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 47517 - 47616 of 49015 Forward 100 Records   Forward 1000 Records   Last 100 Records|

ID Entry Date Affiliation Organization
Name
Organization
Address
Comments Attachment
47517 05/26/2009 at 05:22:28 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.

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.

 
47518 05/26/2009 at 05:22:33 PM Self     To Whom it May Concern,

The proposed NIH Human Stem Cell Guidelines represent a policy of poor use of tax dollars when compared to the alterative of putting that same money into adult stem-cell research. Any federal dollar used for embryonic stem cell experimentation is a dollar not used for adult stem cells. This will delay the development of adult stem cell treatments and cures.

As the sister of a type 1 diabetic patient, I have seen the extreme discomfort of this disease. It is with excitement that I and my family have noted the developments and successes in treating type 1 diabetes with adult stem cells. Policies from NIH should reflect a commitment to following up the most successful and most promising of health treatments, and leaving those with serious ethical and scientific flaws.

Added to the success of adult stem cell treatments is the freedom it has from ethical divisiveness. The destruction of human embryos through researching new cures has enormous ethical implications. I know based on my sister’s ethical beliefs that she would never accept treatment or cure at the cost of destroying embryonic human life. Thus, even if successful, embryonic stem cell treatments would do my sister absolutely no good.

I urge to fund the promising alternatives to embryonic stem cell research, and to defund embryonic stem cell research.

 
47519 05/26/2009 at 05:22:51 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.

 
47520 05/26/2009 at 05:24:04 PM Self     To whom it may concern,

I am glad to see a reversal of the policy that allow federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research. However, to apply retroactively would defeat the purpose since many of the previously established line would not be eligible. Therefore, I would suggest that the inform consent requirement for established line be lifted, or judge on a case to case basis.

Thank you for your time.

 
47521 05/26/2009 at 05:24:20 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.

 
47522 05/26/2009 at 05:25:23 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.

I hope you will weigh these concerns carefully before you take steps to create a society wherein the strong are legally empowered to take advantage of and exploit the weak and vulnerable who cannot speak out on their own behalf.

 
47523 05/26/2009 at 05:25:24 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.

 
47524 05/26/2009 at 05:25:29 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.

 
47525 05/26/2009 at 05:25:32 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.

My sister suffers from type 1 diabetes, so I have to deal with its repercussions on a daily basis, making this move all the more important to me on a personal level.

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.

 
47526 05/26/2009 at 05:25:39 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 Colorado Medical School 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.

 
47527 05/26/2009 at 05:25:50 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.

 
47528 05/26/2009 at 05:25:57 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.

 
47529 05/26/2009 at 05:27:13 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.

 
47530 05/26/2009 at 05:27:15 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.

 
47531 05/26/2009 at 05:27:41 PM Self JDRF   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.

 
47532 05/26/2009 at 05:27:46 PM Self     As a woman scientist, I would like to urge the NIH to lift the ban on federal funding for parthenogenetic stem cells. These potentially valuable stem cells are not derived from a viable embryo, but rather from an activated egg, a cluster of cells that does not have the potential to generate a baby (there was no sperm involved). I have personally worked with the primate parthenogenetic stem cells and I can attest to the fact that their potential for therapeutic utility looks vast (maybe even as vast as embryonic stem cells), and is largely unexplored. Parthenogenetic stem cells should be fully compatible with the egg cell donor, eliminating the need for immunosuppressive therapies. Why shouldn't a woman be allowed to use her own cells (in this case, egg cells) to generate stem cells that could cure her disease? I don't understand the ethical argument against it, it simply doesn't make sense. In theory, a woman should be able to take some of her own egg cells, generate parthenogenetic stem cells, differentiate them in vitro into the cells that she needs and then put them back into her own body to cure life-threatening illnesses. What is wrong with that? If more woman knew that this was actually a possibility, you would be receiving a lot of letters like mine. As a woman and a scientist, I urge the NIH to fund parthenogenetic stem cell research.

 
47533 05/26/2009 at 05:27:47 PM Self     I WISH TO SUPPORT THE STEM CELL WORK BEING DONE. IT IS TOO LATE FOR MY HUSBAND, BUT I ONLY WISH SUCCESSFUL RESULTS FOR THOSE WHO ARE FOLLOWING HIM IN THE PARKINSON DISEASE JOURNEY. THANK YOU.

 
47534 05/26/2009 at 05:27:56 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.

 
47535 05/26/2009 at 05:28:02 PM Self     How can we allow embryonic stem cell distruction: 1)when every time usd it has caused cancerous tumors 2)money used for that was taken from money formerly used for bone marrow and umbelic cord that produced 1000s of time successful. Somebody's making a ton of money on this sham. Is there no common sense left in our government?

 
47536 05/26/2009 at 05:29:15 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

 
47537 05/26/2009 at 05:29:47 PM Self     Dear NIH:

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.

Thank you for your attention in this matter.

 
47538 05/26/2009 at 05:30:23 PM Self     I support Stem Cell research!!

 
47539 05/26/2009 at 05:30:36 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.

 
47540 05/26/2009 at 05:30:49 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.

 
47541 05/26/2009 at 05:31:01 PM Self     I wholeheartedly support federal fudning for stem cell research. I worked for Christopher Reeve and only wish it had been approved when he was alive. I'd like to see the guidelines expanded to provide funding for all existing stem cell lines and I also support somatic cell nuclear transfer.

 
47542 05/26/2009 at 05:31:36 PM Self     We oppose federal funding for research of human embryonic stem cells. Rather than being destroyed, we would like to see these human embryos adopted. Please reconsider your actions in this matter.

 
47543 05/26/2009 at 05:31:43 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 Parkinsons 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.

 
47544 05/26/2009 at 05:32:34 PM Self     I am opposed to your draft guidelines for embryonic stem cell research based on the research findings that show embryo-destructive stem cell research is 1) ineffective; 2) dangerous, forming uncontrollable tumors and causing rejection problems. 3) Adult stem cells have proven a sound and effective alternative.

I am opposed to your draft guidelines for embryonic stem cell research, which force me as a taxpayer to subsidize ineffective and morally questionable research which requires 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.

 
47545 05/26/2009 at 05:32:52 PM Self     I oppose federal funds being used for human embyronic stem cell experiments. We need to use adult stem cells because they have been medically proven to be effective in treating diseases.

You are destroying human life when you use embyronic stem cells.

I do not want my tax money being used in any way to hurt the un- born.

 
47546 05/26/2009 at 05:33:11 PM Self     Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans suffering from many diseases and disorders. I am a biological scientist and I also am a member of the Parkinson’s community. I 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. 0A 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. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on these proposed draft guidelines. These draft guidelines can, if amended as I have proposed, make possible steady, even speedy, progress towards the day when millions of Americans can once again have lives of service to their communities instead of being burdens to their families and friends.

Sincerely, *****, BS Degree with a Major in Biological Science

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
47547 05/26/2009 at 05:33:11 PM Organization Cleveland Right to Life Cleveland, OH 44106 NIH, its Acting Director Dr. Raynard Kingston, and the NIH staff should protest the efforts by the Administration to allow Human Embryonic Stem Cell research and experimentation which will result in the direct and premeditated destruction and killing of newly developing human lives. Instead, they should advocate for human adult stem cell research which will lead to health advances without requiring the destruction of newly developing human embryonic lives.

 
47548 05/26/2009 at 05:33:24 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.

 
47549 05/26/2009 at 05:33:29 PM Self     I would like to see that responsible research continue in the use of stem cells.

 
47550 05/26/2009 at 05:33:34 PM Self     The proofs in the pudding, that's an old country saying.

However according to reasearch to date there are NO positive results from human embryonic stem cell experiments, NONE.

And there are several successful results from adult stem cell. Why are we spending money where there are no results, instead of investing where the harvest is blooming.

 
47551 05/26/2009 at 05:34:21 PM Self     Suppose the embryo of George Washington was aborted... would he still be the first President of our country?

When does life begin?

Please do not act as though there are no consequesces to killing innocent people in the name of stem cell research. This is barberic.

Please do not create life for the purpose of experimentation and in the process of killing an innocent person.

 
47552 05/26/2009 at 05:34:45 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.

 
47553 05/26/2009 at 05:35:36 PM Self     I suggest that the final document should include two sets of guidelines for stem cell line eligibility. The first will be a detailed set of guidleines to be applied to the stem cells that will be derived in the future (after the publication of the final document). The second set should be much more general and will be applied to the already existing stem cell lines. This second set of guidelines should be developed in cooperation with stem cell producers, to assure that the scientific community will be able to use all the existing human embryonic stem cell lines, as long as they were derived from embryos that had been originally generated for reproductive purposes but were no longer needed for such purposes.

 
47554 05/26/2009 at 05:35:37 PM Self     As an experienced researcher and Professor of ***** at the State University of ***** at*****I am very much aware of the potential of stem cell research. I strongly support federal funding for this important research initiative and urge HHS to expand the the current guidelines so as to to provide funding for all existing cell lines.

 
47555 05/26/2009 at 05:35:56 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.

 
47556 05/26/2009 at 05:35:57 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.

 
47557 05/26/2009 at 05:36:00 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.

 
47558 05/26/2009 at 05:37:05 PM Self     Comments on Draft National Institutes of Health Guidelines for Human Stem Cell Research: May 2009.

My name is *****, JD, PhD. I am a gubernatorial appointee to ***** Stem Cell Research Advisory Committee *****, which funds research on human embryonic stem cell lines conducted within the state. I am ***** of ****** University’s *****, and an at-large board member of the *****. These comments, however, are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of any of the institutions with which I am affiliated, or of their other members.

CT SCRAC has separately submitted its own comments, which I endorse.

I recommend the following changes to the draft guidelines:

1. Create a separate mechanism for evaluation and recognition of the ethical derivation of stem-cell lines derived from embryos donated before these guidelines go into effect.

I fully endorse the NIH’s proposed informed consent guidelines, as applied to stem-cell lines derived from embryo donations occurring after the guidelines go into effect. I urge, however, that some provision be made to permit NIH funding for continuing research on lines whose derivation was consistent with previously-existing and well-respected guidelines for ethical derivation of human embryonic stem-cell lines. These include the guidelines published (and amended from time to time) by the National Academy of Sciences, which have been adopted by reference by a number of academic institutions and state stem-cell programs; and the guidelines published by the International Society for Stem Cell Research, which apply to many lines originally derived abroad to which American researchers have since gained access, or to which they might want access in the future. The NAS and ISSCR guidelines clearly supplied adequate protections to couples who donated embryos for research. Retroactive funding-disqualification of lines approved under these derivation standards would hinder much valuable research, including even research on many of the few stem-cell lines that were NIH-fundable under President Bush.

Consider the following, for example: the draft NIH guidelines ask for documentation that “[a] policy was in place at the health care facility where the embryos were donated,” to the effect that a potential donor’s decision to give or to withhold consent would not affect the quality of care provided to that potential donor. NAS and ISSCR guidelines both require, absolutely, that a couple's donor consent decision not affect their quality of care, but do not require written evidence of a facility’s existing policy to that effect. The substantive protection afforded the donor couple is thus the same under any of the three guidelines, but retroactive application of the NIH guidelines’ evidentiary requirement (“written evidence” that a “policy was in place”) might prohibit funding of valuable ongoing research on lines originally derived according to NAS or ISSCR ethical standards. One convenient mechanism for dealing with stem-cell lines derived from embryos donated before these NIH guidelines come into effect would be to require review by an IRB (or equivalent body) of the derivation of all such lines for adherence to ethical-derivation regulations and guidelines in place at the time of the embryo donation.

2. Permit the funding of research on qualified parthenogenetic cell lines.

Parthenogenesis involves stimulating an egg to produce an embryo without any genetic contribution from a male. While mammalian parthenote embryos seem incapable of developing into healthy offspring, they can be used to create stem-cell lines; scientists have already produced human stem cell lines via parthenogenesis. The fact that parthenotes do not develop into healthy offspring is reason enough not to treat them as “embryos” under the guidelines. Moreover, parthenogenetic lines may offer distinct clinical benefits that other human-derived stem-cell lines cannot. Cells created from such lines may be a perfect genetic match for the egg donor, permitting transplantation without rejection. Parthenogenesis might also produce stem cell lines that are easier to match to non-donor patients. Having been derived from only one “parent” oocyte, they inherit only one set of histocompatiblity antigens. This means fewer opportunities for incompatibility in transplant.

NIH should permit the use of parthenogenetic lines, provided that their ethical derivation is established by an IRB. IV. B. of the draft guidelines should be amended to allow the funding of research on lines created by parthenogenesis.

Respectfully submitted,

*****, JD, PhD

 
47559 05/26/2009 at 05:37:06 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 harm NO ONE and are already producing good results. In no case should government support be extended to human cloning or other morally reprehensible creation of human embryos for research purposes! Stop this madness! This is not some sci-fi movie!

 
47560 05/26/2009 at 05:37:28 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 harm no one and are already producing good results. In no case should government support be extended to human cloning or the human embryos for research purposes.

 
47561 05/26/2009 at 05:37:35 PM Self     -I a m 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. "

 
47562 05/26/2009 at 05:38:08 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.

 
47563 05/26/2009 at 05:38:15 PM Self University of Wisconsin-Madison   The current NIH draft guidelines are a dramatic improvement over the restrictive 2001 funding policy for embryonic stem cell (hESC) research, but they could be even better. The draft guidelines will expand hESC research by increasing the range of available cell lines for NIH-funded research. The issue is which lines can be used in NIH research. That, in turn, depends on whether they were derived from embryos that were donated in an acceptable manner.

First, the draft guidelines are redundant. The federal “Common Rule” regulations for the protection of tissue donors apply to all federally funded research and have been voluntarily adopted by most institutions for all research under their auspices. These regulations include a comprehensive system of independent oversight by Institutional Review Boards (IRBs), and documentation of proper standards and procedures for informed, voluntary consent free of any undue inducements. The draft guidelines set out a parallel set of requirements, but with terminology and procedures that require new interpretations and possibly new forms of oversight and documentation. Many existing hESC lines – whether approved or not by the Bush Administration -- were derived from embryos donated by couples who were fully informed of their options and of the purposes of the research, and whose donations were overseen by an IRB. Despite this, if their consent forms do not have the precise words listed in the draft guidelines, there is a risk these lines will be ruled ineligible for use in NIH-funded research. The same risk attaches to lines developed pursuant to the laws and regulations of various states and foreign countries, even if their requirements are substantially equivalent to those in the U.S.

It is my belief that the following points conform to President Obama’s goal of expanding research on human embryonic stem cell research with an ethical process mandated by the Federal government that has demonstrated effectiveness for years.

1. The informed consent process for deriving the lines as described in the guidelines is basically the same that is already used for the donation of human tissue under the Common Rule, which requires voluntary informed consent, an appreciation of alternatives, and information about any risks or benefits. The draft guidelines, however, risk creating confusion because they use slightly different words and procedures. I recommend that any line derived from materials originally donated in accordance with the Common Rule be acceptable for use in NIH-funded research. The same standard should be applied to existing lines and to lines that are derived in the future. Similarly, the same standard should apply to lines derived here and abroad.

2. As a practical matter, the vast majority of lines already in existence were originally derived from embryos donated in accordance with the Common Rule. As is done for other tissue-research, IRBs can provide the necessary assurance that this occurred. And again, as is done for other tissue-research, IRBs can provide the necessary assurance that lines derived abroad come from materials originally donated in an acceptable manner.

3. The same considerations should apply to embryos already donated but from lines have not yet been derived, that is, the lines that are derived from them in the future should be usable in NIH-funded work provided the original donation was done in accordance with the Common Rule.

4. ESCROs and SCROs will be optional, with some institutions choosing to eliminate them entirely, and others maintaining them as a source of advice.

5. This proposal takes advantage of the fact that IRBs are already required to assure that cell lines and tissues have been obtained in an appropriate manner. This proposal avoids the redundancy and confusion inherent in the draft guidelines' approach.

In sum, the NIH should abandon the effort to create what is, essentially, a new, parallel system of governance for hES cell research alone. Instead, it should insist that hES cell work comply with the same regulatory standards and procedures that apply to donations from human research subjects. Treating embryonic stem cell research rules as a subset of human tissue research rules (including those for non-embryonic sources of stem cells) makes it more likely that they will be understood and properly implemented. And this approach will relieve barriers to responsible hES cell research while better respecting those who donated sensitive biological materials in order to advance this promising field of research.

 
47564 05/26/2009 at 05:38:24 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

 
47565 05/26/2009 at 05:38:39 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.

 
47566 05/26/2009 at 05:39:22 PM Self     Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans suffering from many diseases and disorders. I am a scientist and although not involved in stem cell research directly, I 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.

 
47567 05/26/2009 at 05:39:23 PM Self     Though the NIH draft guidelines do not allow federal funds to be used explicitly for the destruction of human embryos for stem cell research purposes, the guidelines to ensure that such destruction will continue to occur. Destruction of embryos is absolutely necessary for the type of research being done; therefore the NIH guidelines are deceptively giving implicit approval as well as impetus for the destruction of human life. This is a clever way for the NIH to circumvent the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, but it is not logically sound. If it is illegal to fund the derivation of human embryonic stem cells for research, why should it not also be illegal to fund research that first requires this derivation to occur? Using surplus embryos from fertility clinics and the like does not exonerate the NIH's involvement in their destruction. The very existence of these embryos is a vastly complicated ethical dilemma. The NIH draft guidelines only implicate the federal government and researchers in this additional ethical problem.

Regardless of the ethical mess produced by engaging in embryonic stem cell research, embryonic stem cell research has been staggeringly unsuccessful: not a single cure has resulted from this research, only uncontrollably dividing cells. Adult stem cell research using stem cells derived from umbilical cord blood, the nasal cavity, and even fat cells just to name a few easily accessible sources, have proven to be a viable method of treatment for a myriad of health problems. For example, stem cells taken from Erica Nader's nose regenerated her damaged spinal cord tissue, curing her paralysis. Treatment of childhood leukemia using adult stem cells is now commonplace. These are only two examples, and much research remains to be done to fully realize the possibilities of these stem cells present in our bodies. The interests of the NIH and the health of Americans would be better served by the NIH putting its research dollars into this sort of stem cell research. It is much less expensive to obtain and reprogram these cells, rejection is not a problem, and we already know they work.

Thank you for attentively considering my comments on the NIH draft guidelines.

 
47568 05/26/2009 at 05:40:18 PM Self     I oppose killing human embryos. The proposed regulations will force me and other 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.

 
47569 05/26/2009 at 05:40:45 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.

 
47570 05/26/2009 at 05:40:49 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.

 
47571 05/26/2009 at 05:40:49 PM Self     No life should ever be taken for any reason. We all want to live as healthy as we can but not at the expense of a human life of another person let alone a helpless forming humanbeing. This is just selfishness on the part of politicians and the medical profession and people are falling for these lies. It is about the MONEY!!!!

 
47572 05/26/2009 at 05:40:56 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.

 
47573 05/26/2009 at 05:42:23 PM Self     I am opposed to Federal funding for any research involving stem cells derived from human embryos created for reproductive purposes on the grounds that the life of a human being should not be sacrificed without the consent of that human being (and their parents' consent does not suffice, as it would not in any other situation), even if the end result would benefit other human beings.

 
47574 05/26/2009 at 05:42:30 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.

 
47575 05/26/2009 at 05:42:50 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.

Thank you for your time,

*****

 
47576 05/26/2009 at 05:44:13 PM Self     The benefits of embryonic stem cell research far outweigh the potentially (and, frankly, laughable) morally questionable nature of the research. The restrictions on embryonic stem cell research need to be relaxed in order that progress be achieved, and there is little actual reason for the restrictions. I am glad that some of the restrictions on stem cell research are being relaxed, but believe that there needs to be further relaxation of the guidelines.

 
47577 05/26/2009 at 05:44:45 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.

 
47578 05/26/2009 at 05:45:25 PM Self     i do not agree with the use of invitro-fertilization "leftovers" for any purpose. i do not agree with the use of embryonic stem cells. any other stem cells, like skin, are ok.

*****

 
47579 05/26/2009 at 05:45:48 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.

 
47580 05/26/2009 at 05:46:05 PM Organization TN4SaferVaccines Knoxville, TN Adult Stem Cells have proven to work, embryonic stem cells have shown no promise at all. It's absurd and immoral to continue experimenting with babies. Just use adult stem cells.

 
47581 05/26/2009 at 05:46:17 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.

 
47582 05/26/2009 at 05:47:51 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.

 
47583 05/26/2009 at 05:48:52 PM Self     I support federal funding for stem cell research and would like to see the guidelines expand to provide funding for all existing cell nuclear transfer.

 
47584 05/26/2009 at 05:49:00 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.

 
47585 05/26/2009 at 05:49:04 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

 
47586 05/26/2009 at 05:49:19 PM Self     In my opinion, the passage of Embronic Stem Cell Research should not take place. There have been proven studies stem cell research & regrowth of human cell can be done by using human tissue, skin, umbillical cords & various other forms other than embroinc cells.

Please DO NOT approve the useage of Embronic Cells for stem cell research.

Sincerely,

 
47587 05/26/2009 at 05:50:03 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.

 
47588 05/26/2009 at 05:50:12 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.

 
47589 05/26/2009 at 05:51:29 PM Self     We are opposed to the funding for research using human EMBRYONIC stem cell research. NIH should use funds to continue research of ADULT stem cell research which has a proven record of treatment and cures.

 
47590 05/26/2009 at 05:51:31 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 harm no one and are already producing good results. In no case should government support be extended to human cloning or the human embryos for research purposes.

We live in a DEMOCRATIC country, not a socialist one. Speak up for the unborn.

 
47591 05/26/2009 at 05:51:36 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.

 
47592 05/26/2009 at 05:52:09 PM Self     Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed rules surrounding NIH funded stem cell research. Three things regarding my life give my views some unique credibility: • I have had Type I diabetes for nearly **** years. • I work in the field of clinical research and compliance. • I have two degrees in scientific disciplines which have required studies in molecular/cellular biology and ethics.

Fundamentally I am personally against the use and destruction of embryos for research purposes.

As a compliance professional in a scientific discipline, I understand the need for bright lines and standards surrounding how research is allowed to run. The following is a list of comments regarding the proposed rules for funding stem cell research:

1. Human cloning must be prohibited.

2. Require that research institutions document exactly how embryonic stem cell material will be derived for research use. This should become an elemental part of their research protocol which is subject to IRB review a. The statement,”Although human embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos, such stem cells are not themselves human embryos.” Should be clarified to explain why their pluripotent qualities preclude them from embryo status. It is important to understand exactly at what point an individual life may/may not be destroyed.

3. Require that informed consent to use remaining embryos for research purposes is acquired from both the mother AND the father prior to creating embryos for the treatment of infertility a. Genetic material from both parents will be present in the stem cell product (aka embryo, baby, pluripotent stem cell source etc.) Both parents deserve a chance to understand that their genetic material may be used to perpetuity of the embryonic stem cell line existence. i. PHI privacy matters may come into play depending on the interpretation of the IRB. ii. If consent for such a use is properly given, it should include a discussion on the ethics and public disagreements regarding the initiation of human life between the physician and parents. 1. All public views pertaining to human life and embryonic state bears discussion during the consenting process since one side of the argument fundamentally believes that the destruction of embryos is potential destruction of human life. a. Alternatives to research donation should be included in the discussion(eg embryo adoption) b. This point should also uphold #B4 of the currently proposed guidelines.

4. Federal audits and monitoring should be implemented to periodically (eg > annually) verify that the NIH budgets are being executed ethically and that research protocols are not compromised. This audit should also address any potential conflicts of interest.

Thank you for the opportunity to briefly comment on these guidelines. I look forward to seeing how this Presidential action matriculates into reality.

 
47593 05/26/2009 at 05:52:10 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 harm no one and are already producing good results. In no case should government support be extended to human cloning or the human embryos for research purposes.

We live in a DEMOCRATIC country, not a socialist one. Speak up for the unborn.

 
47594 05/26/2009 at 05:53:03 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.

 
47595 05/26/2009 at 05:53:23 PM Self     As a registered voter of the state of Missouri, I make an argument on the subject of embryonic stem cell research: the new guidelines, in order to protect the rights of every citizen of our nation, must be made ensuring ethical practices. Do not divorce biomedical research from ethical foundations! The use of human embryos from IVF for destructive research opens up the door to cloning a fetus, in actuality, an unborn child as each of us began,for use as a human guinea pig sacrificed for spare parts. How degenerate, utterly inhuman. How remeniscient of Mengele's grizzly experimentation on Jewish children during the Nazi Holocaust! Please set guidlines to prevent this horrible scenario. Research utilizing Ipsc is producing virtually any type of stem cell needed by the medical profession already. Don't kill human embryos-it is not necessary.

 
47596 05/26/2009 at 05:53:31 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.

 
47597 05/26/2009 at 05:54:24 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.

 
47598 05/26/2009 at 05:55:01 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.

 
47599 05/26/2009 at 05:55:07 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.

 
47600 05/26/2009 at 05:55:15 PM Organization The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research Church Street Station, PO Box 780, New York, NY 10008 May 26, 2009

NIH Stem Cell Guidelines, MSC 7997 9000 Rockville Pike Bethesda, Maryland 20892 – 7997

Re: National Institutes of Health Guidelines for Human Stem Cell Research

Dear NIH:

I write on behalf of The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research. Founded in 2000, our mission is to develop better therapeutics, and ultimately a cure, for Parkinson’s disease through an aggressively funded research agenda. Human embryonic stem cell research comprises only one part of our research portfolio (approximately $5 million of more than $142 million in research we have funded to date); we write this letter, however, because we believe in pursuing all paths to a cure and because we believe that stem cell research in particular has significant potential to lead to transformative research developments.

We applaud President Obama’s and the NIH’s commitment to exploring human embryonic stem cell research and to ensuring that its promise continues to be explored for the benefit of every individual whose life is touched by illness or injury. Executive Order 13505 presents a tremendous opportunity for the NIH to support ethically responsible and scientifically worthy stem cell research.

In light of the tremendous opportunity at hand, we appreciate NIH so quickly producing the Draft National Institutes of Health Guidelines for Human Stem Cell Research in order to provide us and others with the opportunity to comment on this important document. We support the many thoughtful inclusions within the guidelines that support the spirit of the truly landmark EO 13505. In addition to supporting many of the stipulations within the guidelines, however, we also strongly urge the NIH to adopt certain amendments critical to making the guidelines true to supporting the Executive Order issued by President Obama and effective in maximizing the potential benefits to medicine and human health through stem cell research.

Clarification Needed to Communicate Scope of Federal Support for Embryonic Stem Cell Research:

In order to ensure continuity and consistency across federal agencies, we request clarifying language be added to the second paragraph of the Summary section of the guidelines explaining that it is NIH’s expectation that other federal agencies that fund human embryonic stem cell research adopt the same parameters to be used by NIH.

Clarification Needed to Ensure All Promising Techniques for Stem Cell Research Are Included:

Certain very promising techniques that have scientific potential beyond what is possible with embryonic stem cell lines that are derived from the IVF process and should be eligible for federal funding are currently ineligible for federal funding in the draft guidelines. While in the Summary section, the Supplementary section, and Section IV (B) the draft guidelines currently provide for support for embryonic stem cell lines derived from the IVF process, we request the NIH consider including provisions for support for federal funding for sources of embryonic stem cell lines derived from other sources as well.

Provisions for Continuation of NIH-funded Registry Needed To Strengthen Assurance of Compliance and Avoid Burden on Research:

We believe that the continuation of an NIH-funded registry that will list lines that are eligible for research using NIH funds is critical to avoiding the inefficiencies and duplicative work of each institution reviewing each stem cell line’s derivation process and informed consent compliance regardless of how widely that line is used elsewhere for NIH-funded research.

Should such a registry not be included in the final guidelines, we recommend that the guidelines include a “safe harbor” that does not require each research institution to start from scratch in reviewing a line, especially when they have been reviewed by another institution for NIH-funded research or are already in use by NIH for intramural research.

Clarification Needed Regarding Informed Consent Provisions at IVF Clinics:

While we support the effort of the draft guidelines to establish a strong ethical framework for research on embryonic stem cell research moving forward, not all IVF clinics offer the same options to patients; consequently, we request a clarification to language in Section II B (1) so that it reads “all options offered by the IVF clinic pertaining to the use of embryos no longer needed for reproductive purposes were explained.”

Provision for Grandfathering Research Using Current Stem Cell Lines Needed:

To stay true to the intent we believe behind the guidelines to ensure that any stem cell line that has been responsibly derived be eligible for federal funding, the guidelines need to include a specific Grandfather clause that allows lines in existence before the effective date of the new guidelines to be eligible for federal funding if the grantee institution assures that the line was derived ethically, as defined by the standards established in 2001. If the guidelines are read literally in their current form and each criterion is applied with no flexibility, we are concerned that there are potentially no stem cell lines that are currently in use by federal grantees that would be eligible for continued federal funding and that many ongoing research studies that have been underway for several years will be disrupted. We recommend that a new section be created detailing eligibility for stem cell lines in existence before the effective date of the new guidelines and that grantees provide an assurance to NIH that lines used in research are compliant. Specifically:

Section II (B) be amended to read: “Eligibility of Human Embryonic Stem Cells Derived from Human Embryos After the Date of Publication of the Final Guidelines:”

Section II (C) be created and should read: “Eligibility of Human Embryonic Stem Cells Derived Prior to Date of Publication of Final Guidelines: Human embryonic stem cells may be used in research using NIH funds, if documentation of all the following can be assured: - The stem cells must have been derived from an embryo that was created for reproductive purposes; - The embryo was no longer needed for these purposes; - Informed consent must have been obtained for the donation of the embryo; - No financial inducements were provided for donation of the embryo.

The method that an institution uses to provide such an assurance could include review by the institution’s Institutional Review Board (“IRB”).

Minor Change to Guidelines Title Needed to Reflect Specific Purpose:

To more accurately reflect the purpose of the guidelines, which is to identify the kinds of research eligible for federal funding, the title of the guidelines should be revised as follows: “National Institutes of Health Guidelines for the Federal Funding of Human [Embryonic] Stem Cell Research.”

Based on evidence available to date, we at The Michael J. Fox Foundation believe that the development of viable and feasible cell replacement therapies could revolutionize the treatment of Parkinson’s disease specifically and accelerate the progress of medical research in general. Though the scientific hurdles necessary to achieve therapeutic success with cell replacement are great, and much work remains to be done, ensuring the integrity of these guidelines is critical to setting the tone for maximizing the positive impact of President Obama’s EO 13505, and we believe that it is imperative that the NIH consider and address the recommendations we have provided.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments.

Sincerely,

***** *****

 
47601 05/26/2009 at 05:55:27 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.

 
47602 05/26/2009 at 05:56:10 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.

 
47603 05/26/2009 at 05:56:11 PM Self     Science should never take a backseat to politics. The voters have spoken at the ballot box and they have made a choice overwhelmingly for change! I am a young man suffering from various autoimmune diseases, 25 and in the prime of my life - and I have to spend it all fretting about it my conditions (and quality of life) will degenerate further. I can't help but feel anger that there may be treatments to ameliorate my condition, but are being held up due to superstition and religious issues! Ethics is treating the sick and injured, not appeasing demagogues at the sake of human advancement.

 
47604 05/26/2009 at 05:56:20 PM Organization University of Iowa 100 Gilmore Hall, Iowa City, IA 52242-1320 The University of Iowa endorses the comments submitted by the Council on Governmental Relations (COGR) in reference to these guidelines.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

 
47605 05/26/2009 at 05:56:27 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. And as a result save billions of dollars for health care from Diabetic Complications. 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. And as a result will potentially provide more funds to provide health insurance for all Americans with diabetes, such as myself.

Additional Information

In March, the President issued an Executive Order that ended the blanket ban on federal funding of research using embryonic stem cell lines developed after August 2001. NIH was than instructed to develop guidelines for federal funding of this research.

The purpose of the guidelines is to establish a policy and procedures under which the federal government will fund research in this area, and to ensure that such research is ethically responsible, scientifically worthy, and conducted in accordance with applicable law. You can view the NIH’s draft guidelines online by clicking here.

The draft guidelines would allow funding for research using human embryonic stem cells that were derived from embryos created by in vitro fertilization (IVF) for reproductive purposes and were no longer needed for that purpose. The guidelines also describe the conditions and informed consent procedures that would be required when obtaining embryonic stem cells for research that could be funded by the federal government.

The American Diabetes Association strongly supports the draft guidelines but is concerned that, as written, they may prevent stem cell lines in existence before the guidelines go into effect, from being eligible for federal research funding The Association is urging NIH to consider amending the guidelines to allow current stem cell lines derived using prevailing ethical practices to be considered for federal funding and that NIH be open to review other sources of stem cell lines (excluding reproductive cloning) in the future.

 
47606 05/26/2009 at 05:57:19 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.

 
47607 05/26/2009 at 05:57:36 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.

 
47608 05/26/2009 at 05:57:53 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.

 
47609 05/26/2009 at 05:59:07 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.

 
47610 05/26/2009 at 05:59:45 PM Self     I am in support of stem cell research and in particular want to express my hope that somatic cell nuclear transfer will be permitted according to the NIH guidelines, since it will create so much potential for individualized therapies. I am also in favor of grandfathering in the current lines that were made eligible by Bush for federal funding.

 
47611 05/26/2009 at 05:59:49 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.

 
47612 05/26/2009 at 06:00:12 PM Self     THESE ARE PERSONAL COMMENTS. IT IS ESSENTIAL AND MORAL THAT THE DRAFT NIH STEM CELL GUILINES BE IMPLEMENTED. THE ROLE OF NIH IS IMPORTANT SO THAT EVENTUALLY STEM CELLS WILL BE USED FOR THE MANY DISEASES THAT CAN BE "CURED".

MY SPOUSE DIED FIVE YEARS AGO FROM PARKINSON'S COMPLICATIONS. SHE KNEW THAT THE USE OF STEM CELL WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR HER BUT HER HOPES( AND THEY WERE AWAYS THERE IN HER THOUGHTS) WERE FOR FUTURE PATIENTS THAT COULD BE HELPED.

IF THERE IS ANYTHING THAT I PERSONALLY CAN DO TO HELP IN YOUR EFFORTS ON STEM CELL RESERCH, I AM AVAILABLE AND READY FOR ANY ACTIONS NEEDED.

THANKS IN ADVANCE,

*****

 
47613 05/26/2009 at 06:01:18 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.

 
47614 05/26/2009 at 06:01:24 PM Self     Please do not discriminate against persons based on their stage of development. These embryos are human beings just like you or me (They are living and have their full complement of DNA at fertilization. Because of this, they must belong to a species and I have not heard of any living thing switching species after they are conceived!).

To kill these human beings for research, even if the research brings amazing results, is immoral and intrinsically evil. It is the same as Dr. Mengele did with Jewish human beings being treated as non-persons - with the only difference being the basis of discrimination: that is, of their religion rather than of their stage of development.

If the argument is that "they'll be discarded anyway", this was the same type of rationalization used by Dr. Mengele and his cohorts, too. And we're ALL going to die anyway, so why not use any human being for research (without their consent) if it shows a glimmer of promise?

Deliberately singling out these people for death for medical research on their bodies has a term that goes with it: MURDER!! But I suppose because these people have no voice, won't "suffer", and their just wasteful human beings, then does that make their murder OK?

Please don't increase the blood that already is on our nation's hands!

 
47615 05/26/2009 at 06:01:27 PM Self     To whom it may concern,

I am writing to let you know that I am very much opposed to using tax dollars to support embryonic stem cell research.

Thank you for your time.

 
47616 05/26/2009 at 06:01:31 PM Organization International Center for Technology Assessment 660 Pennsylvania Ave SE Suite 302 Washington DC 20003 The International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA) is a non-profit, non-partisan organization committed to providing the public with full assessments and analyses of technological impacts on society. ICTA was formed to assist the general public and policymakers better understand how technology affects society.

ICTA is devoted to exploring the economic, ethical, social, environmental and political impacts that can result from the applications of technology or technological systems. Using this holistic form of analysis, ICTA provides the public with independent, timely, and comprehensive information about the potential impacts of technology. Using legal petitions, comments, and litigation ICTA works to limit genetic engineering, end the patenting of life, address greenhouse gas emissions, place a moratorium on nanotechnologies until appropriate regulations are in place, protect animals from abuse in research and agriculture, and halt deforestation.

ICTA has no financial conflicts of interest on the issues of human genetics, human embryonic stem cell research, human cloning and other issues being considered by the NIH in these guidelines.

File Link (.txt)
ICTA Comments to NIH on human embryonic stem cell guidelines



Go to NIH Stem Cell Information Page