
(The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
To: neverdem
If this research is to be done, I do not want to be paying for it
If someone wants this research to be done, let it be on their head, They can donate the money if it pleases them
To: neverdem
re: Stem cell ban hobbles science
And, the point is? It's like saying "harvesting both kidneys from a living patient results in the death of the donor." Hey, it's two-fer solution, so where's the problem. Same with lungs.
6
posted on
03/19/2007 6:38:00 PM PDT
by
jwpjr
To: neverdem
Let him get money from the universities that are sitting on BILLIONS in endowments. Harvard's is ~20 billion.
To: neverdem
Nazi research chief: ban on vivisection of Jews hobbles science. Of course not letting scientists do evil things puts limits on what they can do, and thus potentially what they can learn. So?
8
posted on
03/19/2007 6:38:20 PM PDT
by
The_Reader_David
(And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
To: neverdem
Appointed by Bush in 2002. His self-inflation page is here. Not just a capsule biography but a whole portfolio of web pages boasting about himself:
http://www.nih.gov/about/director/index.htm
Where does Bush find these guys? How many of his own appointees are going to stab him in the back before we're through with this fiasco?
9
posted on
03/19/2007 6:39:01 PM PDT
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: DuncanWaring
No private pharma company could afford massive very-long term fundamental research program on this scale. Not for nothing the things like hubble and NASA, major particle accelerators, tokamaks etc. are funded by government agencies, and not by private investors.
10
posted on
03/19/2007 6:42:19 PM PDT
by
GSlob
To: neverdem
LOLOLOLOL>...
Sure, Pres. Bush is being kicked around for everything else right now...let's pull out the fed funding for ESC research...and how IMPORTANT it is that we kill babies to cure grandma.
pffffffffffft
11
posted on
03/19/2007 6:48:03 PM PDT
by
Txsleuth
(I don't know who I am voting for yet...just window shopping.)
To: neverdem
Lifting the ban on taxpayer funding of research on new stem cells
from fertilized embryos would better serve both science and the
nation, the chief of the National Institutes of Health told lawmakers Monday.
I suspect that his real beef is that he doesn't want to move to
the new mecca of embryonic stem cell research.
Missouri.
12
posted on
03/19/2007 6:53:44 PM PDT
by
VOA
To: neverdem
I guess I have to do some research on the NIH, so I can figure out what they do for us that requires a 29 BILLION dollar budget.
13
posted on
03/19/2007 6:56:40 PM PDT
by
FlyVet
To: neverdem
There are no limits on cell lines. Just funding.
If there are such magnificent benefits waiting just around the corner, why is it that taxes must be used to get across the finish line? The normal capitalist risk-invention- profit model should work.
Or is it the vast amount of progress shown by more enlightened countries that use their citizens' tax dollars? Are US investigators embarrassed that other labs able to use the public money have so much better success? /s
If these researchers are truly looking to mankind's better interests, perhaps moving to a country that allows taxes to be used for fetal stem cell research and no limits on cell lines would give them the clinical advancements they claim would result if we did it here in the USA.
Or maybe the tax money is not the key. Applying the Razor of Sir Ockham....
14
posted on
03/19/2007 7:03:18 PM PDT
by
DBrow
To: FlyVet
"what they do for us that requires a 29 BILLION dollar budget."
they are a funding agency - approving [or declining] the research grants to university profesors, graduate and postdoctoral fellowships etc.
15
posted on
03/19/2007 7:04:31 PM PDT
by
GSlob
To: neverdem
There is no stem cell ban. This guy just wants grant money for which he doesn't have to account.
It's like the government funding research into a perpetual motion machine.
16
posted on
03/19/2007 7:05:12 PM PDT
by
Tribune7
(A bleeding heart does nothing but ruin the carpet)
To: neverdem
They haven't banned stem cell research.
On the other hand, it would make a whole lot more sense to fund energy research.
To: Coleus; Peach; airborne; Asphalt; Dr. Scarpetta; I'm ALL Right!; StAnDeliver; ovrtaxt; ...
18
posted on
03/19/2007 7:11:54 PM PDT
by
neverdem
(May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
To: neverdem
The killers lie and the media reports it as gospel.
There is no ban on embryonic stem cell research!
Just government funding!
19
posted on
03/19/2007 7:14:51 PM PDT
by
airborne
(Airborne! Ranger! Vietnam Vet! That's why I support DUNCAN HUNTER 2008!)
To: FlingWingFlyer
Why does "science" require "taxpayer funding?" What Gslob said. Big science projects with very long term payoffs require Gov't funding. No company is going to invest billions on a bet that may payoff in 10 years or more. What investor would put money in a company bleeding red for 10 years? Maybe some knuckleheads in Az.
Anyway, we wouldn't have gotten to the moon if the aerospace companies were footing the bill. There'd be a Soviet flag up there, not ours.
The ultimate monetary benefits of the space program have more than covered what the taxpayers forked in.
Watch out! There's a Commie behind that cactus!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-82 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson