Studies recommended for funding by California Stem Cell Rush dollars

The working future of embryonic stem cell biology and regenerative medicine is in the 38 projects listed and linked below. Or at least in some of them. These are the research projects that were recommended for funding available by the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine after a thorough evaluation and all applications can be found in the Public List of CIRM. 47 more were recommended for funding if money is available. If you choose to scan through the public abstracts of the proposal (linked with the numbers) I also strongly recommend to read the WEAKNESSES part of the review. The order of the projects is descending from the highest scientific score (out of 100) to the lowest.

96 Generation of forebrain neurons from human embryonic stem cells RS1-00205-1

95 The APOBEC3 Gene Family as Guardians of Genome Stability in Human Embryonic Stem Cells RS1-00210-1

95 Generation of hESC lines, under defined conditions, modeling normal & diseased states from material stored at the Burnham shared embryo bank. RS1-00305-1

94 Gene regulatory mechanisms that control spinal neuron differentiation from hES cells. RS1-00288-1

93 Mitochondrial Dysfunction in Embryonic Stem Cells RS1-00432-1

Adult stem cells and astronauts in the ISS with one screwdriver

“Allowing research into the medical uses of adult stem cells, but not embryonic stem cells, is the equivalent of sending astronauts to work on the international space station with a single tool” according to Dr. Geoffrey Lomax, senior officer for medical and ethical standards of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, running California’s $3 billion stem cell research program. Link

Well, if we ever would like to use stem cell therapy to extend healthy lifespan through continuous regeneration of every organ and tissue we have to use probably all available forms and sources of stem cells.

2 unintended consequences of stem cell research via Lomax’s MIIS talk yesterday:

i., Improved therapeutic techniques can drive medical costs up, because all patients will want the new, expensive cures.

ii., Intellectual property questions have arisen over who or what agency “owns” the fruits of stem cell research financed by the taxpayers.

Real arguments not just echo chambering in embryonic stem cell funding debate

Finally a journalist at Wired, Brandon Keim thought it’s time to check out some facts and formulate real arguments in the embryonic stem cell funding debate instead of boondoggling. He has collected good historical examples of long-term funding in drug research, which then saved many lives, like Taxol, and has enumerated fields of promising science, like proteomics, gene therapy and nanotechnology which are heavily donated with hundreds of millions of dollars by federal government, although as unproven yet as regenerative medicine based on embryonic stells. Thank you Brandon it is really wired. Link

“A favorite argument as to why the federal government should not fund embryonic stem cell research is that the science is unproven. It has not led to any cures or FDA-approved treatments. That happens to be true. But that doesn’t make it a good argument. In fact, most of the science funded by the federal government is not successful yet, since proven science doesn’t usually need funding.”

Election perspectives in tech support: New York City as California’s rival in stem cell billions?

Check this fresh Wired review about US Midterm elections’ effects on high-tech possibilities for the United States: In New York, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer’s gubernatorial victory was no surprise, but it’s a big win for stem-cell research in that state. Spitzer wants to commit several billion dollars of the state’s money to the science. Link I’ve heard about only 1 billion.