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 20752 - 20851 of 49015 Forward 100 Records   Forward 1000 Records   Last 100 Records|

ID Entry Date Affiliation Organization
Name
Organization
Address
Comments Attachment
20752 05/13/2009 at 09:58:48 PM Self     To whom it may concern:

Why involve the destruction of innocent human life, when there are good alternatives that work, such as stem cells from umbilical cord tissue? We must protect our God-given right to life, because it is through this right all of our other rights derive!

Sincerely,

 
20753 05/13/2009 at 10:01:30 PM Self     Human embryos are human persons. Experimenting with them is akin to what was done to Jews, Gypsies, and others by the notorious Dr. Mengele and other perverted doctors in Nazi Germany. Killing human embryos is just plain murder - the unjust taking of a life belonging to another person.

On the other hand, experimenting with adult stem cells has not only led already to more than 70 beneficial treatments, but is perfectly moral and an acceptable practice of medicine and research. Such work should be encouraged.

It should be the policy of the United States to prevent experimentation with human beings as embryo stem cells, and to prosecute for murder in the first degree, any who destroy such embryo persons.

 
20754 05/13/2009 at 10:01:33 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.

 
20755 05/13/2009 at 10:02:11 PM Self     Human embryos are human persons. Experimenting with them is akin to what was done to Jews, Gypsies, and others by the notorious Dr. Mengele and other perverted doctors in Nazi Germany. Killing human embryos is just plain murder - the unjust taking of a life belonging to another person.

On the other hand, experimenting with adult stem cells has not only led already to more than 70 beneficial treatments, but is perfectly moral and an acceptable practice of medicine and research. Such work should be encouraged.

It should be the policy of the United States to prevent experimentation with human beings as embryo stem cells, and to prosecute for murder in the first degree, any who destroy such embryo persons.

 
20756 05/13/2009 at 10:02:30 PM Self     At last there's real hope for a cure. NIH please broaden the guidelines you are establishing to include the existing stem cell lines already derived as well as newer lines. I have two grandchildren, who in their lifetime could benefit from your research. Thank you for the work you do and the hope you provide.

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.

 
20757 05/13/2009 at 10:04:35 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.

 
20758 05/13/2009 at 10:05:51 PM Self     Stem cell research finds that using adult stem skin cells is adequate with no need to use embryonic stem cells. My tax dollar does not need to be used for embryonic stem cell research. It is my right as an American to have freedom of choice as to how my money will be used. Where is the moral reasoning? If its ok to abort a pregnancy using my tax dollars and now how about tax dollars being used for embryonic stem cell research where does my freedom of choice come in? I feel as long as tax dollars are available lets use the money. How about my religious rights? How about my choice? What would the Supreme Court consider. Our country is losing its framework when the right to life is denied.

 
20759 05/13/2009 at 10:06:19 PM Self     Please do not take innocent life in the hope of finding any medical cure. It is an absolute corruption of our culture. Thousands of men and women have given their lives to make life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness possible. Destroying pre-born life makes a travesty of their sacrifice.

 
20760 05/13/2009 at 10:07:00 PM Self     A Master Gardener called me to ask for suggestions about the plants that she had dug/potted for the plant sale that were droopy & sad looking. So, I thought I would share with you what we talked about & perhaps you all have suggestions, too! With all the windy days, the transplants are easily dehydrated. Try moving them to a sheltered location -- either beside the house out of the wind or in your garage if you have windows in it. If the soil is dry, then water well. If it's moist, give it a short drink & get it out of the wind. Once the wind is gone, you can move the pots back out. Transplants always need some extra coddling -- partial, not full/hot sun & ample water -- to get over the transplant shock. Sometimes trimming off some of the foilage on the top is necessary because the roots have been diminished by moving & cutting. (the balance of the root size trying to feed the foliage size, and perhaps blossoms, needs to be equalized.) Please feel free to share with the group what's worked. what ideas & recommendations you have and any funny experiences! Thanks everyone for your enthusiasm & support of Master Gardening!!! Karen

 
20761 05/13/2009 at 10:07:06 PM Self     Obama Administration, Do not let research to continue on embryonic stem cell. Nothing has ever been successful through his type of research. Adult stem cell has proven effective in research. So why support something that does not work and kills a life that was not given a chance to live. The persn who was to create that special medication or so might have already been created by God and someone killed that person before him/her was given a chance to prove him/her self - by abortion.

 
20762 05/13/2009 at 10:09:04 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.

 
20763 05/13/2009 at 10:09:23 PM Self     To whom it may concern:

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,

 
20764 05/13/2009 at 10:09:38 PM Self     I have had type 1 diabetes for 23 years, and I am very much looking forward to the future that stem cell research may create--a future where type 1 diabetes is stopped before it develops. The government'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 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.

 
20765 05/13/2009 at 10:10:05 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 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.

 
20766 05/13/2009 at 10:12:23 PM Self     Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans suffering from many diseases and disorders. I am an active scientist who has been funded for work with allowable stem cell lines and by my state for studies of "non-approved" stem cell lines. I believe that the final guidelines should not create new bureaucratic hurdles that will slow the pace of progress and should not attempt to preemptively set barriers anticipating that the political process will continue to do so. 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. It is noteworthy and commendable that additional review processes were not added, and the guidelines appear to rely on the already existing Institutional Review Boards rather than separate committees, as were recommended by the National Academy of Sciences guidelines. I also believe that the final NIH 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 not prohibit federal funding using stem cell lines derived in other ways or to reinforce the stigma associated with these other methods. Other sources of stem cells may be important especially for disease-specific cell lines and may not be derivable using the methods presently allowed. There is no reason for the NIH guidelines even to mention these other methods – allow the Congress to make the rules (and to eliminate the Dickey-Wicker amendment). Congress is most likely, I believe, to prohibit the same stem cell derivations, but the NIH guidelines should be stated to allow what Congress allows in its revisions rather than appearing to be opposed to these and having to be revised if/when Congress changes the laws.

 
20767 05/13/2009 at 10:12:24 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.

 
20768 05/13/2009 at 10:13:14 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.

 
20769 05/13/2009 at 10:14:00 PM Self     As an american citizen I don't think the the government should use tax-dollars to fund this project when our schools are in such need of funds at a critical time as the one we are facing right now. We don't have the right to create new human embryos for research. I believe the unlimited funding could be used to provide basic necesities in our schools and the education of our children.

 
20770 05/13/2009 at 10:14:35 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.

 
20771 05/13/2009 at 10:15:03 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.

 
20772 05/13/2009 at 10:15:20 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.

 
20773 05/13/2009 at 10:15:59 PM Self     I am opposed to your draft guidelines for embryonic stem cell research which forces me as a tax payer to subsidize research requiring the distruction of human life. There are other options. Human life is precious.

 
20774 05/13/2009 at 10:16:41 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.

 
20775 05/13/2009 at 10:17:44 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.

 
20776 05/13/2009 at 10:19:51 PM Self     Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for millions of Americans suffering from many diseases and disorders. I am not a scientist, but I am a member of the Parkinson’s community and have been following progress in this field with great interest. Significant strides have been made over the past decade, and the final guidelines issued by NIH must build on this progress so that cures and new therapies can get to patients as quickly as possible. The final guidelines should not create new bureaucratic hurdles that will slow the pace of progress.

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

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

 
20777 05/13/2009 at 10:20:35 PM Self     The use of embryonic stem cells should NOT be supported by the government. To "kill and destroy" these innocent lives for research that has not shown any promise to benefit the medical community as opposed to adult stem cells is arrogant and unnecessary.

I also oppose the use of my tax dollars to perform such an inhumane act, especially in an economy where it could be used in a better way than chasing a dream which, once again, has shown no promise of coming true.

 
20778 05/13/2009 at 10:20:40 PM Self     I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20779 05/13/2009 at 10:20:47 PM Self     "These 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."

What EXACTLY does that mean? Aborted babies being used for research is wrong, morally and ethically. Using adult stem cells produces the same results and does not put babies in danger.

You may think that an exaggeration, but think again. If embryos are used for research the possibility for abuse is endless and innocent babies have a chance at becoming victims of this farce.

If anyone is offended by me calling embryos, babies, that is too bad. That is what they are.

I do not support this. Human adult stem cells are sufficient for research and should be utilized instead of embryos.

 
20780 05/13/2009 at 10:22:14 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.

 
20781 05/13/2009 at 10:25:21 PM Self     Dear Mr. President: I urge you to respect human life by restricting research and experimentation for stem cell development without using human embryos to obtain material. As a fellow human being, you have to realize that life is our most important asset and destroying even the tiniest of human life for experimental purposes is inhuman and will be catastrophic for further development of our culture. There are several other viable sources for stem cell and its associated research that does not require the destruction of a human life and that is exactly what a human embryo is. Sincerely,

 
20782 05/13/2009 at 10:27:45 PM Self     PLEASE DO NOT USE OUR PRECIOUS HARD-EARNED MONEY THAT WE ARE PAYING TAXES ON TO SUPPORT EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH OR CLONING. IS THE AMERICAN WAY TO USE TAX DOLLARS TO KILL OUR OWN SOCIETY, IN ORDER TO GAIN INFO OR GET RICH FROM THE USE THEREOF? WE ARE NOT AGAINST ADULT STEM CELL RESEARCH. IT IS PROVEN TO BE VERY BENEFICIAL TO TREAT ILLNESSES, AND A HUMAN IS NOT BEING KILLED TO BENEFIT FROM IT. MY OWN BROTHER - IN LAW HAD ADULT STEM CELLS IN THE TREATMENT OF HIS CANCER. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO STATE MY OPINION.

 
20783 05/13/2009 at 10:29:37 PM Self     I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you

 
20784 05/13/2009 at 10:29:50 PM Self     I'm a 19 year old Republican Christian from North Carolina. I may not know much about politics and all that jazz but I do know that forcing Americans to pay taxes that support things against their beliefs and views is unconstitutional. My family did not vote democratic and therefore should not have to support democratic issues and researches. You can not force the Republicans to be Democrats. If the government needs more money for things like this, tell Obama to pull some money out of his own butt and use it and stop increasing the national debt. Money doesn't grow on trees. He is sending us into the next great depression. Anyway, if the Americans are gonna be forced to pay for the research thing, I'm sure it won't go well with many Republicans. It's against our beliefs and it's against God. Believe in Him or not, He is out there. Hope is not going to get us anywhere. I PRAY for this country because the direction were headed is going to kill us all, literally. A nation that kill its own children is a nation without a future.

 
20785 05/13/2009 at 10:30:01 PM Self     It has already been proven, time and again, that Embryonic Stem Cell Research is both destructive to human life and is fruitless. On the other hand, non-destructive Adult Stem Cell Research has produced some amazing medical breakthroughs. I don't understand how the taxpayers could be, or should be, forced to fund any form of science that is so highly controversial, unethical, and ineffective at producing results.

 
20786 05/13/2009 at 10:31:01 PM Self     -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.

 
20787 05/13/2009 at 10:31:25 PM Self Hadassah   I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20788 05/13/2009 at 10:32:15 PM Self     My comments refer to Section II B of the draft guidelines.

This refers to Sec. II B of the draft guidelines. I commend you for allowing more stem cell research than in the immeadiate past. In particular, I agree with opening the research to use of surplus embros from fertility clinics. However, I believe that the final guidelines should allow federal funding of research from other than IVF embryos, specifically from somatic cell nuclar transfer (SCNT). The narrow religious views of some should not be imposed upon the general public. The general public should have access to the benefits of research from all sources.

 
20789 05/13/2009 at 10:32:15 PM Organization Hadassah Chicago Chapter Skokie, IL 60076 I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20790 05/13/2009 at 10:32:35 PM Self     I am totally against stem cell research unless they are adult stem cells.

 
20791 05/13/2009 at 10:32:49 PM Organization Hadassah   I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20792 05/13/2009 at 10:33:23 PM Self     As a child of a parent suffering from a dibilitating neurological disease, I am pleased that Section II B of the draft guidelines appear to permit federal funding of some existing stem cell lines previously not eligible for federal funding and for new lines that will be created from surplus embryos at fertility clinics. However, as drafted, Section II B does not ensure that all current stem cell lines will be eligible for federal funding. I believe the final guidelines should allow federal funds for research using any existing stem cell lines that were created under ethical guidelines. This will allow research to 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. Since new breakthroughs to create stem cell lines occur regularly, it is crucial that the final guidelines provide federal funding using stem cell lines derived in other ethical ways.

 
20793 05/13/2009 at 10:36:14 PM Self     "Embryos are humans at their earliest developmental stage. There is no such thing as an excess life. And the fact that a human lacks some particular capacity, or even is going to die, does not justify experimenting on that individual, or exploiting him or her as a natural resource." This quote is taken directly from the January 2007 White House Domestic Policy Council Report.

I am opposed to the current administration's draft guidelines for embryonic stem cell research, which force me as a taxpayer to subsidize research that destroys innocent human lives. Adult stem cell research has already produced numerous cures for the exact diseases that the researchers promoting embryonic stem cell research claim to be “researching” for.

So, not only is embryonic stem cell research morally wrong, (since it uses human beings as scientific experiments) but it is a complete waste of money. The REAL cures and the REAL promise of therapies lie in ADULT stem cell research.

Please, redirect the funds so that science wins, not politics.

 
20794 05/13/2009 at 10:38:01 PM Self     Embryonic stem cells are human. The use of living humans, even in a state in which the human being is microscopic, is unethical. Advances in the use of adult human stem cells and umbilical stem cells pose a much greater benefit and should be advanced ahead of embryonic stem cells.

 
20795 05/13/2009 at 10:38:55 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.

 
20796 05/13/2009 at 10:40:54 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.

 
20797 05/13/2009 at 10:41:44 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.

 
20798 05/13/2009 at 10:41:57 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.

 
20799 05/13/2009 at 10:45:58 PM       Please do not stand in front of the progress that I and most americans have voted for. My grand daughters life depends on this science and I am sure many other families have this same hope. We voted for it we want it we need it lives depend on it so let the people have this science for saving lives.

 
20800 05/13/2009 at 10:47:38 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.

 
20801 05/13/2009 at 10:47:56 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 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.

NIH Draft Guidelines

Background On March 9th, President Obama issued an Executive Order instructing the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to develop guidelines to establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. The NIH, in implementing the Executive Order, recently published draft guidelines in the Federal Register. The full text can be obtained at http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-9313.pdf. The public has thirty days to submit comments on the draft guidelines; comments must be received by NIH by May 26th. Once the comment period is over, NIH will review the content and volume of comments as it drafts its final guidelines, expected to be issued on or before July 7th.

Summary The draft guidelines establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cells that were derived from embryos created for reproductive purposes and were in excess of clinical need. In addition, to be eligible for federal funding, the guidelines impose significant eligibility criteria on the donation process of the embryo used to derive the stem cell line. The criteria include: · All options for the use of the embryos were explained to the donor; · No inducements were offered for the donation; · A policy was in place at the facility where the embryos were donated that ensures that the decision to donate embryos for research would not affect the quality of care provided; · There was a separation between the donor’s decision to create embryos for reproductive purposes and the donor’s decision to donate embryos for research; · Consent for the donation was obtained at the time of donation from the individual who sought reproductive services; · Whenever practicable, the physician responsible for the donor’s reproductive clinical care was not the same person as the researcher deriving the stem cells; and · Written informed consent was obtained from individuals who sought reproductive services and who elected to donate embryos for research purposes (specific criteria is listed for the informed consent process).

We believe that these ethical parameters are appropriate for new stem cell lines that are created in 2009 and thereafter. Unfortunately, the draft guidelines do not explicitly ensure that current lines that are already being used in research will be eligible for federal funding. It is our recommendation that the final guidelines include a provision that allows for inclusion of current lines, already being used in very important research, if those lines were derived using the prevailing ethical practices at the time.

The draft guidelines prohibit federal funding of research using embryonic stem cells derived from other sources such as somatic cell nuclear transfer ( SCNT ), IVF embryos created for research purposes, and parthenogenesis. It is our belief that these very promising research techniques have potential that is beyond what is possible with embryonic stem cell lines that are derived from the IVF process and should be eligible for federal funding.

 
20802 05/13/2009 at 10:48:35 PM Organization Hadassah   I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20803 05/13/2009 at 10:50:18 PM Self     Dear President Obama, Your stated policies and actions regarding abortion and stem cell research are offensive to me. You are my President, but you do not represent me. There's not much I can do about that, except to keep telling you how I feel about what you are doing. I pray that you will wake up one of these days and realize that you have been wrong about these issues and many others. May God forgive you.

 
20804 05/13/2009 at 10:51:37 PM Organization Kol Tikvah Hadassah Lake Worth, FL 33467 I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20805 05/13/2009 at 10:52:11 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.

Please help us find a way to help our children find a cure for their disease.

 
20806 05/13/2009 at 10:52:34 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.

 
20807 05/13/2009 at 10:55:06 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.

 
20808 05/13/2009 at 10:55:08 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.

President Obama's your order that allows MY tax dollars to be spent on the destruction of human life is unconstitional.

 
20809 05/13/2009 at 10:57:16 PM Self     -I am opposed to 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.

 
20810 05/13/2009 at 10:57:34 PM Self     We are opposed to your draft guidelines for embryonic stem cell research, which forces us as taxpayers to subsidize research requiring the destruction of innocent human life. We think support should be directed to the adult stem cell research and treatments which do not destroy human life and which 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. We know that embryo-destructive stem cell research has been shown to be ineffective and even dangerous, often forming uncontrollable tumors and causing rejection problems. Adult stem cells, on the other hand, 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 also leave open a loophole that could allow future funding for embryonic stem cell research that could lead to the creation of clones and human-animal hybrids. We want this loophole closed immediately.

 
20811 05/13/2009 at 11:00:52 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.

 
20812 05/13/2009 at 11:02:24 PM Self     While there is legitimate proof that adult stem cells show promise in the cure of some diseases, there is none that show the same for embryonic stem cells. The cost for this research (embryonic stem cell) cannot only be measured simply in dollars, but more importantly in the destruction of human life. This policy creates a slippery slope which is unnecessary and costly and as a tax-paying citizen of the United States, I object to it.

 
20813 05/13/2009 at 11:03:57 PM   Hadassah   I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20814 05/13/2009 at 11:04:26 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 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.

 
20815 05/13/2009 at 11:06:28 PM Organization Hadassah of Greater washington 1220 East West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20816 05/13/2009 at 11:09:16 PM Self     i oppose NIH Human Stem Cell Guidelines Draft on moral grounds: Each human embyo is a unique and compete human being, in process of development. Another human being has no right to purposefully destroy a very early human life for scientific experimentation. A society in which the stronger members can destroy the weakest among us will destroy itself. Respect for every human life is the core value of the American experiment in human government. Without that, we will destroy ourselves. In addition, IPS cell technology has made it unnecessary to destroy the early human child to obtain stem cells. Thus we don't even have a "scientific" excuse for our immorality.

 
20817 05/13/2009 at 11:09:33 PM Organization Hadassah of Greater Washington 1220 East West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20818 05/13/2009 at 11:14:42 PM Self     To the Obaba administration,

-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.

Sincerely,

 
20819 05/13/2009 at 11:16:59 PM Self     It's wrong to destroy human life to further science. That's what Hitler's henchmen did with "nonpeople Jews". It's pouring salt into a wound to require all taxpaying citizens to pay for these murders.Just say no!

In response to April 23, 2009 Federal Register Notice.

 
20820 05/13/2009 at 11:18:23 PM Self     I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20821 05/13/2009 at 11:18:48 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.

 
20822 05/13/2009 at 11:19:49 PM Self     As a brother of a patient suffering from diabetes, I am pleased that Section II B of the draft guidelines appear to permit federal funding of some existing stem cell lines previously not eligible for federal funding and for new lines that will be created from surplus embryos at fertility clinics. However, as drafted, Section II B does not ensure that all current stem cell lines will be eligible for federal funding. I believe the final guidelines should allow federal funds for research using any existing stem cell lines that were created under ethical guidelines. This will allow research to 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. Since new breakthroughs to create stem cell lines occur regularly, it is crucial that the final guidelines provide federal funding using stem cell lines derived in other ethical ways.

 
20823 05/13/2009 at 11:22:40 PM Self     I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20824 05/13/2009 at 11:23:30 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.

 
20825 05/13/2009 at 11:27:54 PM Self     PLEASE - do NOT approve of embryonic stem cell research. It is so reprehensible to me as a taxpayer to think that my taxes will support the destruction of the tiniest and most innocent among us that it makes me sick.

Adult stem cells are PROVEN, SAFE, EFFECTIVE. And they do not destroy existing lives.

AbuGraib labeled us as inhumane and other things. What does embryonic stem cell research say??? Especially when there's a very effective alternative!! Please, let us respect all human life, and not one at the expense of the other. Thank you.

 
20826 05/13/2009 at 11:29:30 PM Self     Please do not approve the funding of stem cell research. Thank You.

 
20827 05/13/2009 at 11:29:33 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.

Please use your time and research on adult stem cells, which have shown great success, and do not require the killing of embryonic children.

Sincerely,

 
20828 05/13/2009 at 11:30:42 PM Self     For many Americans with a personal connection to type 1 diabetes, the Administration’s expansion of the federal policy on embryonic stem cell research has renewed our hope for a cure. I am writing today to support the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) draft guidelines and suggest a change to ensure promising, ethically conducted research currently underway will be eligible for federal funding in the future.

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

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

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

 
20829 05/13/2009 at 11:31:07 PM Self     Approving the funding of stem cell research is morally wrong. Please do not let this happen. Thank you.

 
20830 05/13/2009 at 11:31:46 PM Self     Please do not fund stem cell research that destroys human life. The promise of adult stem cells should be advanced.

 
20831 05/13/2009 at 11:31:48 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.

 
20832 05/13/2009 at 11:32:11 PM Organization Hadassah NY, NY I applaud these guidelines that establish a framework for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Please ensure that the final draft includes language stating that stem cell lines derived using the prevailing ethical standards at the time they were derived are eligible for federal funding. Also, please include language stating that stem cell lines derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer will be eligible for federal funding. Clear and well-crafted guidelines will lead to sooner therapies and cures for millions of deserving patients. Thank you.

 
20833 05/13/2009 at 11:32:36 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 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.

 
20834 05/13/2009 at 11:36:32 PM Self     "As a member of a family in which several members have suffered from diabetes and several neurological diseases (Parkinsons, MS, and ALS), I am pleased that Section II B of the draft guidelines appear to permit federal funding of some existing stem cell lines previously not eligible for federal funding and for new lines that will be created from surplus embryos at fertility clinics. However, as drafted, Section II B does not ensure that all current stem cell lines will be eligible for federal funding. I believe the final guidelines should allow federal funds for research using any existing stem cell lines that were created under ethical guidelines. This will allow research to 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. Since new breakthroughs to create stem cell lines occur regularly, it is crucial that the final guidelines provide federal funding using stem cell lines derived in other ethical ways.

 
20835 05/13/2009 at 11:37:36 PM Self     Please - NO EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH! It is so reprehensible to think that my tax dollars would support the destruction of the MOST INNOCENT and weakest among us that it makes me sick.

Adult stem cell research is SAFER, already PROVEN, EFFECTIVE. It's unnecessary, let alone immoral, to destroy tiny humans.

AbuGraib humiliates us but this is far far worse. Please reconsider.

 
20836 05/13/2009 at 11:39:42 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.

 
20837 05/13/2009 at 11:39:42 PM Self     I appreciate this opportunity to submit comments.

We know that human life begins at conception. I hope we know that it is inherently unjust for the strong to deliberately take the lives of the weak. This suggests that the deliberate destruction of human life at any stage of development for research is inherently unjust and, consequently, ethically irresponsible.

Furthermore, adult stem cells have actually produced cures in patients while embryonic stem cells produce lethal tumors. Vaccines can be produced without destroying human life. Please use taxpayer dollars on research that is both ethically responsible and scientifically worthy.

Thank you for your time.

 
20838 05/13/2009 at 11:39:45 PM Self     Dear People, No human life (at any stage) should be disrespected so cruelly as to be used for scientific research. Would you experiment on a condemned prisoner, "who's just going to die anyhow?" No government has the right nor should it assume the right to designate which "classes of humans" can be targeted as "not useful to society" and dispensable. It offends us that our tax dollars would be used in such a brutal and inhumane manner. Have our hearts hardened to this extent? We are outraged that such an evil science should even be considered in our America. No federal tax dollars should ever be used for the heinous Embryonic Stem Cell Research!! You don't need to listen to us only. Read the whole story from doctors and scientists themselves at the website www.stemcellresearch.org.

 
20839 05/13/2009 at 11:40:41 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.

Thank you,

 
20840 05/13/2009 at 11:44:06 PM Self     Scientists in Portugal1, 2 are using olfactory enshething glial cells from the lining of a patient’s nose to treat spinal cord injuries. Senator Brownback recently held a press conference where he introduced two young ladies, Susan and Laura, who were paralized, one a quadriplegic. Both of them are now able to walk with braces, due to adult stem cells.

In South Korea a 20-year-old quadriplegic woman received transplanted umbilical cord stem cells to the site of her spinal injury. She’s now mobile with a walker.3

In Germany, stem cells have been used to help repair skull bone damage in a seven-year-old girl. Unlike other bones, skull bones do not regenerate, hence the use of metal plates to repair the damage. Using adult stem cells, the missing bone plates were replaced by thin, solid bone. Bits of the child’s own bones, mixed with adult stem cells, produced the healing.4

London researches have been using adult stem cells in trials to treat damaged livers. They hope to colonize and grow new liver cells allowing the liver to function again.5

In the US6, Germany7, Brazil8 and France9, human patients have been treated with their own stem cells to regenerate heart muscle destroyed during a heart attack or injury. In most cases this was successful.

Twenty-three patients regained their eyesight following limbal (adult) stem cell transplants.10 This treatment has helped many suffering from blindness for years, including victims of Iraqi mustard gas attacks.

Patients with Crohn’s disease have apparently been cured after treatment with stem cells from their own blood.11

Ninety percent of 19 patients with various autoimmune disorders, such as systemic lupus, are in remission or have improved after treatment with their own blood stem cells.12

One patient with multiple sclerosis improved after being treated with adult stem cells from his own blood.13

One study of Parkinson’s patients showed an average improvement of sixty-one percent increase of coordination, as well as fewer symptoms after transplants of the patient’s own neuronal stem cells.14

Doctors added adult stem cells from umbilical cord blood to the treatment of leukemia patients. This freed fourteen of eighteen patients of the disease.15

Hematopietic stem cell transplants successfully treated over two hundred sickle cell patients. The success rate has been eighty to eighty-five percent.16

A 52-year-old woman with rheumatoid arthritis in 38 joints was treated with adult stem cells from her sister. While still in the hospital, her morning stiffness ceased. One year later she is free of the disease and off medication.17

Innsbruck, Austria, doctors have used adult stem cells from patients’ muscles to successfully treat urinary stress incontinence. Eighteen of twenty remain continent one year later.18

Researchers found that adult stem cells in the pulp of baby teeth may be extremely useful in growing replacement brain tissue to overcome stroke damage and other neurological disorders.19

Chagas disease is a potentially lethal parasitic condition attacking and destroying the heart and other tissue. It kills six million people worldwide every year. The parasite can be killed with treatment, but the damage remains. Now scientists in Buenos Aires, using adult stem cells from patients’ own bone marrow, have been repairing heart damage.20

Scientists in New York are exploring the real possibility of using adult stem cells to regenerate teeth that have been removed.21

Toronto researchers reported finding adult stem cells not merely in umbilical cord blood, but also a “jackpot” of adult stem cells in the tissue mass (Warton’s Jelly) surrounding the three umbilical cord blood vessels. They anticipate using these adult stem cells to regrow bone and connective tissue in knees that have been damaged in an accident.22

In Argentina, stem cells from a diabetic patient’s own bone marrow were fed into his pancreas through an artery. His glucose levels returned to normal with no need for medication.23

Pennsylvania and Louisiana scientists have coaxed adult stem cells from bone marrow to differentiate into the type of cells that line lungs and air passages. This may lead to effective treatments for cystic fibrosis.24

Adult stem cells hold a promise to treating baldness in humans. A study at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine reports using them to grow hair on bald mice.25

Chicago researchers are looking at a new adult stem cell technique that will replace implants for reconstructive surgery and body augmentation. This could have profound commercial implications for cosmetic surgery.26

Many of the above studies are preliminary and several have been done in animal models, although many have been used in human trials. A single report of a success (e.g. of skull bone) is not considered official until other scientists replicate the same study. Then trials must succeed in human subjects using adult stem cells before such treatments will be available for you and your loved ones. This being said, however, we can hardly conceal our excitement at these new discoveries. Most of the above have been reported within the last year, with some much more recent. In stark contrast to this, we have no reports of such successes using embryonic stem cells.

Embryonic Stem Cells Objections to the use of embryonic stem cells are both medical and moral. The moral dimension is evident. The only way to obtain these cells is to directly kill a five-day-old living human embryo, cutting him or her open and extracting embryonic stem cells. From an ethical, moral standpoint, this alone should rule out their use.

Medically speaking, there are several major problems. One is this tissue is from another living human, with a different DNA and can be rejected just like a transplanted kidney. Another is that they can carry infection from the donors; a worse case would be AIDS. Finally, and most importantly, researchers have not discovered a way to regulate or target their growth, for they are “very plastic.” They can uncontrollably grow into many types of cells. For instance, implanted embryonic stem cells have turned into bone, skin, kidney and other tissues when researchers had hoped they would turn into brain cells. This tendency for tumor formation has, as of yet, been uncontrolled.

Can these problems be solved? That is the challenge scientists hope to solve if and when they are given free reign to kill human embryos and use these cells in unrestricted and usually lethal experimentation. Their hope is the curative value of embryonic stem cells might even exceed all of the above adult stem cell successes. This, however, is just a hope. A number of highly scientific experts in this field have predicted such hopes are pipe dreams and that embryonic stem cells will never be able to be harnessed for curative reasons.

The above dim prospects are specifically the reason almost no private venture capital has been flowing into embryonic stem cell research, whereas, substantial amounts have been invested in the adult stem cell research.

Why then is there an almost exclusive push by liberal sources for embryonic stem cell research, and a near total blackout of the above adult stem cell successes? One reason is that killing five-day-old human embryos does not pose a problem for many scientists and certainly not for much of the media. If you can abort them before birth, you can snuff out their lives in a research lab. For scientists, the unknown is a challenge, a horizon that needs to be explored. They want to boldly go where no man has gone before. Whether or not palatable results seem reasonably obtainable is irrelevant. Exploring the unknown is a goal in itself. They are, however, faced with the obvious fact that private money will not subsidize such questionable investigations. This is why there is tremendous pressure from scientists, the liberal media and, very clearly, a powerful and well-financed biotech industry to appropriate tax money for such research. We should be in the forefront, telling the world the exciting possibilities of ethical ADULT stem cell research. Further, this should be contrasted with the fact that embryonic stem cell research is done by killing living humans in the very limited hope of someday helping another.

CURRENT CLINICAL APPLICATIONS OF ADULT STEM CELLS

CANCER TREATMENTS

BRAIN TUMORS Combination of high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell transplant from the patients themselves shows good response in treatment of brain tumors. Reference: Dunkel, IJ; “High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue for malignant brain tumors”; Cancer Invest. 18, 492-493; 2000.

“Patients with recurrent medulloblastoma had a significant improvement in long-term survival (median: 34 months) as compared with historical reports; two patients with glioblastoma survive beyond four years without progression.” Reference: Abrey, LE et al.; “High dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue in adults with malignant primary brain tumors”; J. Neurooncol. 44, 147-153; Sept. 1999

“Review of HDCT and stem cell transplant for children with brain tumors. Studies demonstrating durable disease- free survival for a proportion of patients with recurrent malignant gliomas and medulloblastomas/PNET, as well as encouraging data in some of those patients with newly diagnosed brain tumors.” Reference: Finlay, JL; “The role of high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell rescue in the treatment of malignant brain tumors: a reappraisal”; Pediatr. Transplant 3 Suppl. 1, 87-95; 1999

RETINOBLASTOMA A localized retinoblastoma of the left eye in a 7-year-old girl, was treated by enucleation. She received no additional therapy. Four months later, metastases of retinoblastoma in the lymph nodes, bone and bone marrow were diagnosed. Relapse chemotherapy consisting of three courses of vincristine, cyclophosphamide, etoposide and carboplatin led to a second complete remission. Subsequent high-dose chemotherapy with thiotepa, etoposide and carboplatin and autologous stem cell transplantation with CD34-selected stem cells were successful, with no adverse effects. No radiotherapy was given and the girl remains in continuous second remission with a follow-up of more than 4 years. Reference: Hertzberg H et al.; “Recurrent disseminated retinoblastoma in a 7-year-old girl treated successfully by high-dose chemotherapy and CD34-selected autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation”; Bone Marrow Transplant 27(6), 653-655; March 2001

Patients with metastatic retinoblastoma have a poor prognosis with conventional treatments. This study used intensive conventio nal chemotherapy, high-dose chemotherapy, with autologous stem cell rescue, and radiation therapy. The treatment strategy was effective for all four patients with metastatic retinoblatoma that does not involve the central nervous system, surviving event free from 46-80 months after diagnosis. Reference: Dunkel IJ et al.; “Successful treatment of metastatic retinoblastoma”; Cancer 89, 2117-2121; Nov. 15, 2000

OVARIAN CANCER Report studying whether patients benefit more from autologous stem cell transplantation. “Some patients with ovarian cancer seem to have good outcomes after autotransplantation”. Reference: Stiff PJ et al.; “High-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation for ovarian cancer: An autologous blood and marrow transplant regis try report”; Ann. Intern. Med. 133, 504-515; Oct. 3, 2000

“Developing data suggest that this approach in both of these settings merit further evaluation for the treatment of epithelial ovarian carcinoma.” Used autologous, purified peripheral blood stem cells Reference: Schilder, RJ and Shea, TC; “Multiple cycles of high-dose chemotherapy for ovarian cancer”; Semin. Oncol. 25, 349-355; June 1998

SOLID TUMORS Use of patients’ own bone marrow or blood stem cells leads to long-term recovery from various types of solid tumors. Reference: Nieboer P et al.; “Long-term haematological recovery following high-dose chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow transplantation or peripheral stem cell transplantation in patients with solid tumours”; Bone Marrow Transplant 27, 959-966; May 2001

Merkel cell carcinoma is a rare cutaneous tumor with neuroendocrine differentiation; there is no standard protocol for treatment of the metastatic disease. This study used high-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation to achieve complete remission that lasted for 6 months. Reference: Waldmann V et al.; “Transient complete remission of metastasized merkel cell carcinoma by highdose polychemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transpla ntation”; Br. J. Dermatol. 143, 837-839; Oct. 2000

Patients with metastatic or locally advanced, unresectable soft tissue sarcoma are seldom curable, with 5- year survival rates of less than 10%. Used high-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant; “a high survival rate was observed in HDCT-treated patients who were in complete remission after conventional chemotherapy.” Reference: Blay JY et al.; “High-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for advanced soft tissue sarcoma in adults”; J. Clin. Oncol. 18, 3643-3650; Nov. 1, 2000

“The prognosis of metastatic malignant mesenchymal tumors (MMT) remains poor.” Used high-dose chemotherapy with bone marrow or peripheral blood stem cell transplant. “A response exceeding 50% was observed in 6/18 patients (response rate 33%).” Reference: Lafay-Cousin L et al.; “High-dose thiotepa and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in pediatricmalignant mesenchymal tumors: a phase II study”; Bone Marrow Transplant 26, 627-632; Sept. 2000

High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous haematopoietic rescue is widely used in the treatment of patients with paediatric malignancies. It is now well established as a major component for the treatment of children with metastatic neuroblastoma over the age of one at diagnosis. Its place for other tumours, such as metastatic Ewing and rhabdomyosarcoma, needs to be better established.” Reference: Michon, J and Schleiermacher, G. “Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for paediatric solid tumors”, Baillieres Best Practice Research in Clinical Haematology 12, 247- 259, March-June 1999.

Used for malignant solid tumors. Overall response rate 96%, complete clinical response rate 67%. Treatment described as safe, feasible, and active. Reference: Schilder, RJ et al.; “Phase I trial of multiple cycles of high-dose chemotherapy supported by autologous peripheral-blood stem cells”; J. Clin. Oncol. 17, 2198-2207; July 1999

TESTICULAR CANCER “Thirty-seven (57%) of the 65 patients are continuously disease- free. Three additional patients are disease- free with subsequent surgery. High-dose chemotherapy was associated with significant morbidity but no treatment-related mortality. High-dose chemotherapy as initial salvage chemotherapy achieved impressive long-term survival with acceptable toxicity in patients with relapsed testicular cancer.” Reference: Bhatia S et al.; “High-dose chemotherapy as initial salvage chemotherapy in patients with relapsed testicular cancer”; J. Clin. Oncol. 18, 3346-3351; Oct. 19, 2000

“High-dose chemotherapy with the transplantation of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) has been performed for the treatment of advanced testicular cancer patients.” “After mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells with G-CSF alone, sufficient amounts of MNC were obtained from testicular cancer patients who had undergone chemotherapy several times.” Reference: Hanazawa, K et al.; “Collection of peripheral blood stem cells with granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor alone in testicular cancer patients”; Int. J. Urol. 7, 77-82; March 2000.

MULTIPLE MYELOMA, LEUKEMIAS Umbilical Cord Blood Effective At Treating Adult Blood Disorders A new report shows that umbilical cord blood can provide effective treatment of various blood disorders in adults. It had previously been assumed that there were too few stem cells in cord blood to treat adults, and only children were treated. The results of this study show that cord blood stem cells can proliferate extensively and provide sufficient numbers of cells for adult treatments. Reference: Laughlin MJ et al.; “Hematopoietic engraftment and survival in adult recipients of umbilical-cord blood from unrelated donors”, New England Journal of Medicine 344, 1815-1822; June 14, 2001

Bone marrow/peripheral blood stem cell treatments can be used to treat older patients Reference: Tabata M et al.; “Peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in patients over 65 years old with malignant lymphoma--possibility of early completion of chemotherapy and improvement of performance status”; Intern Med 40, 471-474; June 2001

Successfully treated lymphoma using patient’s own stem cells. Reference: Koizumi M et al.; “Successful treatment of intravascular malignant lymphomatosis with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation”; Bone Marrow Transplant 27, 1101-1103; May 2001

This retrospective study included 21 children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, 15 with acute myelogenous leukaemia and one each with chronic myelogenous leukaemia, refractory anaemia with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and juvenile myelomonocytic leukaemia (JMML). These data confirm that HLA-mismatched, unrelated Cord Blood Transplant is a feasible procedure to cure a significant proportion of children with leukaemia, especially if conducted in a favourable phase of the disease. Reference: Ohnuma K et al.; “Cord blood transplantation from HLA- mismatched unrelated donors as a treatment for children with haematological malignancies”; Br J Haematol 112(4), 981-987; March 2001

Angioimmunoblastic lymphadenopathy with dysproteinemia (or dysgammaglobulinemia) (AILD) is a lymphoproliferative disorder with abnormalities characteristic of malignant T-cell lymphoma (angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma -- AITL). We report the clinical course of a 58-year-old male patient with unusually aggressive AILD, At relapse, treatment with high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous peripheral stem cell transplantation (APSCT) with CD34 selected cells was shown to be successful. The patient is alive and disease-free 3 years after diagnosis and 32 months after APSCT. Considering the poor prognosis of the majority of patients with AILD, intensive treatment followed by APSCT, may be a subject for further studies. Reference: Lindahl J et al.; “High-dose chemotherapy and APSCT as a potential cure for relapsing hemolysing AILD”; Leuk Res 25(3), 267-270; March 2001

Patients given high-dose chemotherapy followed by allogeneic stem cell transplants. Peripheral blood stem cells rather than bone marrow results in higher rates of overall and disease- free survival, and restores blood counts faster. Patients in whom the benefit of peripheral-blood cells was most apparent were those with advanced hematologic cancer. Other studies have also shown that the use of peripheral-blood cells is associated with fewer days of hospitalization and lower overall costs. Reference: Bensinger WI et al.; “Transplantation of bone marrow as compared with peripheral-blood cells from HLA- identical relatives in patients with hematologic cancers”; New England Journal of Medicine 344, 175-181; Jan. 18, 2001

**Review of new procedures involving stem cell transplantation. The authors note that “Stem cell transplantation has been successfully used to treat a wide variety of hematologic malignancies. New and exciting strategies being developed for use in conjunction with transplant will be useful in overcoming tumor resistance.” Reference: Margolis J et al.; “New approaches to treating malignances with stem cell transplantation”; Semin. Oncol. 27, 524-530; Oct. 2000

**Study notes that “autologous stem cell transplantation is a potential therapeutic approach in patients with acute myelocytic leukemia over 60 years of age.” Reference: Gorin NC et al.; “Feasibility and recent improvement of autologous stem cell transplantation for acute myelocytic leukaemia in patients over 60 years of age: importance of the source of stem cells”; Br. J. Haematol. 110, 887-893; Sept. 2000

“Infants with acute leukemia have a poor prognosis when treated with conventional chemotherapy.” 5-year overall survival 64%. “SCT is a valid option in the treatment of infant acute leukemia, and it may overcome the high risk of relapse with conventional chemotherapy showing very reduced toxicity.” Reference: Marco F et al.; “High Survival Rate in Infant Acute Leukemia Treated With Early High-Dose Chemotherapy and Stem-Cell Support”; J Clin Oncol 18, 3256-3261; Sept. 15, 2000

“Actuarial survival and disease-free survival at 34 months are 56% and 50% respectively, with 95% confidence interval (25-78%).These results suggest that nonmyeloablative conditioning significantly reduces transplant-related toxicity, thus making a second transplant feasible.” Reference: Nagler A et al.; “Second allogeneic stem cell transplantation using nonmyeloablative conditioning for patients who relapsed or developed secondary malignancies following autologous transplantation”; Exp. Hematol. 28, 1096-1104, Sept. 1, 2000

Review of autologous stem cell treatment strategies. “Controlled clinical trials have demonstrated a long-term disease- free survival of 40%-50% for patients treated with at least two courses of HIDAC. Other studies have demonstrated that postremission autologous bone marrow transplantation results in a disease-free survival equal to or better than conventional chemotherapy. However, autotransplantation with mobilized peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) would now be preferred instead of autologous bone marrow, due to the shorter hematopoietic reconstitution period.” Reference: Bruserud O et al.; “New strategies in the treatment of acute myelogenous leukemia: mobilization and transplantation of autologous peripheral blood stem cells in adult patients”; Stem Cells 18, 343-351; 2000

Study to evaluate high-dose melphalan followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation in patients with refractory multiple myeloma. High-dose therapy with melphalan 200 mg/m(2) is feasible with high response rates (58% overall) and an OS of 19 months in patients with refractory multiple myeloma.” Reference: Vesole, DH et al.; “High-Dose Melphalan With Autotransplantation for Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Results of a Southwest Oncology Group Phase II Trial”; J Clin Oncol 17, 2173- 2179; July 1999.

BREAST CANCER The “data suggest that high-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic stem cell rescue is safe and can be beneficial to patients with high-risk primary breast cancer and for those with metastatic breast cancer achieving complete response/no evidence of disease.” Reference: Damon LE et al.; “High-dose chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell rescue for breast cancer: experience in California”; Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant 6, 496-505; 2000

Stem cells in circulating blood can be isolated, expanded in number in culture, and provide better clinical results. Reference: Paquette, RL et al., “Ex vivo expanded unselected peripheral blood: progenitor cells reduce posttransplantation neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia in patients with breast cancer”, Blood 96, 2385-2390; October 2000.

“The collection of small aliquots of bone marrow (BM), followed by ex vivo expansion for autologous transplantation may be less morbid, and more cost-effective, than typical BM or blood stem cell harvesting. Passive elimination of contaminating tumor cells during expansion could reduce reinoculation risks.” “It is feasible to perform autotransplants solely with BM cells grown ex vivo in perfusion bioreactors from a small aliquot.” “This procedure could reduce the risk of tumor cell reinoculation with autotransplants and may be valuable in settings in which small stem cell doses are available, eg, cord blood transplants.” Reference: Stiff P et al.; “Autologous transplantation of ex vivo expanded bone marrow cells grown from small aliquots after high-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer”; Blood 95, 2169-2174; March 15, 2000

“This report is the first describing infusion of autologous MSCs with therapeutic intent. We found that autologous MSC infusion at the time of PBPC transplantation is feasible and safe. The observed rapid hematopoietic recovery suggests that MSC infusion after myeloablative therapy may have a positive impact on hematopoiesis and should be tested in randomized trials.” Reference: Koc, ON et al.; “Rapid Hematopoietic Recovery After Coinfusion of Autologous-Blood Stem Cells and Culture-Expanded Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Advanced Breast Cancer Patients Receiving High-Dose Chemotherapy”; J Clin Oncol 18, 307-316; January 2000

NEUROBLASTOMA “According to initial reports, stage 4 neuroblastoma patients with amplification of the MYCN protooncogene developed progressive disease within 8 months. The prognosis for such patients, however, should now be reevaluated in light of recent results achieved with up-to-date combination chemotherapy. Not all patients with advanced neuroblastoma who have more than 10 copies of MYCN will die. The requisites for survival in such patients seem to be intensive induction chemotherapy, effective surgery, irradiation, and the use of SCT” (stem cell transplant). Reference: Kawa, K et al.; “Long-Term Survivors of Advanced Neuroblastoma With MYCN Amplification: A Report of 19 Patients Surviving Disease-Free for More Than 66 Months”; J Clin Oncol 17:3216-3220; October 1999

NON-HODGKIN’S LYMPHOMA Tabata M et al.; “Peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in patients over 65 years old with malignant lymphoma--possibility of early completion of chemotherapy and improvement of performance status”; Intern Med 40, 471-474; June 2001

“To determine differences in prognosis between primary progressive Hodgkin's disease (HD) and aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), we retrospectively analyzed patients with progressive lymphoma who were treated with different salvage chemotherapy regimens including high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) followed by autologous stem-cell support (ASCT). There are striking differences in the prognosis of patients with progressive HD and aggressive NHL. The prognosis of progressive NHL patients is dismal. Most patients have rapidly progressive disease after salvage treatment and are, therefore, excluded from HDCT programs. In contrast, progressive HD patients can achieve long-term survival after HDCT.” Reference: Josting, A; “Treatment of Primary Progressive Hodgkin’s and Aggressive Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: Is There a Chance for Cure?”; J Clin Oncol 18, 332-339; 2000

“Patient achieved complete remission and has survived in continuous complete remission for more than 72 months to date. Marrow-ablative chemotherapy facilitated by PBSCT is thought to be useful as part of the primary therapy for patients with NHL who have poorer prognoses.” Reference: Kirita T et al.; “Primary non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma of the mandible treated with radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation”; Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 90, 450-455; Oct. 2000

“These results suggest first that ex vivo expansion of hematopoietic stem cells in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is feasible without incurring the parallel risk of amplifying tumor cells; second, that Flt3-L did not stimulate the growth of tumor cells while it clearly favored the growth of normal progenitors.” Reference: Yao M et al.; “Ex vivo expansion of CD34-positive peripheral blood progenitor cells from patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: no evidence of concomitant expansion of contaminating bcl2/JH-positive lymphoma cells”; Bone Marrow Transplant 26, 497-503; Sept. 2000

“Nonmyeloablative allogeneic stem-cell transplantation can induce sustained regression of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma in patients who have had no response to conventional immunotherapy.” Reference: Childs R et al., “Regression of Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma after Nonmyeloablative Allogeneic Peripheral-Blood Stem-Cell Transplantation”, New England Journal of Medicine 343, 750- 758; Sept. 14, 2000

“The complete regression of metastatic disease, which has now been maintained for more than 1 year, is compatible with a graft-versus-tumor effect.” Reference: Childs, RW; “Successful Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma With a Nonmyeloablative Allogeneic Peripheral-Blood Progenitor-Cell Transplant: Evidence for a Graft-Versus-Tumor Effect:; J Clin Oncol 17, 2044-2049; July 1999

AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES –multiple sclerosis, systemic lupus erythematosus, juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis

Adult Stem Cells Treat Potentially Fatal Skin Disorder A man with scleromyxedema, a rare and potentially fatal skin disease, is reported free of symptoms after receiving a transplant of adult stem cells taken from his own bone marrow. Like scleroderma, scleromyxedema causes the skin to thicken and become hard. Prior to the adult stem cell treatment, the patient could not completely close his eyes, and had lost the ability to eat. Three months after treatment the patient could once again close his eyes and open his mouth to eat. The results are reported in the August issue of Archives of Dermatology. References: A.M. Feasel et al., "Complete remission of scleromyxedema following autologous stem cell transplantation," Archives of Dermatology 137, 1071-1072; Aug. 2001."Stem Cell Transplant Treats Rare Skin Disorder," Reuters Health, August 17, 2001

Patients’ own stem cells to treat severe multiple sclerosis Use of combined therapy with using a patient’s own stem cells for treatment of severe cases of multiple sclerosis. Treatment decreased tissue damage in the patients, and had the capacity to completely suppress further tissue damage, an effect that is sustained with time. Reference: Mancardi GL et al.; “Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation suppresses Gd-enhanced MRI activity in MS”; Neurology 57, 62-68; July 10, 2001

Adult Stem Cells Show Success in Treating Another Autoimmune Disease—Crohn’s Disease Physicians at Chicago's Northwestern Memorial Hospital report initial success in using adult stem cells to treat two patients with Crohn's disease, a potentially disabling inflammatory bowel disease. One patient was said to be doing "phenomenally well" 2 ½ months after undergoing the procedure using the adult stem cells, which were extracted from her blood, leading doctors to try it on a second patient. Results in both patients were very encouraging, according to Dr. Richard Burt, who performed the procedures. Burt noted that results of similar procedures on multiple sclerosis patients have also shown progress, and that adult stem cell therapy on patients with lupus had repaired damage to their organs. According to Burt: " 'If you're able to use your own stem cells,' the embryonic stem cell issue is 'not just ethically moot, it's practically moot.' " Reference: "Adult Stem Cells Hold Hope for Autoimmune Patients," Reuters Health, Aug. 13, 2001.

High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous HSCT is feasible and safe, and can result in longterm improvement of disease activity in patients whose condition previously did not respond to conventional antirheumatic drugs or TNF blocking agents. The persistence of active disea

 
20841 05/13/2009 at 11:47:17 PM Self     We oppose the use of my taxpayer dollars for experiments that rely on killing embryonic human beings.

 
20842 05/13/2009 at 11:47:22 PM Self     To those concerned; As a child of a mother suffering from diabetes and a father who has already passed away but suffered from Parkinsons disease. I personally am in the process of recovering from two types of cancer (Hodgkins lymphoma and skin cancer),yet I'm acutely aware of those who would benefit even greater and more immediately from every type of Stem Cell research that exists in this world both today and tommorrow. I am pleased that Section II B of the draft guidelines appear to permit federal funding of some existing stem cell lines previously not eligible for federal funding and for new lines that will be created from surplus embryos at fertility clinics. However, as drafted, Section II B does not ensure that all current stem cell lines will be eligible for federal funding. I believe the final guidelines should allow federal funds for research using any existing stem cell lines that were created under ethical guidelines. This will allow research to 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. Since new breakthroughs to create stem cell lines occur regularly, it is crucial that the final guidelines provide federal funding using stem cell lines derived in other ethical ways. Don't back down! Democrats, moderate republicans, every thinking, caring human being should be empathetic to the human suffering and work to pass legislation that opens the doors to all ethical research that may lead to a chance for a cure and/or a solution to the health concerns of those living with these terrible diseases. Thank you for your time and hard work. Please!

 
20843 05/13/2009 at 11:47:31 PM Self     I am very opposed to these draft guidelines allowing the useless destruction of human embryos for research that is ineffectual and unprofitable. Adult stem cells are already being used to treat diseases and conditions making research on embryonic cells completely unnecessary and morally/ethically wrong. I am also opposed to the use of tax dollars to fund this research- the destruction of human life at any stage of development is against everything I believe and knowing that my tax dollars are aiding in these crimes against humanity is unthinkable. As a nurse, mother, woman, citizen of this great nation, I beg you to stop the creation and destruction of embryos and to stop using tax-payer dollars to fund such activity. Thank you for taking the time to read this.

 
20844 05/13/2009 at 11:48:42 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.

 
20845 05/13/2009 at 11:49:36 PM Self     It is vital that funding be provided for embryonic stem cell research. Please be sure that stem cell lines derived fom somatic cell nuclear transfer is eligible for federal funding.

Thank you.

 
20846 05/13/2009 at 11:51:12 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.

 
20847 05/13/2009 at 11:52:21 PM Self     Much research has been done using adult stem cells that has produced very good results and usable therapies have been and are being developed. The results from embryonic stem cell research has been much less successful to this point. Because there are many who object to research being done using human embryos, and since the results of research to this point using other types of stem cells has been very successful, it seems to me inappropriate to use public funding for embryonic stem cell research. If private individuals wish to fund this research, that should be their prerogative. No one should be required to fund, through taxes that he or she is required to pay, that which he or she finds to be morally wrong.

 
20848 05/13/2009 at 11:52:46 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.

 
20849 05/13/2009 at 11:53:51 PM Self     Regarding your consideration to draft NIH Human Stem Cell Guidelines, I am deeply grieved by the decision to use embryonic stem cells for research, no matter what their origin. These cells are the beginnings of human life, and as such, ought to be protected by our health systems and government rather than being utilized as experimental matter. There are other sources of stem cells which can be used for research without causing the death of an individual human life. These other lines of research have been very promising. Why must we turn like cannibals to these tiny seeds of our own humanity? My heart is broken that our society has become so indifferent and callus towards the sanctity of human life. We desperately need firm guidelines re-establishing a committment to protect and revere human life, especially in embryonic form, and in the most helpless among us. Thank you, ***** from Oregon

 
20850 05/13/2009 at 11:54:47 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.

 
20851 05/13/2009 at 11:54:59 PM Self     I am a 54 retired Navy, looking forward to retire from my second career in the civilian word. However due to connective tissue disease that has attacked my lungs my golden years may not be that golden. There is no treatment for the damage that has been done to my lungs. The only thing that has any promise for treatment is stem cell to repair the damage in my lungs. I wish that the fanatics would be drowned out and allow science to do there research that have a chance of helping people live better lives.

May God help these sciencetist find speedy break throughs.

PS: I have never smoked, done drugs, and very seldom have a drink. I have worked hard, help others, and lived a clean life. In other words I think these fanatics are brained wash, if they are agaist Stem Cell, then they have a right not to have it, but don't denie others that right.

 



Go to NIH Stem Cell Information Page