New stem cell work bypasses ethical debates [?]
The journal Science devoted a two page story to the new work in stem cells -->
318 Science 1224 (23 Nov 07): Field Leaps Forward With New Stem Cell Advances
The Science article includes text: Such a recipe would not need human embryos or oocytes to generate patient specific stem cells--and therefore could bypass the ethical and political debates that have surrounded the field for the past decade.
There is a reference to Science, 7 July 2006, page 27, discussing earlier work by Yamanaka.
The final line quotes Cibelli: "People working on ethics will have to find something new to worry about."
There is a discussion of parthenotes.
Mention of work by David Cram of Monash University in Clayton, Australia making sure cell lines [of the Oregon work] had same genotype as donor of skin cells. At this point, there was a reference to "recent history in the cloning field." [obliquely referring to the fraud of Hwang Woo Suk. Recall Cibelli was a co-author on first Hwang paper.]
See also
http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2007/11/further-revolution-in-stem-cells.html
http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2007/11/new-york-times-on-sea-change-in-stem.html
CIRM Media Coverage: Conflicts to Anachronisms [IPBiz notes californiastemcellreport STILL has not covered EITHER the Oregon work OR the reprogramming work (Yamanaka and Thomson group). By not mentioning Yamanaka's discovery, californiastemcell report avoids another unpleasant reality: Yamanaka's work at Gladstone will not be funded by grants from Proposition 71. Gladstone, not the state of California, is funding work that promises to be a break-out in stem cells. One suspects that the co-discovers of the reprogramming work (Thomson's folks in Wisconsin) are not funded by Proposition 71 either. Hmmm, did IPBiz spell anachronism right? While californiastemcellreport discusses all the ethical lapses involved with Prop 71, other guys, who don't have Prop 71 funding, are getting the job done.
A note to Cibelli (People working on ethics will have to find something new to worry about): there's plenty for ethicists to worry about with the folks at Proposition 71, here and now. [recall Aldous Huxley's birds in Island]
318 Science 1224 (23 Nov 07): Field Leaps Forward With New Stem Cell Advances
The Science article includes text: Such a recipe would not need human embryos or oocytes to generate patient specific stem cells--and therefore could bypass the ethical and political debates that have surrounded the field for the past decade.
There is a reference to Science, 7 July 2006, page 27, discussing earlier work by Yamanaka.
The final line quotes Cibelli: "People working on ethics will have to find something new to worry about."
There is a discussion of parthenotes.
Mention of work by David Cram of Monash University in Clayton, Australia making sure cell lines [of the Oregon work] had same genotype as donor of skin cells. At this point, there was a reference to "recent history in the cloning field." [obliquely referring to the fraud of Hwang Woo Suk. Recall Cibelli was a co-author on first Hwang paper.]
See also
http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2007/11/further-revolution-in-stem-cells.html
http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2007/11/new-york-times-on-sea-change-in-stem.html
CIRM Media Coverage: Conflicts to Anachronisms [IPBiz notes californiastemcellreport STILL has not covered EITHER the Oregon work OR the reprogramming work (Yamanaka and Thomson group). By not mentioning Yamanaka's discovery, californiastemcell report avoids another unpleasant reality: Yamanaka's work at Gladstone will not be funded by grants from Proposition 71. Gladstone, not the state of California, is funding work that promises to be a break-out in stem cells. One suspects that the co-discovers of the reprogramming work (Thomson's folks in Wisconsin) are not funded by Proposition 71 either. Hmmm, did IPBiz spell anachronism right? While californiastemcellreport discusses all the ethical lapses involved with Prop 71, other guys, who don't have Prop 71 funding, are getting the job done.
A note to Cibelli (People working on ethics will have to find something new to worry about): there's plenty for ethicists to worry about with the folks at Proposition 71, here and now. [recall Aldous Huxley's birds in Island]
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 11:44 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home