Listing of Comments on Draft NIH Human Stem Cell Guidelines
Entire Comment Period: 04/23/2009-05/26/2009

Browse Comments Beginning With:
Record ID:
Entry Date:
On April 23, 2009, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) published draft stem cell guidelines for public comment in the Federal Register. The purpose of these guidelines are to implement President Barack Obama’s Executive Order 13505 “Removing Barriers to Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells,” which was issued on March 9, 2009.

NIH received 49,015 comments by May 26, 2009, the closing date of the comment period, and have compiled these comments on this website. Any comments received via email or mail after the May 26 deadline are not included on this website. In reviewing the comments, NIH determined that 60 comments were inappropriate (i.e., contained SPAM responses or offensive language), and these comments have been excluded from this website. In addition, to protect the identities and personal information of individuals who submitted comments, NIH has removed personally identifiable information from the comments on this website even though individuals consented that the information provided could be made available for public review and posting.



|First 100 Records   Back 1000 Records   Back 100 Records   Records 46717 - 46816 of 49015 Forward 100 Records   Forward 1000 Records   Last 100 Records|

ID Entry Date Affiliation Organization
Name
Organization
Address
Comments Attachment
46717 05/26/2009 at 01:14:02 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46718 05/26/2009 at 01:14:04 PM Self     This is a great beggining on federal funding, next step I suggest is start envolving and fund foreign scientists and institutions that could help to fight paralisys, brasilian legislation allow embryonic stem cell research.

 
46719 05/26/2009 at 01:14:07 PM Organization Southern California Stem Cell Consortium   The new NIH guidelines are most welcome, heartily endorsed, and viewed as a major step forward towards generating cures and therapies for a range of diseases that plague the American citizenry. These guidelines have the enthusiastic endorsement of our organization, comprised of over 400 scientists, physicians, patient advocates, health care professionals, and entrepeneurs. Such guidelines allow for the most economical and parsimonious use of our country's limited biomedical research dollars, particularly in these financially challenging times. However, in the process of adding new human embryonic stem cell lines for scientists to use, older lines should not be invalidated based on specious informed consent issues. While it is a well-meaning goal to insure that couples donating left-over IVF blastocysts are fully informed, to hold older hESC lines to the "letter" rather than the "spirit" of 2009 criteria will have the unintended consequences of actually impeding stem cell research -- wasting an enormous amount of data, money, and effort that have been devoted over the past decade -- while not providing substantively more information for couples. The older informed consent criteria, while differing from 2009 in their specific wording, were used by IVF practitioners in good faith in dealing with their patients. The spirit of insuring endorsement by patients of the use of these otherwise-to-be-discarded blastocysts to advance medical knowledge and therapies was always preserved. While going forward from this point on, the informed consent forms can be more elaborate in their degree of explanation, reflecting our growing knowledge of stem cell biology, the older lines should definitely be "grandfathered" to be eligible for federal funding. Furthermore, federal funding should be able to be used for generating new lines from left over frozen and abnormal fresh (based on PDG) blastocysts from IVF, from parthenogenesis, and from the creation of disease hESC lines in vitro (either by nuclear transfer or controlled union of a sperm and egg to achieve blastocyst stage). (Of course implantation of such blastocysts would never be permitted or condoned by the scientific community). In other words, the new guidelines should be identical to those recommended by the National Academy of Science (NAS) as well as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). They should not be hampered by the outdated and inappropriately broad and misguided proscriptions of the Dickey-Wicker amendment.

 
46720 05/26/2009 at 01:14:17 PM Self     My son has a spinal cord injury, and we support embryonic stem cell research in hopes it may one day provide curative therapies for him. The NIH guidelines on research are too restrictive as written. We would like to see them expanded to provide funding for all existing stem cell lines, and to support somatic cell nuclear transfer. The guidelines as written will undo a great deal of work that has taken years to complete, and restrict other ETHICAL advances in the field.

 
46721 05/26/2009 at 01:14:40 PM Self     Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans facing the challenges of living with many diseases and disorders. I have been following progress in this field with great interest and understand the importance that it holds for people living with chronic diseases like multiple sclerosis. I am encouraged to see the field of human embryonic stem cell research expanded through the issuance of these guidelines and the change in federal policy around funding for this important scientific field. Much progress has been made over the past decade, and the final guidelines issued by NIH must build on this progress so that cures and new therapies can get to patients as quickly as possible. The final guidelines should not create new bureaucratic hurdles that will slow the pace of progress.

I am pleased that these draft guidelines — in Section II B — would appear to permit federal funding of studies using stem cell lines previously not eligible for federal funding and using new lines created in the future from surplus embryos at fertility clinics. However, as drafted, Section II B does not ensure that any current stem cell line will meet the criteria outlined and thus be eligible for federal funding. It will be important for the final guidelines to allow federal funds for research using all stem cell lines created by following ethical practices at the time they were derived. This will ensure that the final guidelines build on progress that has already been made.

I also believe that the final guidelines should permit federal funding for stem cell lines derived from sources other than excess IVF embryos. Sections II B and IV of the draft guidelines do not permit such federal funding and I recommend that the final guidelines provide federal funding using stem cell lines derived in other ways. If not, it is essential that the NIH continue to monitor developments in this exciting research area and to update these guidelines as the research progresses. Thank you.

 
46722 05/26/2009 at 01:14:48 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46723 05/26/2009 at 01:14:52 PM Self     I write to fully endorse the suggestions made in a recent article in Cell Stem Cell (Taylor, Retroactive Ethics in Rapidly Developing Scientific Fields, Cell Stem Cell (2009), doi:10.1016/ j.stem.2009.05.002), which I quote here:

"The proposed rules should be modified. They should not be retroactive. Grants awarded previously should be continued, and Presidential lines ought to be eligible for funding. Funding should be permitted for ESC lines created previously if approved by IRBs or ESCROs under the standards then applicable, and for new cell lines derived from embryos donated ethically under IRB-approved protocols and then-existing standards, including the NAS and ISSCR guidelines. The rules ought to allow the Sugarman/Siegel/Lo framework to operate: the NIH should permit contextual evidence of adherence to ethically core principles, including for research using lines that originate outside the U.S."

 
46724 05/26/2009 at 01:14:53 PM Self     For many Americans with a personal connection to type 1 diabetes, the Administration’s expansion of the federal policy on embryonic stem cell research has renewed our hope for a cure. I am writing today to support the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) draft guidelines and suggest a change to ensure promising, ethically conducted research currently underway will be eligible for federal funding in the future. The Administration’s Executive Order on stem cell research restored scientific decision-making to its rightful place at the NIH. In these guidelines, the NIH has demonstrated its capacity to formulate a research framework that will unleash the potential of embryonic stem cell research while maintaining the highest safety and ethical standards. I would encourage the NIH, however, to grandfather into this policy stem cell lines that have received federal funding, as well as existing lines that were derived in an ethically-responsible manner according to the best practices at the time. Research on these stem cell lines should be eligible for federal funding so that scientists can maximize the scientific advancements already achieved through research on these lines. Research should be vigorously pursued on all promising stem cell sources that could potentially lead to a cure for type 1 diabetes. While embryonic stem cell research is still in its early stages, this research has already yielded impressive results in our continuing effort to find a cure for type 1 diabetes. Recent research suggests that embryonic stem cells can be differentiated to produce the insulin-producing beta cells that could reverse the course of type 1 diabetes. We do not yet know which stem cell sources may ultimately lead to a cure or be the most clinically useful or practical for patients with type 1 diabetes. It is clear, however, that the more knowledge we gain about embryonic stem cells, the better we can assess the full therapeutic potential of all stem cell sources. These draft guidelines allowing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research using excess embryos from fertility clinics will ensure that this research matures and its potential is more fully realized. I commend the NIH for allowing this important research to expand in a scientifically and ethically appropriate manner.

 
46725 05/26/2009 at 01:14:59 PM Self     The draft guidelines on human stem cell research seem fair and promising. Science and ethics can each inform our understanding of the other, and progress demands that we explore both for all the best they can provide.

I strongly support research funding under the guidelines of the draft report.

 
46726 05/26/2009 at 01:15:15 PM Self     As a local government official charged with both preparing for public health emergencies and designing a budget around skyrocketing health care costs, I would like to offer my support for federal funding ofstem cell research. Indeed, I would like to see the guidelines expanded to provide funding for all existing stem cell lines, grandfathering in those that have been derived since 1998, since they are necessary for the most comprehensive study of disease.

Thanks,

 
46727 05/26/2009 at 01:15:28 PM Self     For many Americans with a personal connection to type 1 diabetes, the Administration’s expansion of the federal policy on embryonic stem cell research has renewed our hope for a cure. I am writing today to support the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) draft guidelines and suggest a change to ensure promising, ethically conducted research currently underway will be eligible for federal funding in the future.

The Administration’s Executive Order on stem cell research restored scientific decision-making to its rightful place at the NIH. In these guidelines, the NIH has demonstrated its capacity to formulate a research framework that will unleash the potential of embryonic stem cell research while maintaining the highest safety and ethical standards. I would encourage the NIH, however, to grandfather into this policy stem cell lines that have received federal funding, as well as existing lines that were derived in an ethically-responsible manner according to the best practices at the time. Research on these stem cell lines should be eligible for federal funding so that scientists can maximize the scientific advancements already achieved through research on these lines.

Research should be vigorously pursued on all promising stem cell sources that could potentially lead to a cure for type 1 diabetes. While embryonic stem cell research is still in its early stages, this research has already yielded impressive results in our continuing effort to find a cure for type 1 diabetes. Recent research suggests that embryonic stem cells can be differentiated to produce the insulin-producing beta cells that could reverse the course of type 1 diabetes.

We do not yet know which stem cell sources may ultimately lead to a cure or be the most clinically useful or practical for patients with type 1 diabetes. It is clear, however, that the more knowledge we gain about embryonic stem cells, the better we can assess the full therapeutic potential of all stem cell sources. These draft guidelines allowing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research using excess embryos from fertility clinics will ensure that this research matures and its potential is more fully realized. I commend the NIH for allowing this important research to expand in a scientifically and ethically appropriate manner.

 
46728 05/26/2009 at 01:15:58 PM Self     I do not want my tax dollars to fund research that uses stem cells derived from human embryos resulting in their death. The killing of one class of humans to benefit another class of humans is profoundly immoral. Instead, direct research toward adult and cord blood stem cells, which is ethical and has proven to be successful.

 
46729 05/26/2009 at 01:16:08 PM Self     My belief is that individual life begins at the moment of conception. Therefore harvesting stem cells from embryos means the taking of a life. Easing suffering or improving the quality of life by ending a life is not the answer.

 
46730 05/26/2009 at 01:16:30 PM Organization Program in Stem Cell & Regenerative Biology   The new NIH guidelines are most welcome, heartily endorsed, and viewed as a major step forward towards generating cures and therapies for a range of diseases that plague the American citizenry. These guidelines have the enthusiastic endorsement of our department (for which I serve as ****). We are comprised of over 140 scientists and physicians. Such guidelines allow for the most economical and parsimonious use of our country's limited biomedical research dollars, particularly in these financially challenging times. However, in the process of adding new human embryonic stem cell lines for scientists to use, older lines should not be invalidated based on specious informed consent issues. While it is a well-meaning goal to insure that couples donating left-over IVF blastocysts are fully informed, to hold older hESC lines to the "letter" rather than the "spirit" of 2009 criteria will have the unintended consequences of actually impeding stem cell research -- wasting an enormous amount of data, money, and effort that have been devoted over the past decade -- while not providing substantively more information for couples. The older informed consent criteria, while differing from 2009 in their specific wording, were used by IVF practitioners in good faith in dealing with their patients. The spirit of insuring endorsement by patients of the use of these otherwise-to-be-discarded blastocysts to advance medical knowledge and therapies was always preserved. While going forward from this point on, the informed consent forms can be more elaborate in their degree of explanation, reflecting our growing knowledge of stem cell biology, the older lines should definitely be "grandfathered" to be eligible for federal funding. Furthermore, federal funding should be able to be used for generating new lines from left over frozen and abnormal fresh (based on PDG) blastocysts from IVF, from parthenogenesis, and from the creation of disease hESC lines in vitro (either by nuclear transfer or controlled union of a sperm and egg to achieve blastocyst stage). (Of course implantation of such blastocysts would never be permitted or condoned by the scientific community). In other words, the new guidelines should be identical to those recommended by the National Academy of Science (NAS) as well as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). They should not be hampered by the outdated and inappropriately broad and misguided proscriptions of the Dickey-Wicker amendment.

 
46731 05/26/2009 at 01:16:50 PM Self     I strongly oppose the Draft NIH Human Stem Cell Guidelines because research on embryonic stem cells requires the destruction of human life.

Under the Supplemental Information heading of the Draft, one sentence reads, "Although human embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos, such stem cells are not themselves human embryos." It would appear that these words are an attempt to alleviate concerns about using human embryos for research. However, the fact that human embryonic stem cells are not themselves embryos is irrelevant; in order to "derive" the cells from embryos, the embryos are destroyed. Trying to obscure this fact is reprehensible.

In a later paragraph, one sentence reads, "Perhaps the most important potential use of human embryonic stem cells is the generation of cells and tissues that could be used for cell-based therapies." This is an attempt to justify destroying human embryos to allegedly benefit other human beings. Destroying certain human lives to help other human lives is something our government should have no part in. This is nothing less than sacrificing the weak and defenseless to help the strong. These guidelines should be rejected.

 
46732 05/26/2009 at 01:17:11 PM Self     Dear NIH:

President Obama’s Executive Order 13505 represents a tremendous opportunity for the NIH to support ethically responsible and scientifically worthy stem cell research. The NIH deserves credit for producing draft Guidelines quickly to provide time for public comment. However, I am worried that that the NIH proposal will exclude funding for many existing stem cell lines ethically created over the last eight years. I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Draft National Institutes of Health Guidelines for Human Stem Cell Research and urge you to take the following into consideration: Develop final Guidelines that allow the NIH to fund research utilizing established hESC lines derived in accordance with the core principles in the ISSCR Guidelines for the Conduct of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research. These guidelines recommend independent oversight, voluntary and informed donor consent and no undue inducements. Most established hESC lines that are widely used in research today have been obtained in accordance with these principles. To ensure continued international collaboration, these principles should be applied to the evaluation of existing lines.

Most existing U.S. lines have been derived in accordance with the core principles in the ISSCR’s guidelines and consistent with the established federal regulatory framework involving IRB oversight and approval. In some instances, additional specialized embryonic stem cell research oversight committees (ESCROs), and other oversight methods in other countries (referred to as SCROs in ISSCR Guidelines), have also provided oversight. Established policy has demonstrated that this self-regulatory structure has provided a sound ethical foundation for stem cell research. In developing the final Guidelines the NIH should consider this well-established framework of independent oversight and give weight to its determinations.

Specifically, for funding eligibility purposes, the ethical provenance of existing U.S. cell lines should be judged based on the standards that prevailed at the time they were derived, provided the protocol under which donations were accepted, and any amendments, were approved by an IRB operating under federal regulations. Non-US lines should be eligible for funding within the US if the IRB and/or SCRO for the US institution receiving NIH funding determines that the protocol under which the underlying donation occurred met operative standards of the time and core ethical principles. In addition, new requirements that go beyond established U.S. and international practice should be applied prospectively only, and after a time period for affected parties, including IVF clinics, to adapt. We specifically ask the NIH to reconsider those aspects that go beyond existing ISSCR standards, including, for example, the proposed mandatory dual IVF consent the proposed guidelines would require, and the proposed requirement that the informed consent form is the sole source for ethical validation.

It will be essential that investigators know with some certainty what lines are eligible for funding. I therefore urge the NIH to work with organizations such as the ISSCR to develop a list or registry of hESC lines available for NIH-funding or resources to support the oversight process. The ISSCR has in development a registry to document that hESC derivation was performed in accordance with ethical requirements, and make associated documentation available to reviewing IRBs and stem cell oversight bodies. Such a registry would reduce uncertainty and improve research efficiency. While that registry is being finalized, a useful and easy place to start in the meantime would be for the NIH to publish, on a Web site, the lines that are determined to be fundable based on IRB and SCRO determinations.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft Guidelines.

 
46733 05/26/2009 at 01:17:13 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46734 05/26/2009 at 01:18:51 PM Self     do not kill embryos! they are people! there is a God and He sees everything!

 
46735 05/26/2009 at 01:19:36 PM Self     Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans suffering from many diseases and disorders. I am not a scientist, but I am a member of the Parkinson's community and have been following progress in this field with great interest. Significant strides have been made over the past decade, and the final guidelines issued by NIH must build on this progress so that cures and new therapies can get to patients as quickly as possible. The final guidelines should not create new bureaucratic hurdles that will slow the pace of progress.

I am pleased that these draft guidelines -- in Section II B -- would appear to permit federal funding of stem cell lines previously not eligible for federal funding and for new lines created in the future from surplus embryos at fertility clinics. However, as drafted, Section II B does not ensure that any current stem cell line will meet the criteria outlined and thus be eligible for federal funding. It will be important for the final guidelines to allow federal funds for research using all stem cell lines created by following ethical practices at the time they were derived. This will ensure that the final guidelines build on progress that has already been made.

I also believe that the final guidelines should permit federal funding for stem cell lines derived from sources other than excess IVF embryos, such as somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). Sections II B and IV of the draft guidelines do not permit such federal funding and I recommend that the final guidelines provide federal funding using stem cell lines derived in other ways. If not, it is essential that the NIH continue to monitor developments in this exciting research area and to update these guidelines as the research progresses

 
46736 05/26/2009 at 01:19:46 PM Self     any research that destroys innocent human life is morally and ethically wrong. the motives are good, but this is the wrong path, with long slippery slopes, leading to somewhere we do not want to go. I am against this research.

 
46737 05/26/2009 at 01:20:33 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46738 05/26/2009 at 01:21:35 PM Self     There is no reason for creating embryos for the purpose of research. Plenty of reasearch on adult stem cells is happening with good results. Much more positive than embryo stem cell research, which does not show those results. We do not need to play God and create babies for the purpose of research. Mosr non-medical people I know think this research is coming from after the birth of live babies in their umbilical cord blood.

 
46739 05/26/2009 at 01:22:26 PM Self     -I oppose killing human embryos. The proposed regulations will force taxpayers like me to fund research I believe is unethical because it requires the killing of human embryos.

-Expanding funding to new human embryonic stem cell lines will divert federal funds away from promising research that is treating people now with non-embryonic stem cells and will also divert funds away from other sources of embryonic-like stem cells that have been generated without the use of human embryos.

-The proposed regulations create a financial incentive for the creation of more human embryos to be destroyed to obtain their embryonic stem cells.

-The guidelines do not require any separation between an IVF doctor and an ESCR researcher. The guidelines say they "should" be separate, but only when practicable. The guidelines allow any IVF doctor to create more embryos than are needed for fertility purposes in order to generate more so-called "leftover" embryos for ESCR research using taxpayer funds.

-Instead of preventing any future expansion of funding for ESCR on unethical experiments involving human clones and human-animal hybrids, these regulations open the door for such funding upon the order of NIH.

-The guidelines do not require full informed consent for the parents of the human embryos so that they understand that their options include permission for infertile couples to adopt them.

 
46740 05/26/2009 at 01:22:51 PM Self     It is morally wrong to create new human embryos specifically to destroy them for research. Adult stem cell research is more productive and is ethical. Please don't use my tax dollars to fund fund embryonic stem cell research!

 
46741 05/26/2009 at 01:23:04 PM Organization Georgetown County Citizens for Life   -We are opposed to your draft guidelines for embryonic stem cell research, which forces us as taxpayers to subsidize research requiring the destruction of innocent human life. Support should be directed to stem cell research and treatments that do not destroy human life and are already proven successful. There is no case under which government support should be extended to human cloning or the creation of human embryos for research purposes. -Embryo-destructive stem cell research has shown to be ineffective and even dangerous, forming uncontrollable tumors and causing rejection problems. Adult stem cells are non-controversial, ethical, and most importantly, effective in treating patients. We should not fund controversial research that destroys human life when we have other options that do not destroy human life. -The proposed regulations do not prevent future funding for embryonic stem cell research that could lead to the creation of clones and human-animal hybrids. This loophole must be closed immediately. I'm sure as a man of integrity and fairness you will see the error in allowing our tax money to be used in a way that is totally against who we are as citizens of these great United States of America. Sincerely,

 
46742 05/26/2009 at 01:23:04 PM Self     Stem cell research holds much promise in the search for a cure and better treatments for the nearly 24 million American adults and children with diabetes, as well as those with many other serious medical conditions.

This research will allow scientists an opportunity to better explore how to control and direct stem cells so they can grow insulin-producing beta cells found in the pancreas. Creating new beta cells could mean a cure for type 1 diabetes and could provide a powerful tool for controlling type 2 diabetes.

I strongly support the draft guidelines on embryonic stem cell research. They demonstrate the ability of NIH to create a research framework that will allow for the potential of embryonic stem cell research while maintaining the highest safety and ethical standards.

As this process moves forward, however, I hope that NIH will consider adapting the guidelines to ensure they include funding not only new stem cell lines, but current stem cell lines that have been developed using prevailing ethical practices. Research on these current stem cell lines should be eligible for federal funding as part of the final rule.

Given the enormous promise of stem cells for diseases such as diabetes, it is important to allow federal funding for all forms of stem cell research, including research on embryonic stem cells, and that NIH continue to adapt as our scientists learn more about the promise of stem cell research.

I commend NIH for taking this important action to support research that provides the potential for new treatments, and ultimately a cure, for diabetes.

 
46743 05/26/2009 at 01:23:34 PM Self     For many Americans with a personal connection to type 1 diabetes, the Administration’s expansion of the federal policy on embryonic stem cell research has renewed our hope for a cure. I am writing today to support the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) draft guidelines and suggest a change to ensure promising, ethically conducted research currently underway will be eligible for federal funding in the future. The Administration’s Executive Order on stem cell research restored scientific decision-making to its rightful place at the NIH. In these guidelines, the NIH has demonstrated its capacity to formulate a research framework that will unleash the potential of embryonic stem cell research while maintaining the highest safety and ethical standards. I would encourage the NIH, however, to grandfather into this policy stem cell lines that have received federal funding, as well as existing lines that were derived in an ethically-responsible manner according to the best practices at the time. Research on these stem cell lines should be eligible for federal funding so that scientists can maximize the scientific advancements already achieved through research on these lines. Research should be vigorously pursued on all promising stem cell sources that could potentially lead to a cure for type 1 diabetes. While embryonic stem cell research is still in its early stages, this research has already yielded impressive results in our continuing effort to find a cure for type 1 diabetes. Recent research suggests that embryonic stem cells can be differentiated to produce the insulin-producing beta cells that could reverse the course of type 1 diabetes. We do not yet know which stem cell sources may ultimately lead to a cure or be the most clinically useful or practical for patients with type 1 diabetes. It is clear, however, that the more knowledge we gain about embryonic stem cells, the better we can assess the full therapeutic potential of all stem cell sources. These draft guidelines allowing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research using excess embryos from fertility clinics will ensure that this research matures and its potential is more fully realized. I commend the NIH for allowing this important research to expand in a scientifically and ethically appropriate manner.

 
46744 05/26/2009 at 01:23:37 PM Self     NIH Stem Cell Guidelines, MSC 7997 9000 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20892

Dear Dr. Kington and Stem Cell Guidelines Committee:

I urge the NIH to adopt alternative criteria that will allow federal money to be used with stem cell lines currently approved for NIH-funding. Eliminating federal support for use of these lines would seriously undermine current research programs. I recommend that the criterion for acceptable derivation be oversight of embryo and oocyte donation by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or its equivalent. The IRB should ensure that the informed consent process conformed to accepted regulations and guidelines at the time and place of donation. This alternative IRB criterion for informed consent continues support for current research programs and supports use of an expanded set of valuable stem cell lines.

I also urge the NIH to develop a registry or data-base of NIH-approved stem cell lines. This registry would save tax payer dollars by eliminating the need for each research institution to conduct its own reviews of stem cell lines.

To comply with President Obama’s Executive Order #13505: Removing Barriers to Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells, the proposed Guidelines posted in the Federal Register April 23, 2009, need to be amended as follows:

I. no suggested changes. I. A. no suggested changes II.B. should read: “Eligibility of human pluripotent stem cells: Human pluripotent stem cells may be used in research using NIH funds if the cells were derived from human embryos or oocytes donated for research purposes for which documentation for the following can be assured: II.B.(1) and (2) no suggested changes II.B. (3) “...where the embryos or oocytes were donated...” II.B. (4) delete II.B. (5) should read: “At the time of donation, donors were informed that they retained the right to withdraw consent until the embryos or oocytes were actually used for research. II.B. (6) should read: “The attending physician responsible for clinical care and the researcher proposing to utilize human pluripotent stem cells should not have been the same person. II. B. (7) should read: “Informed consent was obtained from individual(s) who elected to donate human embryos or oocytes for research purposes. Such informed consent should comply with human subjects research guidelines such as those proposed by the National Academy of Science or other bodies who have carefully considered human pluripotent stem cell research such as the International Society for Stem Cell Research, or recognized human subjects review committees.” II. B. (7. a. - i) delete II. C. no suggested changes II. A. and B. no suggested changes IV. A. no suggested changes, could be combined with III. IV.B. delete

Finally, I support the use of NIH-funds with stem cell lines derived through parthenogenesis and nuclear transfer as long as they meet standards for ethical derivation.

Yours truly,

 
46745 05/26/2009 at 01:24:16 PM Self     Human Stem Cell Research is necessary to cure so many prevalent diseases suffered by so many such as diabetes and parkinsons.

 
46746 05/26/2009 at 01:24:22 PM Self     For many Americans with a personal connection to type 1 diabetes, the Administration’s expansion of the federal policy on embryonic stem cell research has renewed our hope for a cure. I am writing today to support the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) draft guidelines and suggest a change to ensure promising, ethically conducted research currently underway will be eligible for federal funding in the future.

The Administration’s Executive Order on stem cell research restored scientific decision-making to its rightful place at the NIH. In these guidelines, the NIH has demonstrated its capacity to formulate a research framework that will unleash the potential of embryonic stem cell research while maintaining the highest safety and ethical standards. I would encourage the NIH, however, to grandfather into this policy stem cell lines that have received federal funding, as well as existing lines that were derived in an ethically-responsible manner according to the best practices at the time. Research on these stem cell lines should be eligible for federal funding so that scientists can maximize the scientific advancements already achieved through research on these lines.

Research should be vigorously pursued on all promising stem cell sources that could potentially lead to a cure for type 1 diabetes. While embryonic stem cell research is still in its early stages, this research has already yielded impressive results in our continuing effort to find a cure for type 1 diabetes. Recent research suggests that embryonic stem cells can be differentiated to produce the insulin-producing beta cells that could reverse the course of type 1 diabetes.

We do not yet know which stem cell sources may ultimately lead to a cure or be the most clinically useful or practical for patients with type 1 diabetes. It is clear, however, that the more knowledge we gain about embryonic stem cells, the better we can assess the full therapeutic potential of all stem cell sources. These draft guidelines allowing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research using excess embryos from fertility clinics will ensure that this research matures and its potential is more fully realized. I commend the NIH for allowing this important research to expand in a scientifically and ethically appropriate manner.

 
46747 05/26/2009 at 01:24:25 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46748 05/26/2009 at 01:24:39 PM Self     I am opposed to killing human embryos. The proposed regulations will force taxpayers to fund research which is unethical and immoral as it requires the killing of human embryos. All life begins at conception and should be protected by every nation. It is highly unethical to destroy one life in order to save another.

More funds should be set aside for non-embryonic stem cell research which has been promising and producing good results without taking life.

Are parents fully aware of what becomes of their human embryo? Are they given options for adoption by infertile parents?

These embryos as well as all unborn children have rights which must be protected. Any research that requires taking life should be banned by society. If research goes forward with these immoral plans it is very obvious that the door will be opened for human cloning. This will be an atrocity and will lead to severe consequences for our nation.

Please do was is right for the embryo, for our society and nation, DO NOT us human embryos for research. No good can come out of an intrinsic evil.

Sincerely yours,

 
46749 05/26/2009 at 01:24:56 PM Self     I am opposed to your draft guidelines for embryonic stem cell research, which force me as a taxpayer to subsidize research requiring the destruction of innocent human life.

Support should be directed to stem cell research and treatments that do not destroy human life and are already proven successful. There is no case under which government support should be extended to human cloning or the creation of human embryos for research purposes.

Embryo-destructive stem cell research has shown to be ineffective and even dangerous, forming uncontrollable tumors and causing rejection problems.

On the other hand,adult stem cells are non-controversial, ethical, and most importantly, effective in treating patients. We should not fund controversial research that destroys human life when we have other options that do not destroy human life.

The proposed regulations do not prevent future funding for embryonic stem cell research that could lead to the creation of clones and human-animal hybrids. This loophole must be closed immediately.

Please do no harm.

 
46750 05/26/2009 at 01:25:27 PM Self     For many Americans with a personal connection to type 1 diabetes, the Administration’s expansion of the federal policy on embryonic stem cell research has renewed our hope for a cure. I am writing today to support the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) draft guidelines and suggest a change to ensure promising, ethically conducted research currently underway will be eligible for federal funding in the future.

The Administration’s Executive Order on stem cell research restored scientific decision-making to its rightful place at the NIH. In these guidelines, the NIH has demonstrated its capacity to formulate a research framework that will unleash the potential of embryonic stem cell research while maintaining the highest safety and ethical standards. I would encourage the NIH, however, to grandfather into this policy stem cell lines that have received federal funding, as well as existing lines that were derived in an ethically-responsible manner according to the best practices at the time. Research on these stem cell lines should be eligible for federal funding so that scientists can maximize the scientific advancements already achieved through research on these lines.

Research should be vigorously pursued on all promising stem cell sources that could potentially lead to a cure for type 1 diabetes. While embryonic stem cell research is still in its early stages, this research has already yielded impressive results in our continuing effort to find a cure for type 1 diabetes. Recent research suggests that embryonic stem cells can be differentiated to produce the insulin-producing beta cells that could reverse the course of Type 1 diabetes.

We do not yet know which stem cell sources may ultimately lead to a cure or be the most clinically useful or practical for patients with Type 1 diabetes. It is clear, however, that the more knowledge we gain about embryonic stem cells, the better we can assess the full therapeutic potential of all stem cell sources. These draft guidelines allowing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research using excess embryos from fertility clinics will ensure that this research matures and its potential is more fully realized. I commend the NIH for allowing this important research to expand in a scientifically and ethically appropriate manner.

 
46751 05/26/2009 at 01:25:36 PM Self     I urge the NIH to adopt alternative criteria for the acceptable derivation of stem cell lines that will allow federal money to be used with stem cell lines currently approved for NIH-funding. Eliminating federal support for use of these lines would seriously undermine current research programs. I recommend that the alternative criterion for acceptable derivation be oversight of embryo donation by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or its equivalent for stem cell lines created before 2009. The IRB should ensure that the informed consent process conformed to accepted regulations and guidelines at the time and place of donation. This alternative IRB criterion for informed consent continues support for current research programs and supports use of an expanded set of valuable stem cell lines.

 
46752 05/26/2009 at 01:25:46 PM Self     Please keep regulations ethical and do not allow the gathering of stem cells for research.

 
46753 05/26/2009 at 01:25:52 PM Self     NO more funding for Embrionic Stem Cell research. All cures to date have come from ethical "adult" stem cells. It is always wrong to sacrifice the life of one person for the benefit of another, particularly when the peson being killed has no "choice".

 
46754 05/26/2009 at 01:27:02 PM Self     I am a member of the Center for Inquiry, a non-profit organization devoted to promoting science and reason as the basis of public policy. I have read the NIH guidelines for federal funding of stem cell research and urge the NIH to promote the widest range possible of research in this field because of its potential for improving health and curing diseases.

Your present guidelines are admirable in expanding the number of embryonic stem cell lines eligible for federal funding and maintaining research using adult stem cells. At a minimum, these guidelines should be maintained, especially because a large majority of Americans polled report that they support federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

The present guidelines, however, do not go far enough. I would like to see the guidelines expanded to allow federal funding of all avenues of stem cell research. Research on human embryonic stem cells, somatic cell nuclear transfer and adult stem cells needs to continue in parallel. All are part of a research effort that seeks to expand our knowledge of how cells function, what fails in the disease process, and how the first stages of human development occur. It is this combined knowledge that will ultimately generate safe and effective therapies. This research should be funded with federal money in order to promote the development of innovative and potentially lifesaving medical treatments as quickly as possible.

While approving the present guidelines is an excellent first step, I urge you to continue to monitor developments in the field and update these guidelines as the research progresses.

Thank you for your attention.

Sincerely,

 
46755 05/26/2009 at 01:27:07 PM Organization Children's Hospital of WI and Medical College of WI   Stem cell research holds much promise in the search for a cure and better treatments for the nearly 24 million American adults and children with diabetes, as well as those with many other serious medical conditions.

This research will allow scientists an opportunity to better explore how to control and direct stem cells so they can grow insulin-producing beta cells found in the pancreas. Creating new beta cells could mean a cure for type 1 diabetes and could provide a powerful tool for controlling type 2 diabetes. We serve 1700 pediatric Diabetes patients in our clinic. Most of them take 4-6 shots a day! Some of them are less than a year old!

I strongly support the draft guidelines on embryonic stem cell research. They demonstrate the ability of NIH to create a research framework that will allow for the potential of embryonic stem cell research while maintaining the highest safety and ethical standards.

As this process moves forward, however, I hope that NIH will consider adapting the guidelines to ensure they include funding not only new stem cell lines, but current stem cell lines that have been developed using prevailing ethical practices. Research on these current stem cell lines should be eligible for federal funding as part of the final rule.

Given the enormous promise of stem cells for diseases such as diabetes, it is important to allow federal funding for all forms of stem cell research, including research on embryonic stem cells, and that NIH continue to adapt as our scientists learn more about the promise of stem cell research.

I commend NIH for taking this important action to support research that provides the potential for new treatments, and ultimately a cure, for diabetes.

 
46756 05/26/2009 at 01:27:17 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46757 05/26/2009 at 01:27:30 PM Self     I oppose killing human embryos. The proposed regulations will force taxpayers like me to fund research I believe is unethical because it requires the killing of human embryos. The proposed regulations create a financial incentive for the creation of more embryos to be destroyed to obtain their embryonic stem cells.

 
46758 05/26/2009 at 01:27:30 PM Self     I oppose killing human embryos. The proposed regulations will force taxpayers like me to fund research I believe is unethical because it requires the killing of human embryos. The proposed regulations create a financial incentive for the creation of more embryos to be destroyed to obtain their embryonic stem cells.

 
46759 05/26/2009 at 01:27:34 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46760 05/26/2009 at 01:27:42 PM Self     For many Americans with a personal connection to type 1 diabetes, the Administration’s expansion of the federal policy on embryonic stem cell research has renewed our hope for a cure. I am writing today to support the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) draft guidelines and suggest a change to ensure promising, ethically conducted research currently underway will be eligible for federal funding in the future.

The Administration’s Executive Order on stem cell research restored scientific decision-making to its rightful place at the NIH. In these guidelines, the NIH has demonstrated its capacity to formulate a research framework that will unleash the potential of embryonic stem cell research while maintaining the highest safety and ethical standards. I would encourage the NIH, however, to grandfather into this policy stem cell lines that have received federal funding, as well as existing lines that were derived in an ethically-responsible manner according to the best practices at the time. Research on these stem cell lines should be eligible for federal funding so that scientists can maximize the scientific advancements already achieved through research on these lines.

Research should be vigorously pursued on all promising stem cell sources that could potentially lead to a cure for type 1 diabetes. While embryonic stem cell research is still in its early stages, this research has already yielded impressive results in our continuing effort to find a cure for type 1 diabetes. Recent research suggests that embryonic stem cells can be differentiated to produce the insulin-producing beta cells that could reverse the course of type 1 diabetes.

We do not yet know which stem cell sources may ultimately lead to a cure or be the most clinically useful or practical for patients with type 1 diabetes. It is clear, however, that the more knowledge we gain about embryonic stem cells, the better we can assess the full therapeutic potential of all stem cell sources. These draft guidelines allowing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research using excess embryos from fertility clinics will ensure that this research matures and its potential is more fully realized. I commend the NIH for allowing this important research to expand in a scientifically and ethically appropriate manner.

 
46761 05/26/2009 at 01:27:43 PM Self     Our 37 year neighbor, wife & mother of 3, who's a triathalon & marathon paticipant, and Physical Education teacher was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease last week. We need a cure for this terrible disabling disease NOW! Her children and husband and the world need her in it. I believe a cure is very close if this research can move forward immediately.

 
46762 05/26/2009 at 01:27:54 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46763 05/26/2009 at 01:29:04 PM Self     Hello,,,I support Federal Funding to research & develop benefits from stem cells for people and other living creatures. I suggest that the Federal Govt provide incentives to private foundations & industry to work in partnership toward manifesting beneficial results from the stem cell research.

 
46764 05/26/2009 at 01:29:08 PM Self     I have found a comparison for the use of embryonic stem cells for research. I have cut and pasted from the web site below. My questions are as follows: 1) What will be the reaction of some when the spiritual war is over; when we all meet our maker? 2) Do the leaders of the United States even realize there is a spiritual war going on?

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/medmurder.html

In the Third Reich, medical depravity was ubiquitous. The following are some representative examples of those involved in medical atrocities: Professor Dr. Carl Schneider (1891-1946), Professor and Chairman of the Department of Psychiatry of the University of Heidelberg, used the Nazis' euthanasia program for his own depraved research. Schneider conducted psychological assessments of children he knew were doomed to die, and had their brains collected and dissected after they were murdered.8 Schneider committed suicide after the war. Professor Dr. Hermann Stieve (1886-1952) was a leading anatomist at the University of Berlin and the Berlin Charité Hospital who exploited the killing programs of the Third Reich to conduct studies on the female reproductive system. When a woman of reproductive age was to be executed by the Gestapo, Stieve was informed, a date of execution was decided upon, and the prisoner told the scheduled date of her death. Stieve then studied the effects of the psychic trauma on the doomed woman's menstrual pattern. Upon the woman's execution, her pelvic organs were removed for histological (tissue) examination. Stieve published reports based on those studies without hesitation or apology.9 After the war, Stieve lectured medical students on studies he had conducted on the migration of human sperm, studies performed on women raped before their deaths in Gestapo execution chambers. Stieve discussed this research before an audience of appalled but silent medical students in East Berlin. (Russian scientists reportedly sought out Stieve's research after the war.10) Stieve served as dean of the Faculty of Medicine of Humbolt University, the East Berlin successor to the University of Berlin. A lecture room and a sculpture of his bust were dedicated in his honor at the Berlin Charité Hospital.

 
46765 05/26/2009 at 01:30:18 PM Self     I am opposed to this. NO civilization or government that sacrificed its children ever prospered.

 
46766 05/26/2009 at 01:30:33 PM Self     I urge you to recommend the use of proven-successful adult stem cell research over embryonic stem cell research. The use of embryonic stem cell creation and use is unethical and may have catastrophic results.

The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46767 05/26/2009 at 01:31:16 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46768 05/26/2009 at 01:31:36 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46769 05/26/2009 at 01:32:58 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

Tax dollars should not be used to destroy embryonic life or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already proven to bear fruit worldwide.

 
46770 05/26/2009 at 01:33:13 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46771 05/26/2009 at 01:33:18 PM Self     Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans suffering from devastating diseases and conditions. As a student who sees the great potential of stem cell research, I strongly support all forms on stem cell research. I am pleased to see that NIH has been directed to create the guidelines for federal funding of stem cell research. I am confident that the NIH is most able to draft effective guidelines that will build on the progress in this field over the past decades so that cures and new therapies can get to patients as quickly as possible. While ensuring ethical standards, the final guidelines should not create new bureaucratic hurdles that will slow the pace of progress.

I am pleased with the intent of the NIH’s draft guidelines to permit federal funding of stem cell lines previously not eligible for federal funding and for new lines created in the future from excess embryos at fertility clinics.

I do encourage that the guidelines cover all basis by including a “grandfather” clause to allow federal funding for existing stem cell lines that were created using the best ethical practices at the time of derivation. At present draft, there is uncertainty if current lines meet all the guidelines set forth in the current draft and thusly might be excluded from federal funding.

While recent scientific advances have been truly remarkable, such as the generation of induced pluripotent stem cells, I still believe that somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) is meritous and ethical research. Thusly, SCNT should be supported by the NIH and have the benefit of the institution’s oversight.

Finally, it is essential that the NIH continue to monitor developments in this exciting research area and to update these guidelines as the research progresses. With the proper support and resources, I believe stem cell research will help my generation meet the medical challenges of the 21st century. Thank you for reviewing my comments.

 
46772 05/26/2009 at 01:33:30 PM Self     I support the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine’s position on the new stem cell guidelines.

1) The Draft NIH human Stem Cell Guidelines are overly cautious and conservative and could disqualify funding for almost all the embryonic stem cell lines made since 1998 when the field began.

2) Last year, America spent $2.3 trillion on medical care costs. Stem cell cure research could initiate beneficial medical care for lower costs.

3) It is likely that stem cell therapies would reverse or cure diseases such as diabetes and Parkinson among others chronic illnesses.

 
46773 05/26/2009 at 01:33:36 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46774 05/26/2009 at 01:34:02 PM Self     I do not agree with killing human embryos. This regulation will require me as a taxpayer to fund something I consider to be un ethical. It should be an option to have my taxes used in non-lifetaking research such as adult stem cell research that has already been proven successful.

Thank you.

 
46775 05/26/2009 at 01:34:04 PM Organization Morgridge Institute for Research   Please allow NIH funding for research using human embryonic stem cells derived from other sources, including somatic cell nuclear transfer, parthenogenesis, and/or IVF embryos created for research purposes. it is important for the United States as whole to maintain their competetive edge and paving new scientific discoveries for the future. We have always been a leader and in order to maintain and achieve excellence we need to continue research in these existing Human Stem Cell areas and new IPS areas. In order for IPS cells to be tested, further research in HeS needs to take place. Second, we do not know what other discoveries are out there to improve human health. Third, economically speaking, many new jobs may be created, as well as, further education and outreach opportunities. This research is very important in many fronts. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to comment on this issue.

 
46776 05/26/2009 at 01:34:29 PM Self     "I support the position of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) to improve the new federal stem cell research funding guidelines."

 
46777 05/26/2009 at 01:34:46 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46778 05/26/2009 at 01:34:50 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46779 05/26/2009 at 01:34:51 PM Self     For many Americans with a personal connection to type 1 diabetes, the Administration’s expansion of the federal policy on embryonic stem cell research has renewed our hope for a cure. I am writing today to support the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) draft guidelines and suggest a change to ensure promising, ethically conducted research currently underway will be eligible for federal funding in the future. The Administration’s Executive Order on stem cell research restored scientific decision-making to its rightful place at the NIH. In these guidelines, the NIH has demonstrated its capacity to formulate a research framework that will unleash the potential of embryonic stem cell research while maintaining the highest safety and ethical standards. I would encourage the NIH, however, to grandfather into this policy stem cell lines that have received federal funding, as well as existing lines that were derived in an ethically-responsible manner according to the best practices at the time. Research on these stem cell lines should be eligible for federal funding so that scientists can maximize the scientific advancements already achieved through research on these lines. Research should be vigorously pursued on all promising stem cell sources that could potentially lead to a cure for type 1 diabetes. While embryonic stem cell research is still in its early stages, this research has already yielded impressive results in our continuing effort to find a cure for type 1 diabetes. Recent research suggests that embryonic stem cells can be differentiated to produce the insulin-producing beta cells that could reverse the course of type 1 diabetes. We do not yet know which stem cell sources may ultimately lead to a cure or be the most clinically useful or practical for patients with type 1 diabetes. It is clear, however, that the more knowledge we gain about embryonic stem cells, the better we can assess the full therapeutic potential of all stem cell sources. These draft guidelines allowing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research using excess embryos from fertility clinics will ensure that this research matures and its potential is more fully realized. I commend the NIH for allowing this important research to expand in a scientifically and ethically appropriate manner.

 
46780 05/26/2009 at 01:35:19 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46781 05/26/2009 at 01:35:33 PM Self     These comments are in response to the Draft National Institutes of Health (NIH) Guidelines for Human Stem Cell Research I object heartily to the idea that under the proposed guidelines taxpayer money could be used to fund research that destroys additional human embryos. As a staunch pro-life advocate it is abhorrent to me that my money could be used to kill defenseless human beings in the name of science. I applaud all those working on adult stem cell research and have read several articles lauding the success of treatments derived from adult stem cells to cure patients with diabetes and other illnesses. If we are making scientific advances using adult stem cells why do we need to kill more defenseless human embryos to further embryonic stem cell research that to-date has not been able to be used to treat a single patient? Why should embryos be subject to scientific experimentation just because they may be left to die in a fertility clinic somewhere? Are we going to start experimenting on terminally ill patients and death row inmates too? There are enough things our tax money needs to be used for - funding embryonic stem cell research is not only inhumane but seems wasteful. Why doesn't the federal government fund more of the adult stem cell research that is actually working instead of chasing embryonic stem cell research?

 
46782 05/26/2009 at 01:35:33 PM Self     I oppose killing human embryos. The proposed regulations will force taxpayers like me to fund research I believe is unethical because it requires the killing of human embryos. Expanding funding to new human embryonic stem cell lines will divert federal funds away from promising research that is treating people now with non-embryonic stem cells and will also divert funds away from other sources of embryonic-like stem cells that have been generated without the use of human embryos.

 
46783 05/26/2009 at 01:36:13 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46784 05/26/2009 at 01:36:28 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

Furthermore, adult stem cells have been used successfully in the treatment of over 70 diseases, conditions, etc., while embryonic stem cells have only been successful at creating tumors in mice. As Dr. David Prentice put it, the difference between adult stem cells and embryonic stem cells is the difference between live patients and dead mice.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46785 05/26/2009 at 01:36:58 PM Self     Please do not use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. Instead, please support adult stem cell research and induced pluripotent stem cell research (iPS), neither of which require destruction of embryos and are already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46786 05/26/2009 at 01:37:11 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46787 05/26/2009 at 01:37:41 PM Self     I am not a scientist, but as part of the Parkinson's community, I feel this research should be expanded to include more than just discarded embryonic stem cells, and Federal funding should be used to further more research into using stem cells for treatment of various nervous system diseases and injuries.

 
46788 05/26/2009 at 01:37:57 PM Self     Dear Friends,

I am not a scientist or a researcher, and I'm stealing time from my job to submit this comment so I will be brief.

I am the widow of a lovely, lovely man who died in 2006 of Lou Gehrig's disease. Whatever happens in the present or the future will be too late for him, but my experience with his disease has had a profound impact on my outlook on the issue of stem cell research.

Your proposed guidelines for such research are fairly technical, so I will comment on general principles and leave those who understand the guidelines to apply those principles to them.

I strongly support the use of existing embryonic material, which is slated for destruction, in stem cell research, according to the protocols that were in place when the cells were created. If consent protocols are changed going forward from now, it makes no sense for previous actions to have to conform to the new protocols in order to be eligible to be used for research. I don't think there is any other area of our law that operates this way. The rules that were in effect at the time are the rules under which that material should be treated - and if permission was given for embryonic material to be destroyed, then it makes no sense to me to withhold that material from scientists seeking a cure for debilitating diseases like the one that cruelly killed my husband.

This is especially true for lines of stem cells that have already been available for study. It makes less than no sense to withdraw those lines from eligibility and lose the body of research based on them.

Please, in the actual guidelines you adopt, make the end result the qualification of MORE stem cell lines for research, including existing lines. The point is to encourage MORE inquiry - not to make lines from the past conform to new, more specific, consent requirements.

I ask this on behalf of people hoping that research will progress quickly enough to save their lives - and on behalf of the families and friends who love them.

Thanks for your attention.

 
46789 05/26/2009 at 01:38:23 PM Self     I am opposed to the use of Federal tax payers money being used for the destruction of human embryonic stem cells. Please consider the following information and refrain from using my tax dollars for the destruction of human life. "The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter - the beginning is conception." Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of ***** It is obvious that the current experimentation and research using human embryonic stem cells results in the destruction of a newly developing human being. The research and experimentation necessarily and in premeditated fashion causes the death of a new human life. What is the justification at law for taking human life? Usually, a human life can only be taken when done in self-defense and when there is no other reasonable option. Taking the lives of these new embryonic human lives can hardly be justified as a self-defense measure.

 
46790 05/26/2009 at 01:38:45 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46791 05/26/2009 at 01:38:56 PM Self     -I am opposed to your draft guidelines for embryonic stem cell research, which force me as a taxpayer to subsidize research requiring the destruction of innocent human life. Support should be directed to stem cell research and treatments that do not destroy human life and are already proven successful. There is no case under which government support should be extended to human cloning or the creation of human embryos for research purposes. -Embryo-destructive stem cell research has shown to be ineffective and even dangerous, forming uncontrollable tumors and causing rejection problems. Adult stem cells are non-controversial, ethical, and most importantly, effective in treating patients. We should not fund controversial research that destroys human life when we have other options that do not destroy human life. -The proposed regulations do not prevent future funding for embryonic stem cell research that could lead to the creation of clones and human-animal hybrids. This loophole must be closed immediately.

 
46792 05/26/2009 at 01:38:58 PM Self     embryonic stem cell research is now useless in view of adult stem cell research.

 
46793 05/26/2009 at 01:39:03 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46794 05/26/2009 at 01:39:19 PM Self     Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans facing the challenges of living with many diseases and disorders. I have been following progress in this field with great interest and understand the importance that it holds for people living with chronic diseases like multiple sclerosis. I am encouraged to see the field of human embryonic stem cell research expanded through the issuance of these guidelines and the change in federal policy around funding for this important scientific field. Much progress has been made over the past decade, and the final guidelines issued by NIH must build on this progress so that cures and new therapies can get to patients as quickly as possible. The final guidelines should not create new bureaucratic hurdles that will slow the pace of progress. I am pleased that these draft guidelines — in Section II B — would appear to permit federal funding of studies using stem cell lines previously not eligible for federal funding and using new lines created in the future from surplus embryos at fertility clinics. However, as drafted, Section II B does not ensure that any current stem cell line will meet the criteria outlined and thus be eligible for federal funding. It will be important for the final guidelines to allow federal funds for research using all stem cell lines created by following ethical practices at the time they were derived. This will ensure that the final guidelines build on progress that has already been made. I would not want any research towards a cure to be lost. I also believe that the final guidelines should permit federal funding for stem cell lines derived from sources other than excess IVF embryos. Sections II B and IV of the draft guidelines do not permit such federal funding and I recommend that the final guidelines provide federal funding using stem cell lines derived in other ways. If not, it is essential that the NIH continue to monitor developments in this exciting research area and to update these guidelines as the research progresses. Thank you.

 
46795 05/26/2009 at 01:39:25 PM Organization American Parkinson Disease Association   Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans suffering from many diseases and disorders. I am not a scientist, but I am a member of the Parkinson’s community and have been following progress in this field with great interest. Significant strides have been made over the past decade, and the final guidelines issued by NIH must build on this progress so that cures and new therapies can get to patients as quickly as possible. The final guidelines should not create new bureaucratic hurdles that will slow the pace of progress.

I am paricularly concerned sbout two policy areas:

- The intent of the Guidelines as drafted is to retroactively apply new rules to existing hESC lines thus disallowing federal funding for ~90% of existing hESC lines, including the WiCell and UCSF lines. - Lack of grandfathering. The NIH should "grandfather" hESC lines ethically and legally created from embryos obtained under IRB (or equivalent) approval. Under the Draft Guidelines, existing lines lines would be disqualified from federal funding due to compliance technicalities that do not add protections for the original donors.

Thank you for the opportuntiy to comment.

 
46796 05/26/2009 at 01:39:59 PM Self     For many Americans with a personal connection to type 1 diabetes, the Administration’s expansion of the federal policy on embryonic stem cell research has renewed our hope for a cure. I am writing today to support the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) draft guidelines and suggest a change to ensure promising, ethically conducted research currently underway will be eligible for federal funding in the future.

The Administration’s Executive Order on stem cell research restored scientific decision-making to its rightful place at the NIH. In these guidelines, the NIH has demonstrated its capacity to formulate a research framework that will unleash the potential of embryonic stem cell research while maintaining the highest safety and ethical standards. I would encourage the NIH, however, to grandfather into this policy stem cell lines that have received federal funding, as well as existing lines that were derived in an ethically-responsible manner according to the best practices at the time. Research on these stem cell lines should be eligible for federal funding so that scientists can maximize the scientific advancements already achieved through research on these lines.

Research should be vigorously pursued on all promising stem cell sources that could potentially lead to a cure for type 1 diabetes. While embryonic stem cell research is still in its early stages, this research has already yielded impressive results in our continuing effort to find a cure for type 1 diabetes. Recent research suggests that embryonic stem cells can be differentiated to produce the insulin-producing beta cells that could reverse the course of type 1 diabetes.

We do not yet know which stem cell sources may ultimately lead to a cure or be the most clinically useful or practical for patients with type 1 diabetes. It is clear, however, that the more knowledge we gain about embryonic stem cells, the better we can assess the full therapeutic potential of all stem cell sources. These draft guidelines allowing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research using excess embryos from fertility clinics will ensure that this research matures and its potential is more fully realized. I commend the NIH for allowing this important research to expand in a scientifically and ethically appropriate manner.

 
46797 05/26/2009 at 01:40:07 PM Self     -I am opposed to your draft guidelines for embryonic stem cell research, which force me as a taxpayer to subsidize research requiring the destruction of innocent human life. Support should be directed to stem cell research and treatments that do not destroy human life and are already proven successful. There is no case under which government support should be extended to human cloning or the creation of human embryos for research purposes. -Embryo-destructive stem cell research has shown to be ineffective and even dangerous, forming uncontrollable tumors and causing rejection problems. Adult stem cells are non-controversial, ethical, and most importantly, effective in treating patients. We should not fund controversial research that destroys human life when we have other options that do not destroy human life. -The proposed regulations do not prevent future funding for embryonic stem cell research that could lead to the creation of clones and human-animal hybrids. This loophole must be closed immediately.

 
46798 05/26/2009 at 01:40:22 PM Self     I am opposed to your draft guidelines for embryonic stem cell research, which force me as taxpayer to subsidize research requiring the destruction of innocent human life. Support should be directed to stem cell research and treatments that do not destroy human life and are already proven successful. There is no case under which government support should be extended to human cloning or the creation of human embryos for research purposes.

Embryo-destructive stem cell research has shown to be ineffective and even dangerous, forming uncontrollable tumors and causing rejection problems. Adult stem cells are non-controversial, ethical, and most importantly, effective in treating patients. We should not fund controversial research that destroys human life when we have other options that do not destroy human life.

The proposed regulations do not prevent future funding for embryonic stem cell research that could lead to the creation of clones and human-animal hybrids. This loophole must be closed immediately.

 
46799 05/26/2009 at 01:40:51 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46800 05/26/2009 at 01:40:58 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46801 05/26/2009 at 01:41:15 PM Self     I support federal funding for stem cell research I would like to have guidelines expanded to provide funding for all existing stem cell lines. I support such groundbreaking technologies as somatic cell, nuclear transfer.

 
46802 05/26/2009 at 01:42:38 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46803 05/26/2009 at 01:42:40 PM Self     The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46804 05/26/2009 at 01:42:47 PM Organization Wespine Study Center   We strenuously object to our Federal tax dollars being used to support research that is highly questionable both morally and scientifically, having as yet produced no appreciable positive results, despite many years and huge amounts of money that have already been poured into ESC research.

While most research projects would have been scrapped long ago after consuming so many resources and producing disproportionally few results, the fact that laws are now being proposed to allow and/or force tax dollars to fund this research makes it difficult to imagine that those pushing these bills are motivated by objective reasoning based on the scientific facts and a desire to achieve efficient progress towards legitimate medical goals rather than by a hidden ideology that seeks to manipulate the legislative process to further its own ends.

 
46805 05/26/2009 at 01:42:55 PM Self     I'm asking that "drafters" stress "medical decisionmakers" over "political electees or appointees" in making ideas. I want doctor-trained, doctor-led authorities making medical decisions, not these political clowns who act like they know "everything" in "every subject" when they happend to have personalities that seek attention, need attention, and act like they know better than people trained in the field.

 
46806 05/26/2009 at 01:43:12 PM Self     I am deeply disappointed in the repealing of the protection of human embryos by President Obama. Equally disturbing is the draft guideline proposed by the NIH. There are several reasons we should not continue to pursue government funding for embryonic stem cell research. First, there is a very viable alternative available in adult and cord blood stem cells. Adult stem cells have shown fewer problems with use. Human trials have been ongoing for over 70 diseases using adult stem cells. Many positive results have been noted. No human trials have been completed with embryonic stem cells because of ongoing difficulty with culturing, rejection, and tumor formation. iPS cells from skin have proven to be pluripotent ESC-like stem cells. Second, adult stem cells do not carry the inherit moral and ethical problems that embryonic stem cells do. If we do not pay attention to history, we are doomed to repeat it. Every time personhood is questioned for a vulnerable part of the human race, great tragedy results. The reason the Nuremburg Code was put in place was because the government in power at the time did not see fit to protect a certain class of people leading to gross injustice and human suffering. The Tuskegee trial should be a warning that this has not just happened on foreign soil. Third, embryonic stem cell research requires many more than the available discarded embryos and is fiscally prohibitive. This leaves women in a vulnerable position. Even with guidelines in place, rules can be broken as was proven already in South Korea. I urge the President, Congress and the NIH to consider the alternative of adult stem cell research. It is a more viable, not ethically challenged option.

 
46807 05/26/2009 at 01:43:23 PM Self     Aside from the unethicalness of using embryonic cells for this purpose, the best hope of medical advances seems to be in the use of adult stem cells. We should not be killing the most innocent of our society - babies - to do research. The money given for research should be directed to adult cell research as it is the most promising and the money would be best put to use there rather than in embryonic cell research.

 
46808 05/26/2009 at 01:43:30 PM Self     I oppose all research and funding involving the manipulation of stem cells outside of the wombs of their mothers.

 
46809 05/26/2009 at 01:44:26 PM Organization Jefferson County Right to Life   The National Institutes of Health should rescind its guidelines proposing to use federal funds for stem cell research that requires destroying live human embryos. It is especially troubling that some supporters of this research are urging the NIH to endorse an even broader policy, encouraging the deliberate use of in vitro fertilization or cloning to produce human embryos for stem cell research. Such creation of new life solely to destroy it would mark the final reduction of human beings to mere objects or commodities.

My tax dollars should not be used to promote destructive embryonic stem cell research or any form of human cloning. Instead support should be directed to adult stem cell research, which is ethically sound, harms no one, and is already helping suffering patients with dozens of conditions.

 
46810 05/26/2009 at 01:44:31 PM Organization SISTERS OF OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE AND SAINT JOSEPH   I AM OPPOSED TO YOUR DRAFT GUIDELINESS FOR EMBROYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH WE WILL NOT SUBSIDIZE RESEARCH REQUIRING THE DESTRUCTION OF INNOCENT HUMAN LIFE. DO NOT DESTROY HUMAN LIFE. GOVERNMENT IS NOT SUPPOSE TO DO HUMAN CLONING, APPROVED IT OR SUBSIDIZE. PLEASE, DO NOT PROVOKE GOD WITH YOUR ACTIONS

THIS IS DANGEROUS FOR YOU AND FOR OUR NATION. MR PRESIDENT OBAMA. PLEASE, NO MORE KILLING INNOCENTS WITH YOUR APPROVAL. PLEASE. PRAY AND ASK FOR FORGIVENESS TO OUR DEAR GOD WHO LOVES YOU AND HAS GIVEN AUTHORITY BUT TO USE IT ACCORDING WITH HIS DIVINE WILL. MAY GOD BLESS YOU

 
46811 05/26/2009 at 01:44:41 PM Self The Saban Research Institute, Childrens Hospital   Dear NIH: Thanks to President Obama’s Executive Order 13505 we now have a tremendous opportunity for the NIH to support ethically responsible and scientifically worthy stem cell research. The NIH deserves credit for producing draft Guidelines quickly to provide time for public comment.

However, I must note that it appears that the NIH proposal will exclude funding for many existing stem cell lines ethically created over the last eight years. And this is highly problematic and detrimental to ongoing research. Without the ability to compare data acquired with these cell lines with newly acquired data using the same cell lines, the scientific validity of ongoing experiments will be hopelessly compromised and much progress will be lost.

For this reason, it is critical to develop final Guidelines that allow the NIH to fund research utilizing established hESC lines derived in accordance with the core principles in the ISSCR Guidelines for the Conduct of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research. These guidelines recommend independent oversight, voluntary and informed donor consent and no undue inducements. Most established hESC lines that are widely used in research today have been obtained in accordance with these principles.

It should also be noted that U.S. investigators could have long term international collaborations compromised and even halted if existing lines are not eligible for funding. Most existing U.S. lines have been derived in accordance with the core principles in the ISSCR’s guidelines and consistent with the established federal regulatory framework involving IRB oversight and approval. In some instances, additional specialized embryonic stem cell research oversight committees (ESCROs), and other oversight methods in other countries (referred to as SCROs in ISSCR Guidelines), have also provided oversight. Established policy has demonstrated that this self-regulatory structure has provided a sound ethical foundation for stem cell research.

To ensure continued international collaboration, the principles under which most of these lines were derived should be applied to the evaluation of existing lines. Specifically, for funding eligibility purposes, the ethical provenance of existing U.S. cell lines should be judged based on the standards that prevailed at the time they were derived, provided the protocol under which donations were accepted, and any amendments, were approved by an IRB operating under federal regulations. Non-US lines should be eligible for funding within the US if the IRB and/or SCRO for the US institution receiving NIH funding determines that the protocol under which the underlying donation occurred met operative standards of the time and core ethical principles. In addition, new requirements that go beyond established U.S. and international practice should be applied prospectively only, and after a time period for affected parties, including IVF clinics, to adapt.

Finally, it must be obvious that unless investigators know with some certainty what lines are eligible for funding, research progress will be delayed or halted. Scientific research is a dynamic, time-sensitive enterprise. It depends on a rigorous course of experimentation that builds a foundation with which to move forward to discovery. If that foundation is compromised, all manner of potential advances will crumble. Forward momentum will be halted due to previously acquired data becoming invalid and needing to be repeated. I therefore urge the NIH to work with organizations such as CIRM, ISSCR etc to develop a list or registry of hESC lines available for NIH-funding or resources to support the oversight process. The ISSCR has in development a registry to document that hESC derivation was performed in accordance with ethical requirements, and make associated documentation available to reviewing IRBs and stem cell oversight bodies. Such a registry would reduce uncertainty and improve research efficiency. While that registry is being finalized, a useful and easy place to start in the meantime would be for the NIH to publish, on a Web site, the lines that are determined to be fundable based on IRB and SCRO determinations.

Scientific concerns must be of utmost importance when NIH drafts guidelines for funding. As a working, NIH-funded scientist, I therefore thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft Guidelines.

 
46812 05/26/2009 at 01:44:51 PM Self     It is never okay to create life and then kill it to "save a life". I know of no military man or woman who would ever hide behind a baby to save their lives, and this is what you are doing. There is never a time when killing a defenseless unborn child would benefit saving lives. God said, "I set before you life and death. Choose life..." in the Bible. Adult stem cell research has proven results, and with these, there is no death caused to cure! Embryonic Stem Cell research is unethical, and I beg you, do not support it! Sincerely,

Ann Young mother of 7 children ...also on Board for Right to LIfe of ***** ...advisory Board for Right to Life of *****

 
46813 05/26/2009 at 01:45:51 PM Self     Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans suffering from many diseases and disorders. I am not a scientist, but I am a member of the Parkinson’s community and have been following progress in this field with great interest. Significant strides have been made over the past decade, and the final guidelines issued by NIH must build on this progress so that cures and new therapies can get to patients as quickly as possible. The final guidelines should not create new bureaucratic hurdles that will slow the pace of progress. I am pleased that these draft guidelines -- in Section II B -- would appear to permit federal funding of stem cell lines previously not eligible for federal funding and for new lines created in the future from surplus embryos at fertility clinics. However, as drafted, Section II B does not ensure that any current stem cell line will meet the criteria outlined and thus be eligible for federal funding. It will be important for the final guidelines to allow federal funds for research using all stem cell lines created by following ethical practices at the time they were derived. This will ensure that the final guidelines build on progress that has already been made. I also believe that the final guidelines should permit federal funding for stem cell lines derived from sources other than excess IVF embryos, such as somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). Sections II B and IV of the draft guidelines do not permit such federal funding and I recommend that the final guidelines provide federal funding using stem cell lines derived in other ways. If not, it is essential that the NIH continue to monitor developments in this exciting research area and to update these guidelines as the research progresses.

 
46814 05/26/2009 at 01:46:35 PM Organization JDRF   My cousin's grandson has juvenile diabetes. I support this endeavor so that a cure can be found for children - and adults alike.

 
46815 05/26/2009 at 01:47:10 PM Self     I strongly oppose the current Stem Cell Guidelines as they currently stand. I am in disagreement, in particular, with the provision for destroying human embryos - individual and unique human beings with the same right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as possessed by you, the reader. I DO NOT WANT MY TAX DOLLARS TO SUPPORT THIS RESEARCH. Thank you for your consideration.

 
46816 05/26/2009 at 01:47:10 PM Self     In the section entitled "Supplementary Information", this document refers to President Obama's Executive Order 13505 that refers specifically to "Responsible Scientific Research". I would like to know to what exactly President Obama sees such "scientific research" being responsible, if not any moral or ethical guidelines. For him and then the NIH to disregard the moral and ethical quandaries of such a decision that requires the destruction of living human embryos, even though embryonic stem cell research is not being successfully used to treat or cure a single disease anywhere in the world, even though it is funded in many places in the world, is irresponsible, inconsiderate, and divisive. Adult stem cell research has already proven its effectiveness in treating or curing over 70 diseases. To divert funds away from proven sources of scientific advance for the purpose of exploring research that does not even have demonstrable promise is an affront to the scientific and medical communities that actually intend to help individuals by their research. Between the advances already offered by adult stem cell research and the ability to induce adult cells to function as pluripotent pseudo-embryonic cells, there is no compelling good reason whatsoever to divert funds from such effective methods to fund methods that are morally questionable, at best, and bankrupt, at worst.

The president and National Institutes of Health should either behave as promised, focusing on scientific research that actually helps individuals, or stop pretending that their motives are anything other than their ideological slavery to those with a flagrant disregard for human life.

 



Go to NIH Stem Cell Information Page