The peripatetic John M. Simpson is a man of many parts.
As stem cell project director for the Foundation of Taxpayer and Consumer Rights of Santa Monica, Ca., he has followed the affairs of the California stem cell agency, a task that has kept him busy for more than two years. But on other occasions, his work for the foundation calls him to different venues.
Recently he was in downtown Los Angeles at an appearance of the chief executive officer of Chevron Oil. Simpson's job? Bestow the Golden Nozzle award on the chairman. Here is a link to a video that tells all.
Friday, November 09, 2007
Thursday, November 08, 2007
More Details Due Friday on Lab Grant Meeting
Regarding the $227 million lab grant item below, Richard Murphy, interim president of CIRM, just sent us the following:
"The slides with the specifics for the meeting are in the process of being edited and should be available on the Web Friday."
How to Wrestle with Requests for $227 Million: CIRM Agenda Vague
The California stem cell agency will deal once again next week with its plans for its largest round of grants ever, but exactly what is on the agenda is a virtual mystery.
No matter. If you are looking for some cash to build labs, you better be at the Facilities Working Group session Nov. 15. The details are what counts here, and missing one could mean the loss of tens of millions of dollars.
On the agenda is something listed only as "Consideration of Process and Procedures for Major Facilities Grants Review Meeting." We queried CIRM for more details. None were forthcoming. Perhaps they will be available in time for applicants and other interested parties to make plans to be in San Francisco.
The facilities group will be dealing with the applications for $227 million in lab construction grants next year, following the scientific review and the first cut in January by the Oversight Committee. The scientific review will be behind closed doors but the facilities group session is scheduled to be public.
No matter. If you are looking for some cash to build labs, you better be at the Facilities Working Group session Nov. 15. The details are what counts here, and missing one could mean the loss of tens of millions of dollars.
On the agenda is something listed only as "Consideration of Process and Procedures for Major Facilities Grants Review Meeting." We queried CIRM for more details. None were forthcoming. Perhaps they will be available in time for applicants and other interested parties to make plans to be in San Francisco.
The facilities group will be dealing with the applications for $227 million in lab construction grants next year, following the scientific review and the first cut in January by the Oversight Committee. The scientific review will be behind closed doors but the facilities group session is scheduled to be public.
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
The Shifting Sands of Stem Cell Support
New Jersey voters on Tuesday sent a message to sanguine supporters of stem cell research in California: Do not assume that the public is always behind you.
Analysis this morning of the election results is a bit preliminary but news reports are characterizing the rejection of the $450 million stem cell research measure as a surprise.
And it is not good news for those in California who find reassurance in the 59 percent voter approval of Proposition 71 in 2004, the measure that created the state's $3 billion stem cell program.
We have pointed out previously that stem cell research is not well understood by the public. Support for it is weak despite often rosy polls that seem to indicate it is a motherhood issue, at least in the eyes of some at CIRM. That is not the case, as shown in a poll by the Pew Forum for Religion and Public Life. According to that survey, support dropped from 57 percent nationally two years ago to 51 percent in August this year. It also showed that 55 percent of the public had heard little or nothing about stem cell research.
The New Jersey vote signals that it is imperative for CIRM to move forward thoughtfully and effectively on its public education/PR plans and promptly fill the vacant position of chief communications officer.
The New Jersey vote showed the vulnerability of stem cell research in the political marketplace. Voters can be fickle. To forestall erosion of support in California, CIRM must move to shore up its weaknesses. Those include its penchant for closed doors and secrecy – all of which breed suspicion and provide a recipe for scandal.
Analysis this morning of the election results is a bit preliminary but news reports are characterizing the rejection of the $450 million stem cell research measure as a surprise.
And it is not good news for those in California who find reassurance in the 59 percent voter approval of Proposition 71 in 2004, the measure that created the state's $3 billion stem cell program.
We have pointed out previously that stem cell research is not well understood by the public. Support for it is weak despite often rosy polls that seem to indicate it is a motherhood issue, at least in the eyes of some at CIRM. That is not the case, as shown in a poll by the Pew Forum for Religion and Public Life. According to that survey, support dropped from 57 percent nationally two years ago to 51 percent in August this year. It also showed that 55 percent of the public had heard little or nothing about stem cell research.
The New Jersey vote signals that it is imperative for CIRM to move forward thoughtfully and effectively on its public education/PR plans and promptly fill the vacant position of chief communications officer.
The New Jersey vote showed the vulnerability of stem cell research in the political marketplace. Voters can be fickle. To forestall erosion of support in California, CIRM must move to shore up its weaknesses. Those include its penchant for closed doors and secrecy – all of which breed suspicion and provide a recipe for scandal.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
CIRM Offers $300,000 PR Contract
"Anonymous" posted a comment on our "communications void" item below that merits some attention. Here it is, and here is the link to the RFP that the comment mentions. Our thanks to "anonymous."
"FYI - There is an RFP out for PR firms. The below is from Odwyerpr.com
"CALIFORNIA ISSUES $300K RFP FOR STEM CELL PR
"California's state-backed entity set up to distribute funds for stem cell research has issued a six-figure RFP for state, national and global public information and communications work.
"The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine is backed by $3 billion in bonds and distributes funds via an independent citizens' oversight committee, which plans to dole out nearly $300M each year over the next decade.
"The Institute has issued an RFP for a firm to handle its public information needs for the next year with a budget capped at $300K. The work includes a full media relations program, strategic counsel, outreach to patient advocacy and health organizations, and internal communications.
"The CIRM wants a firm steeped in education and advocacy for scientific and medical research, public funding and related topics.
"Proposals are due Nov. 30."
Science, Libel and the Law: A California Case
A California physician, who also serves on the UC Irvine faculty, says a lawsuit against him by a Korean stem cell scientist is an attempt to "stamp out any critical scrutiny" of the researcher's credentials and techniques.
The matter, which will hit a Los Angeles court room on Wednesday, pits Bruce Flamm against Kwang Yul Cha.
Flamm works at Kaiser Permanente in Riverside, Ca. Cha, an internationally known scientist, heads a "a vast conglomerate of medical facilities in Korea and the United States," according to legal filings by Flamm.
Last March the California stem cell agency awarded a $2.6 million grant to a nonprofit, Los Angeles subsidiary of the Cha organization. Directors of the agency approved the application without knowing the identity of the applicant, following a recommendation from another CIRM panel arrived at behind closed doors. Both procedures are standard for the agency. A flap arose when the media reported the applicant had links to Cha and reported the controversy surrounding the scientist. In September, the subsidiary withdrew its grant application.
The Flamm-Cha story began with a 2001 article by Cha and two other persons that was published in the Journal of Reproductive Medicine. Flamm said it reported that "distant intercessory prayer can double the success rate" of IVF. The article generated international attention and comment, including some from Flamm.
In August of this year, Cha filed a libel lawsuit against Flamm, saying that Flamm defamed him in a March 15, 2007, article in the Ob/Gyn News. In October Flamm filed what is known as an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against Cha.
Flamm's suit is based on a California law aimed at preventing stifling of public discussion through the use of lawsuits. SLAPP is an abbreviation for "strategic lawsuit against public participation."
Flamm is contending that his comments concerned matters of "significant public interest," are not prima facie defamatory and are protected by California's anti-SLAPP statute.
Flamm told the California Stem Cell Report via email that "Kwang Cha's attorneys will attempt to over-ride our anti-SLAPP motion" in Los Angeles Superior Court at 8:30 a.m. Pacific Standard Time on Wednesday.
The matter, which will hit a Los Angeles court room on Wednesday, pits Bruce Flamm against Kwang Yul Cha.
Flamm works at Kaiser Permanente in Riverside, Ca. Cha, an internationally known scientist, heads a "a vast conglomerate of medical facilities in Korea and the United States," according to legal filings by Flamm.
Last March the California stem cell agency awarded a $2.6 million grant to a nonprofit, Los Angeles subsidiary of the Cha organization. Directors of the agency approved the application without knowing the identity of the applicant, following a recommendation from another CIRM panel arrived at behind closed doors. Both procedures are standard for the agency. A flap arose when the media reported the applicant had links to Cha and reported the controversy surrounding the scientist. In September, the subsidiary withdrew its grant application.
The Flamm-Cha story began with a 2001 article by Cha and two other persons that was published in the Journal of Reproductive Medicine. Flamm said it reported that "distant intercessory prayer can double the success rate" of IVF. The article generated international attention and comment, including some from Flamm.
In August of this year, Cha filed a libel lawsuit against Flamm, saying that Flamm defamed him in a March 15, 2007, article in the Ob/Gyn News. In October Flamm filed what is known as an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against Cha.
Flamm's suit is based on a California law aimed at preventing stifling of public discussion through the use of lawsuits. SLAPP is an abbreviation for "strategic lawsuit against public participation."
Flamm is contending that his comments concerned matters of "significant public interest," are not prima facie defamatory and are protected by California's anti-SLAPP statute.
Flamm told the California Stem Cell Report via email that "Kwang Cha's attorneys will attempt to over-ride our anti-SLAPP motion" in Los Angeles Superior Court at 8:30 a.m. Pacific Standard Time on Wednesday.
WARF Stem Cell Patents: The Latest Chapter
Two groups challenging WARF's stem cell patents, an effort supported by the incoming president of the California stem cell agency, Alan Trounson, are rejecting the Wisconsin organization's latest attempt to beat back the move.
The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights and the Public Patent Foundation said WARF's latest filings do not merit overturning a preliminary ruling against the organization.
You can find the latest legal argument by the two groups here. You can find the press release here.
The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights and the Public Patent Foundation said WARF's latest filings do not merit overturning a preliminary ruling against the organization.
You can find the latest legal argument by the two groups here. You can find the press release here.
Fresh Comment
"Anonymous" has posted a comment on the "high priests" item below. It includes a link to more details on American Chemical Society and its activities regarding open access.
Monday, November 05, 2007
High Priests vs. Open Access to Research
The high priests of the newspaper business – otherwise known as editors and publishers -- have learned about the power of the Internet the hard way. Their business is turning remorselessly downward as advertisers shift their dollars to chase readers who have abandoned print.
Now comes the turn of the high priests of scientific journals. And the forces at work are something that the California stem cell agency will have to confront as it deals increasingly with public access to publicly funded research findings and how quickly that access becomes available.
Merrill Goozner, director of the Integrity in Science project for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, wrote recently that both houses of Congress have approved legislation that would provide free public access to all published articles from NIH-funded research. The measure was opposed by publishers who say that their ability to support independent peer review requires exclusive copyrights.
Goozner cites an article in The Scientist that points out that there may be a link to profits, which in turn are linked to salaries, for example, at the American Chemical Society, which generates $500 million a year from its 36 journals. Several top executives at the society earn more than $750,000 a year.
Any researcher working for a private company knows that he who pays the piper calls the tune. The fact is that taxpayers finance this research. At the heart, they own it just as much as a bank owns a mortgaged house or shareholders own a company.
The Internet is like a tidal force. Resisting its imperative may appear to be possible in the short term, but over the long term the high priests will be sweep out to sea. The alternative is come up with a better business plan and to find a way to ride the tide instead fighting it.
Now comes the turn of the high priests of scientific journals. And the forces at work are something that the California stem cell agency will have to confront as it deals increasingly with public access to publicly funded research findings and how quickly that access becomes available.
Merrill Goozner, director of the Integrity in Science project for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, wrote recently that both houses of Congress have approved legislation that would provide free public access to all published articles from NIH-funded research. The measure was opposed by publishers who say that their ability to support independent peer review requires exclusive copyrights.
Goozner cites an article in The Scientist that points out that there may be a link to profits, which in turn are linked to salaries, for example, at the American Chemical Society, which generates $500 million a year from its 36 journals. Several top executives at the society earn more than $750,000 a year.
Any researcher working for a private company knows that he who pays the piper calls the tune. The fact is that taxpayers finance this research. At the heart, they own it just as much as a bank owns a mortgaged house or shareholders own a company.
The Internet is like a tidal force. Resisting its imperative may appear to be possible in the short term, but over the long term the high priests will be sweep out to sea. The alternative is come up with a better business plan and to find a way to ride the tide instead fighting it.
Friday, November 02, 2007
Communications Void at California Stem Cell Agency
During the next few months, the California stem cell agency is embarking on two rounds of grants worth $312 million, with a multimillion dollar public outreach program in the wings -- all of that minus its top communications executive.
Dale Carlson resigned from his post as chief communications officer last month, saying that he wanted to return to the private sector. Carlson joined the agency August 2006 after serving as vice president for corporate affairs with the Pacific (stock) Exchange in San Francisco for 18 years.
Replacing Carlson will be a difficult task. He is a consummate professional, one of the best that we have encountered over decades of experience with practitioners of public relations. He had a keen grasp of the needs of CIRM and the needs of the media and how to achieve a balance that was in the best interest of his employer.
The communications job at CIRM is particularly difficult because it is a unique enterprise with complex responsibilities and tasks. By comparison, most government agencies are straightforward, as are businesses. But CIRM combines both government and business, along with science, politics, morality, ethics, religion and much more. Finding someone who will be knowledgeable and comfortable with the scope of CIRM activities will take considerable work.
Already we have seen some predictable slippage in CIRM's PR functions, relatively minor at this point. But with the $85 million faculty awards due in December and the far-reaching $227 million in lab grants, the need for top notch help looms large.
CIRM is looking for an interim communications person as well as a permanent replacement with a salary range of $130,000 to $195,000. It will certainly need someone on board, whether an outside firm or person, come January when the lab grants are scheduled for approval by the Oversight Committee.
Also coming up in 2008 is a public outreach program, which the strategic plan says could run $4.5 million. Both incoming CIRM President Alan Trounson and interim President Richard Murphy have identified the public education effort as a major priority.
Murphy told CIRM directors last month that the agency is considering hiring an outside firm that would work with "an internal public information coordinator." Murphy said the agency will begin a search for a "firm that is strong in medical affairs and journalism and has good relationships with government."
CIRM is coming out of an unsettled period that was at least a partial result of failure to fill the vacant presidential spot in a prompt fashion. CIRM's chief scientific officer, Arlene Chiu, has left and others as well. It is fair to speculate that absent the disruption Carlson might still be at the agency.
Carlson was the third communications person/firm in the last three years at CIRM, not including a whopping $378,000 contract with the Edelman PR firm. That track record reflects poorly on the agency. We suspect it is partially linked to micromanagement problems. It also may have to do with internal access issues. If the new communications chief is to serve CIRM well, he or she must have complete access at the highest levels of the organization. Otherwise, policies become locked in place without full consideration of all their public ramifications.
Public relations is one of those tasks that seem simple on the surface and consequently sometimes generates poorly informed and self-serving dabbling. The Oversight Committee at one point even engaged in writing PR practices into its grant administration regulations in a way that protected the interests of grant recipients over the agency itself.
CIRM needs to resolve such issues if it is to achieve its public outreach and education goals.
Dale Carlson resigned from his post as chief communications officer last month, saying that he wanted to return to the private sector. Carlson joined the agency August 2006 after serving as vice president for corporate affairs with the Pacific (stock) Exchange in San Francisco for 18 years.
Replacing Carlson will be a difficult task. He is a consummate professional, one of the best that we have encountered over decades of experience with practitioners of public relations. He had a keen grasp of the needs of CIRM and the needs of the media and how to achieve a balance that was in the best interest of his employer.
The communications job at CIRM is particularly difficult because it is a unique enterprise with complex responsibilities and tasks. By comparison, most government agencies are straightforward, as are businesses. But CIRM combines both government and business, along with science, politics, morality, ethics, religion and much more. Finding someone who will be knowledgeable and comfortable with the scope of CIRM activities will take considerable work.
Already we have seen some predictable slippage in CIRM's PR functions, relatively minor at this point. But with the $85 million faculty awards due in December and the far-reaching $227 million in lab grants, the need for top notch help looms large.
CIRM is looking for an interim communications person as well as a permanent replacement with a salary range of $130,000 to $195,000. It will certainly need someone on board, whether an outside firm or person, come January when the lab grants are scheduled for approval by the Oversight Committee.
Also coming up in 2008 is a public outreach program, which the strategic plan says could run $4.5 million. Both incoming CIRM President Alan Trounson and interim President Richard Murphy have identified the public education effort as a major priority.
Murphy told CIRM directors last month that the agency is considering hiring an outside firm that would work with "an internal public information coordinator." Murphy said the agency will begin a search for a "firm that is strong in medical affairs and journalism and has good relationships with government."
CIRM is coming out of an unsettled period that was at least a partial result of failure to fill the vacant presidential spot in a prompt fashion. CIRM's chief scientific officer, Arlene Chiu, has left and others as well. It is fair to speculate that absent the disruption Carlson might still be at the agency.
Carlson was the third communications person/firm in the last three years at CIRM, not including a whopping $378,000 contract with the Edelman PR firm. That track record reflects poorly on the agency. We suspect it is partially linked to micromanagement problems. It also may have to do with internal access issues. If the new communications chief is to serve CIRM well, he or she must have complete access at the highest levels of the organization. Otherwise, policies become locked in place without full consideration of all their public ramifications.
Public relations is one of those tasks that seem simple on the surface and consequently sometimes generates poorly informed and self-serving dabbling. The Oversight Committee at one point even engaged in writing PR practices into its grant administration regulations in a way that protected the interests of grant recipients over the agency itself.
CIRM needs to resolve such issues if it is to achieve its public outreach and education goals.
Update on Aussie Stem Cell Research Probe
The latest report out of Australia says that the investigation into the stem cell project at Monash University will be over by the end of this month.
Carly Crawford of the Herald Sun reported today that the probe, which is linked to incoming CIRM President Alan Trounson, is in its final stages. Crawford also wrote that Monash says it will return the $1 million in public funds if it is determined that misconduct occurred.
Trounson, who is not the subject of the investigation but oversaw the research, is clearing out his office prior to his move to California in January, the newspaper reported.
Carly Crawford of the Herald Sun reported today that the probe, which is linked to incoming CIRM President Alan Trounson, is in its final stages. Crawford also wrote that Monash says it will return the $1 million in public funds if it is determined that misconduct occurred.
Trounson, who is not the subject of the investigation but oversaw the research, is clearing out his office prior to his move to California in January, the newspaper reported.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
CIRM Director Nova Scores with IPO
It was not a bad financial week for Tina Nova, one of the directors of the California stem cell agency.
She is president of Genoptix of Carlsbad, Ca., which went public this week at $17 a share and then shot up at one point to $27.30. The shares closed at $24.97 today, up 27 cents for the day, even as the Dow Jones Industrial Averages plummeted 362 points.
Terri Somers of the San Diego Union-Tribune reported that the firm, which helps oncologists determine the best treatment for certain cancer victims, is the latest in a series of health-care connected firms to do well on their initial public offerings.
She wrote:
"Scott Sweet, managing director of IPOboutique.com, said investors were eager to snap up Genoptix shares after a recent surge in revenue that was atypical of a biomedical firm."Dow Jones reported,
"Right now, what we have is a shortage of companies that actually have revenues and all that other good stuff," said Steve Brozak, a biotech and medical-devices analyst who is president of WBB Securities."
Trounson and Sale of Melbourne IVF
The financial affairs of Alan Trounson, the incoming president of the California stem cell agency, surfaced in this week in the Australian media.
Australian Bioethics picked up a report from the Australian Financial Review that said the sale of Melbourne IVF should mean $8.8 million (Australian) for Trounson.
According to Australian Bioethics, private equity firms are interested in buying the business for about $200 million. Melbourne IVF is the largest IVF clinic in Australia.
Australian Bioethics picked up a report from the Australian Financial Review that said the sale of Melbourne IVF should mean $8.8 million (Australian) for Trounson.
According to Australian Bioethics, private equity firms are interested in buying the business for about $200 million. Melbourne IVF is the largest IVF clinic in Australia.
StemLifeLine: No to Third Party, Spare Embryo Decisions
Ana Krtolica, chief executive officer of StemLifeLine Inc. of San Carlos, Ca., offers the following on our item concerning the story in the San Francisco Chronicle about her firm. Among other things, the story said the company had triggered protests from both supporters and opponents of embryonic stem cell research.
"StemLifeLine is a life sciences company that offers individuals who have undergone in vitro fertilization, a unique option to develop stem cell lines from their surplus stored embryos.
"As former academic stem cell researchers, we learned that IVF patients who donated embryos for research often inquired about the possibility to access the stem cells derived from their embryos. This inspired us to develop the novel StemLifeLine service - the first of its kind in the world - for IVF patients who wish to develop their own stem cell lines.
"At StemLifeLine, we believe that it is up to IVF patients and not any third party to decide what should be done with their spare embryos. These patients invested financially, emotionally and physically into embryo generation and it is their choice, their genetic material and their responsibility to make the best decision for themselves and their families.
"It is also important to note that clients that choose to use our service may still benefit research while developing their own stem cell lines. The two options are not mutually exclusive. As researchers, the founders and staff at StemLifeLine are personally committed to supporting biomedical research and stem cell research, in particular. Therefore, we provide an option for clients to donate an additional portion of their stem cell lines to any non-profit research facility of their choice at no charge. However, this decision is left entirely up to each patient.
"Finally, there has been speculation about our pricing. Stem cell derivation is an expensive process that requires a high level of scientific expertise, state-of-the-art equipment and significant time investment. Nevertheless, we are able to provide this service for a price comparable to cord blood stem cell banking.
"To conclude, without having personal experience with the IVF process, none of us can fully understand how difficult it is to make a decision regarding the allocation of surplus embryos. Our goal at StemLifeLine is to offer an additional option to IVF patients and it is up to these patients and their families to make the best decision based on their individual needs and priorities."
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
No Interstate Stem Cell Cookbook
The Interstate Alliance on Stem Cell Research has decided not to offer model policies for openness and transparency throughout the nation or any other model regulations for that matter.
According to Warren Wollschlager, chair of the group, it will focus on compiling and sharing information from various states involved in stem cell research programs. He told the Boston Globe that there will be no national "cookbook." Wollschlager also said the group will not engage in direct advocacy efforts.
Wollschlarger reported that about 24 persons attended the group's two-day meeting last week in Boston, including a handful of public attendees. He said,
He also said that the group's web site should be online about Dec. 3 and that the next meeting of the group will be in March or April of next year, probably in Washington, D.C.
According to Warren Wollschlager, chair of the group, it will focus on compiling and sharing information from various states involved in stem cell research programs. He told the Boston Globe that there will be no national "cookbook." Wollschlager also said the group will not engage in direct advocacy efforts.
Wollschlarger reported that about 24 persons attended the group's two-day meeting last week in Boston, including a handful of public attendees. He said,
"As planned, we did discuss governance issues during the meeting, and clarified that the method by which the IASCR will meet its mission of fostering interstate collaboration is by compiling and sharing information about state specific statutes, regulation and policies. This commitment to collecting and sharing state information is reflected by the focus and charge of the various working groups. Working subcommittees are charged with compiling state specific information, checking out the accuracy of the information with the various states, and summarizing the data for the full committee. All final products of the IASCR will be posted on the IASCR website. I wanted to clarify that the IASCR will not be issuing policy recommendations or developing model statutory or regulatory language."In an email to the California Stem Cell Report, Wollschlager said that all future meetings of the group will be open to the public.
He also said that the group's web site should be online about Dec. 3 and that the next meeting of the group will be in March or April of next year, probably in Washington, D.C.
ACT and Geron Talk About Clinical Trials
CNNMoney.com has a piece today on two California companies that report they are edging closer to clinical trials on treatments using human embryonic stem cells.
Aaron Smith wrote the article about Geron and Advanced Cell Technology. It also mentioned Novocell.
In the case of the first two companies, Smith said tests could begin as early as next year. However, schedules have slipped in the past.
Smith wrote:
Aaron Smith wrote the article about Geron and Advanced Cell Technology. It also mentioned Novocell.
In the case of the first two companies, Smith said tests could begin as early as next year. However, schedules have slipped in the past.
Smith wrote:
"'What we're seeing now in the stem cell field is like a chess match,' said Stephen Brozak, analyst for WBB Securities. 'The early moves will ultimately dictate who succeeds in the stem cell space.'"Geron's product involves spinal cord injuries and ACT's vision loss. Novocell is looking at diabetes.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Stem Cell Freeze Flap: Ethics, UC San Francisco, Stanford Involved
"Modern day frankenstein story," "undeniably creepy," "trying to improve the quality of life." Some of the comments on a story in the San Francisco Chronicle involving a firm that offers "to create 'personalized' stem cells from the spare embryos of fertility clinic clients."
The article Monday by Bernadette Tansey said the idea is to freeze the stem cells for possible later use – "insurance for the future" – in the event that medical breakthroughs could make use of them.
The company is StemLifeLine Inc. of San Carlos, which is located south of San Francisco. It charges as much as $7,000 to create and freeze the stem cells with storage costs of $350 currently. Additional fees of up to $2,000 could be charged.
Tansey said the firm's proposal has set off a "flash fire of protest" from both supporters and foes of stem cell research.
Forty-seven comments were filed by the public on the story(they can be read at the end of the Chronicle story). The wide range offers some insight into the magnitude of the public education challenges that stem cell research still faces. Particularly since the Chronicle audience presumably consists largely of stem cell supporters.
The story also reported that the firm's business has triggered something of a tussle involving folks from UC San Francisco and Stanford.
The head of StemLifeLine is Ana Krtolica(see photo), a former researcher at UC San Francisco. On the firm's advisory board is Susan Fisher, who heads the UC San Francisco stem cell program. Olga Genbacev, a member of the firm's board, is a scientist in Fisher's lab. Tansey also reported that "the company's staff and boards include present and former research collaborators of Fisher's."
One of the folks from Stanford arrayed against the firm's proposal was David Magnus, director of that university's Center for Biomedical Ethics. He told Tansey,
"These companies are essentially taking advantage of people's ignorance and fears to make a buck,"
Also commenting negatively from Stanford were Rene Reijo Pera, director of Stanford's stem cell program and formerly of UC San Francisco, and Chris Scott, director of the Stanford program on Stem Cells in Society.
In addition to the comments on the Chronicle site, Monya Baker in Nature's stem cell blog, The Niche, said that it is "troubling" that the company has failed to make any of its customers available for interviews and refuses to provide a copy of the contract that customers sign.
Friday, October 26, 2007
San Diego Wildfires and the Biotech Business
San Diego is one of the global centers for stem cell research. This week it was also the scene of disastrous wildfires that destroyed 2,000 homes and left $1 billion damage.
The fires meant personal tragedies for some, closures of businesses and loss of some research. The fires also served notice once again to businesses and researchers of the impact that natural disasters can suddenly have and the importance of emergency planning, especially in Southern California which is also in an earthquake zone.
Stem cell research and businesses are just one component of a large life science industry in the San Diego -- one that encompasses 500 firms and 36,000 employees.
In an effort to provide a partial view of the fire's impact, The California Stem Cell Report queried a handful of folks in the stem cell business in fire area.
In the case of Richard Murphy, interim president of the California stem cell agency, he was in San Francisco working as the fire advanced towards his home in Rancho Santa Fe. Murphy said the home was being rented while he worked in Northern California, and reported on Thursday that the house was safe.
Researcher Jeanne Loring of the Burnham Institute in La Jolla was in Maine at a stem cell meeting. She said via email that her house in Del Mar had been on the mandatory evacuation list but that it was safe. "I took a break from following the fires on the Internet to give a seminar to a class of a human ESC training course here in Bar Harbor."
She said that at one point both Burnham and neighboring Scripps were closed, but power remained on and the cell banks were okay. Salk and UC San Diego were also partially or completely closed at times.
Loring continued,
Jay Blankenbeckler, a biotech manager at Invitrogen in Carlsbad in northern San Diego County, awoke early one morning in his Rancho Bernardo home to find high winds and approaching blazes. Time magazine quoted him as saying that mature palm trees in his yard were bent over.
He said,
Bioworld Today reported that at one point half of the staff of BIOCOM, the Southern California industry association, was evacuated from their homes. The online publication reported that many biotech businesses had to close during the fire.
Invitrogen at one point sent most workers home from its main production facility. But it said shipments won't be affected, according to an article by Mike Nagle on us-pharmatechnologist.com. It has another distribution site in Maryland.
Nagle also reported that some biotech businesses at one point were in risk of losing buildings. He said,
Here is a link to a regularly updated map by the San Diego Union-Tribune of the fire zones in San Diego.
The fires meant personal tragedies for some, closures of businesses and loss of some research. The fires also served notice once again to businesses and researchers of the impact that natural disasters can suddenly have and the importance of emergency planning, especially in Southern California which is also in an earthquake zone.
Stem cell research and businesses are just one component of a large life science industry in the San Diego -- one that encompasses 500 firms and 36,000 employees.
In an effort to provide a partial view of the fire's impact, The California Stem Cell Report queried a handful of folks in the stem cell business in fire area.
In the case of Richard Murphy, interim president of the California stem cell agency, he was in San Francisco working as the fire advanced towards his home in Rancho Santa Fe. Murphy said the home was being rented while he worked in Northern California, and reported on Thursday that the house was safe.
Researcher Jeanne Loring of the Burnham Institute in La Jolla was in Maine at a stem cell meeting. She said via email that her house in Del Mar had been on the mandatory evacuation list but that it was safe. "I took a break from following the fires on the Internet to give a seminar to a class of a human ESC training course here in Bar Harbor."
She said that at one point both Burnham and neighboring Scripps were closed, but power remained on and the cell banks were okay. Salk and UC San Diego were also partially or completely closed at times.
Loring continued,
"Some experiments were lost just because the researchers were evacuated. Some people who were evacuated were staying at the labs. I offered my office couch, but I don't know if anyone took me up on it....One unexpected benefit was that the NIH gave grant applicants a grace period. We have a few more days to work on one stem cell grant from the Burnham that was due on Tuesday!"Floyd Bloom, a member of the CIRM Oversight Committee and executive director for science communications at Scripps, said, "I've been hunkering down, trying to keep my mind off the tragedies by working."
Jay Blankenbeckler, a biotech manager at Invitrogen in Carlsbad in northern San Diego County, awoke early one morning in his Rancho Bernardo home to find high winds and approaching blazes. Time magazine quoted him as saying that mature palm trees in his yard were bent over.
He said,
"They were doing this swirling thing. My palm trees, 35 to 45 feet of palm tree, almost looked like a swizzle stick in a drink, moving around in a big circle."He and his family evacuated, and at last report his home was still okay.
Bioworld Today reported that at one point half of the staff of BIOCOM, the Southern California industry association, was evacuated from their homes. The online publication reported that many biotech businesses had to close during the fire.
Invitrogen at one point sent most workers home from its main production facility. But it said shipments won't be affected, according to an article by Mike Nagle on us-pharmatechnologist.com. It has another distribution site in Maryland.
Nagle also reported that some biotech businesses at one point were in risk of losing buildings. He said,
"This poses several problems, not least of which is how to care for any animals kept at the facility and where to take them should they need to be evacuated. A further problem is what to with the, often very expensive, compounds used at each facility, many of which require special storage conditions, or are still being used in active experiments or haven't yet been fully analyzed.Nagle said that the daily production of the life sciences companies in San Diego runs about $23 million a day.
"Notwithstanding the fact that much of these materials may intrinsically be commercially sensitive, this is where nearby but not at risk life sciences companies come into the equation, which obviously have the facilities to look after both research animals and chemicals.
"Of course, this is ignoring the more simple fact that a fire at a facility that contains vast amounts of chemicals could be an environmental disaster. However, the companies in the area will, of course, have made contingency plans for emergencies such as this - especially since this is not the first time California has been devastated by wildfires: four years ago, wildfires swept through Southern California, killing over 20 people."
Here is a link to a regularly updated map by the San Diego Union-Tribune of the fire zones in San Diego.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Fresh Comments
A "Mr. Gunn" has raised a question about our handling of the Australian stem cell investigation stories. We have a response for him. It all can be found under "comments" on the "malicious attack" item below.
Secrecy: A Recipe for Scandal
Seventeen California universities and research institutions have applied to the California stem cell agency for $227 million to build major new labs throughout the state.
It is single biggest round of grants in CIRM's short life.
As usual, CIRM refuses to release the names of the applicants, making it difficult for the public to comment, support or express reservations on the grants during the most critical stage of reviews. However, it is fair to say that any institution with a significant stem cell research presence will have applied along with those who are seeking to build that capacity. It is also fair to say that public disclosure of names of grant applicants, prior to formal review, would have avoided the flap earlier this year about a $2.6 million grant to CHA RMI in Los Angeles.
In the case of the lab grants, applicants are certain to include nearly all the University of California campuses, Stanford, USC and the San Diego stem cell consortium, which includes Salk, Scripps and Burnham in addition to UC San Diego.
So if you readers have any reservations about the ability of those institutions to make good use of a $20 million or so lab grant, you can email or write CIRM, whose web site -- www.cirm.ca.gov -- carries all the contact information.
Earlier this week, the California Stem Cell Report and the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights appealed to the agency to reconsider its secrecy policies in connection with the use of $227 million in taxpayer funds. No, was CIRM's response.
The secrecy policies, however, fly in the face of the spirit if not the letter of the California Constitution, which states that the people of the state have a "broadly construed" right to access to information involving the public's business. The amendment to the constitution was approved by 83 percent of voters in 2004. That was the same year voters approved creation of the stem cell agency by only 59 percent.
CIRM is an agency controlled by a 29-person board that is riddled with conflicts of interest. Ultimately it is in the agency's own best interests to operate with more openness. Handing out hundreds of millions of dollars behind closed doors with no public disclosure of the conflicts involving reviewers is a recipe for scandal.
It is single biggest round of grants in CIRM's short life.
As usual, CIRM refuses to release the names of the applicants, making it difficult for the public to comment, support or express reservations on the grants during the most critical stage of reviews. However, it is fair to say that any institution with a significant stem cell research presence will have applied along with those who are seeking to build that capacity. It is also fair to say that public disclosure of names of grant applicants, prior to formal review, would have avoided the flap earlier this year about a $2.6 million grant to CHA RMI in Los Angeles.
In the case of the lab grants, applicants are certain to include nearly all the University of California campuses, Stanford, USC and the San Diego stem cell consortium, which includes Salk, Scripps and Burnham in addition to UC San Diego.
So if you readers have any reservations about the ability of those institutions to make good use of a $20 million or so lab grant, you can email or write CIRM, whose web site -- www.cirm.ca.gov -- carries all the contact information.
Earlier this week, the California Stem Cell Report and the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights appealed to the agency to reconsider its secrecy policies in connection with the use of $227 million in taxpayer funds. No, was CIRM's response.
The secrecy policies, however, fly in the face of the spirit if not the letter of the California Constitution, which states that the people of the state have a "broadly construed" right to access to information involving the public's business. The amendment to the constitution was approved by 83 percent of voters in 2004. That was the same year voters approved creation of the stem cell agency by only 59 percent.
CIRM is an agency controlled by a 29-person board that is riddled with conflicts of interest. Ultimately it is in the agency's own best interests to operate with more openness. Handing out hundreds of millions of dollars behind closed doors with no public disclosure of the conflicts involving reviewers is a recipe for scandal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)