Posted on 03/19/2007 6:27:12 PM PDT by neverdem
Associated Press
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.
Allowing the ban to remain in place, Dr. Elias A. Zerhouni told a Senate panel, leaves his agency fighting "with one hand tied behind our back."
"It is clear today that American science will be better served — the nation will be better served — if we allow our scientists to have access to more cell lines," Zerhouni told two members of the Senate health appropriations subcommittee during a hearing on the NIH's proposed 2008 budget. The NIH, with a nearly $29 billion annual budget, is the main federal agency that conducts and funds medical research.
Zerhouni's comments appear to be his strongest yet in support of lifting President Bush's 2001 ban that restricted government funding to research using only embryonic stem cell lines then in existence. There are just 21 such lines now in use.
Bush issued the first and so far only veto of his presidency last year when he killed legislation that would have expanded federal funding of stem-cell research. In January, the House passed a revived proposal.
Stem cells are created in the first days after conception and typically are culled from frozen embryos, destroying them in the process. Because they go on to form the body's tissues and cells — Zerhouni called them "software of life" — scientists say they could unlock the mystery of many diseases and one day lead to cures.
Sen. Tom Harkin (news, bio, voting record), D-Iowa, said contamination of the 21 embryonic lines available under the ban make it unlikely they ever will be used in treating humans.
Zerhouni, in answering questions from Harkin and Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., the only subcommittee members present for his testimony, said the limited number of cell lines aren't sufficient to do needed research.
"We cannot, I do not think, be second best in this area," Zerhouni told the two, both ardent supporters of stem-cell research. He later said other countries, including China and India, are increasing their spending on overall medical research.
Congress doubled the NIH's budget between 1998 and 2003, but it's remained essentially flat since then, when adjusted for inflation.
On the Net:
National Institutes of Health: http://www.nih.gov/
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.
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.
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?
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
Let him get money from the universities that are sitting on BILLIONS in endowments. Harvard's is ~20 billion.
Of course not letting scientists do evil things puts limits on what they can do, and thus potentially what they can learn. So?
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?
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.
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
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.
It's like the government funding research into a perpetual motion machine.
They haven't banned stem cell research.
On the other hand, it would make a whole lot more sense to fund energy research.
Stem cell ping
There is no ban on embryonic stem cell research!
Just government 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!
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.