A scientist from New York and one from Australia were on the panel at the meeting, whose topics included the level of reimbursement for human egg donors, a subject that readily moves into cash-for-eggs questions. The agenda provides no clear indication of a need to protect proprietary information, as contended by CIRM.
Tina Stevens of San Francisco State University, one of the two persons barred by CIRM, said of the CIRM meeting agenda,
“Please note that the proposed discussion questions following the agenda items concern, in part, paying women for their eggs for research -- something that California has clearly prohibited. Why does CIRM think it is or should be empowered to consider, make, skirt, or change policies that impact women's health without broad public awareness, input, and debate?”Here is our original item on the “Incident at the Marriott” and a follow-up item. Here is the agenda from the June meeting.
“Session 6. Procurement of human oocytes:
“What has been the experience to date?
“15 minute talks / 30 minute discussion
“Chair Renee Reijo-Pera, Stanford University
“11:10 am Jeffrey Janus, International Stem Cell Corporation
Procurement of human oocytes in California and Russia: five years experience of International Stem Cell Corporation.
“11:25 am Scott Noggle, NYSCF
“11:40 am Bernie Tuch, Sydney, Australia
“11:55 am Aaron Hsueh, Stanford University
“12:10 pm Discussion
“Questions to consider for presenters and for discussion
“What levels of donor reimbursement are necessary to support research? (Is it feasible for CIRM to support SCNT research without allowing reimbursement)
“Are there reasons for donors to prefer research donation over reproductive use of oocytes?
“What is the experience of research donors with regard to OHSS or other adverse outcomes?
“Are research donation programs being evaluated for donor satisfaction?”