Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Biotech Science

San Francisco Getting Stem Cell Agency HQ 222

Posted by timothy from the root-cells-are-in-the-basement dept.
karvind writes "San Francisco was chosen Friday as the headquarters for California's new stem cell agency, beating out San Diego, Sacramento and Emeryville. The stem cell institute was created in November after voters overwhelmingly approved a measure allowing the state to borrow $3 billion to fund human embryonic stem cell research. According to Yahoo, the plans call for a 17,000-square-foot office with a maximum of 50 employees who will help dole out nearly $300 million in research grants annually over 10 years."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

San Francisco Getting Stem Cell Agency HQ More

San Francisco Getting Stem Cell Agency HQ

Comments Filter:

  • "Ban" (Score:2, Informative)

    by XanC ( 644172 )
    That's right people, there is no federal ban on stem cell research of any kind. No matter what the media tries to tell you.

    • Re:"Ban" (Score:5, Insightful)

      by natrius ( 642724 ) * <niran@niEINSTEINran.org minus physicist> on Saturday May 07, 2005 @11:57PM (#12465846) Homepage
      That's right people, there is no federal ban on stem cell research of any kind. No matter what the media tries to tell you.

      There's a ban on federal funding for stem cell research. Most funding for scientific research comes from the federal government, so taking away funding for stem cell research is far more significant than you make it out to be. States rarely pass legislation funding specific areas of scientific research like California has now, and I doubt that many states will follow in their footsteps. Future advances in this area will come solely because the residents of the states who fund it chose to do so, and I'm sure people in other states won't have a problem with curing their Parkinson's when a cure comes along. It's easy for people to whine about destroying embryos when there's not a concrete benefit out there that has come from it yet. When it happens, it'll be fairly easy to spot the hypocrites.

      • Re:"Ban" (Score:4, Insightful)

        by XanC ( 644172 ) on Sunday May 08, 2005 @12:00AM (#12465862)
        I would say that this is an argument against government funding of scientific research. Why do a few people in Washington know what's important to focus on?
        Future advances in this area will come solely because the residents of the states who fund it chose to do so.
        And what's wrong with that?

        • Re:"Ban" (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Rakishi ( 759894 )
          Because everyone benefits and uses the research, not just people in that state?

          Also, that doesn't do anything for your first question. What is the difference between a few people in DC and even fewer people in some state capital?
          • What I said was that government funding of science is a bad idea. The few people in Washington were the example because they've taken that authority.
            • Then who is supposed to fund it? The average person? Amusing since I'd say most people have no idea what research is going on, much less so than the people in Washington. Then again those people in Washington don't decide all that much who really don't do much themselves (besides some broad things), they send it to other agencies which at some point have scientists involved. And if you say "well regular people can do that too" then I'm going to counter with "yeah, if they want to waste time finding all thos
              • Comment removed based on user account deletion
                • Which models gives more money to research? "Good clip" and "great clip" can mean a lot in science, especially biology. The Howard Hughes Medical Institute (which I assume you meant) is nice however it is nowhere near NIH in grants and did not have a lot of money till the 80s.

                  I'd like to note, that if most people agreed with you then we wouldn't have the government spending on research however it seems most people do agree (as California's vote has showed if you don't believe that the government really repr
                  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
                    • Which models gives more money to research?

                      Is that your only criterion?

                      YES.

                      All economic growth is a direct result of research. We are a wealthy nation because of our research. But, the amount of time and effort needed to find new technologies keeps increasing. So we need a system that dumps insane amounts of money into research. Yes we could use some of that money to say feed the poor but society gains more from tossing 1 billion to research than it does from spending that money on education or m
                    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
                    • Thank you for playing, but I won't be taking you seriously anymore.

                      Why not? Let's look at Viagra well I am 24 and everything works fine so over the next 20 years I am unlikely to pay for it but in 40 years when I might want such a product it's going to be dirt cheep because the patent's will have expired. So your idea is even though it's going to help me out I have no responsibility to pay for it's research?

                      Research seems to work the same way as roads in that I am never going to donate money to build
                    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
                    • Are you willing to give up the internet, computers, satellites, jet planes and a host of other teck for a little cash in your pocket?

                      O wait I forget you would be making less money now with out government funded research so umm, what do you gain?

                      Liberty? What liberty it's cash and not much cash at that. I like the libertarian ideals but in the real world private industry does not build highways systems and they don't do basic research. Take scram jet's they can bring the cost to orbit down by a factor
                    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
                    • There's another reason not to take you seriously. Your answer presupposes that if government doesn't fund research, then nobody will.

                      NO! I never said that I said that governments fund research that nobody else will. In the world nobody is investing in scramjets outside of governments. QED governments invest in areas that nobody else will.

                      Some things like H-bombs are less useful but this 'let the markets decide' idea is stupid as you are giving up anything that's not useful right now. Government spen
                    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
                    • Your desire for these things does not justify the use of force to fund them. Are you truly unable to grasp this simple concept? I think so, and that's why I'm not taking you seriously. That is one way to look at it. I tend to look at government as a compromise I would like defense spending to be around 5% of what it is now for example. But it's a question of how much you're willing to trade. Basically, I would agree to support all the other pork spending as long as we spend a lot of money on basic re

                • Re:"Ban" (Score:3, Interesting)

                  by Fortunato_NC ( 736786 )
                  Left to its own devices to decide what medical treatments to pursue, the pharmacuetical industry delivered two hair loss prevention treatments and three different erection pills. While that's undoubtedly a benefit to bald guys who can't get it up, we're lucky that federal research dollars are used to find cures for diseases that are not as "commercially viable". If we depended on "the market" for everything, we'd still be using dirt trails and Indian guides for transportation, since no one would find the RO
        • I would say that this is an argument against government funding of scientific research.

          When government funds research, it gets published. Everyone gets to use the knowledge that comes from it. In private research, that's not the case.

          The reason research sponsored by individual states isn't ideal is because they have less money to work with. I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with it, especially because I'm a California resident studying biology. This legislation creates jobs for me, and

          • Re:"Ban" (Score:2, Informative)

            by Anonymous Coward
            When government funds research, it gets published. Everyone gets to use the knowledge that comes from it. In private research, that's not the case.

            Oh, it would be nice if it were the case. But alas I think you need to look more carefully at the epidemic of publicly funded research which winds up being "owned" lock stock and barrel by private companies. Ever hear of the Bayh-Dole act?

            I want there to be public funding of the sciences. But we are in need of serious review of how our public research money i
        • Well, it's certainly an argument against such selective, politically-controlled funding of research. There is nothing wrong with states funding their own research, but it is the Federal government that controls the bulk of research funds. Granted, the overhead in the research community is enormous and surprisingly little of that funding ever makes it to the actual researchers. The universities that provide accredited facilities for researchers to do their work absorb the bulk of money targeted for science a

      • It's worse than that. (Score:4, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 08, 2005 @12:02AM (#12465875)
        There's a ban on federal funding for stem cell research.

        It's worse than that. There's a ban on stem cell research if you've received federal funding. If you have in the past received federal money, if any of that federal money went to facilities, etc, you can't do stem cell research with anything that money's touched. Not facilities, buildings, desk chairs, whatever.

        So, the government offers these groups money. They get pretty much every important research institution infected with having received this money. Then suddenly they bait and switch and announce they're banning anyone who's received this money from doing vital medical research because it offends their leaders' religious sensibilities. Then they get to shrug, do a "who me", and have their lackeys on slashdot claim they didn't ban anything. Neat trick.

        • Re:It's worse than that...... THIS IS BUNK! (Score:2, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          It is Embrionic Stem Cells.....

          And federal funding is not restricted on the current lines of EMBRIOS. It is restricted on *NEW* Embrios.

          And it is *NOT* Backword looking. Geeze...
          Moderators, please MODERATE!

          Here is a link to the real story [whitehouse.gov]
          And for thoes challenged:
          Embryonic Stem Cell Research
          August 9, 2001

          "As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist" I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cel

        • you can do stem cell research with federal money (Score:5, Informative)

          by thinkliberty ( 593776 ) on Sunday May 08, 2005 @01:41AM (#12466256)
          Sorry. But you CAN do stem cell research with federal money.

          Here are the basic guidelines:

          Federal funds will only be used for research on existing stem cell lines that were derived: (1) with the informed consent of the donors; (2) from excess embryos created solely for reproductive purposes; and (3) without any financial inducements to the donors. In order to ensure that federal funds are used to support only stem cell research that is scientifically sound, legal, and ethical, the NIH will examine the derivation of all existing stem cell lines and create a registry of those lines that satisfy this criteria. More than 60 existing stem cell lines from genetically diverse populations around the world are expected to be available for federally-funded research.

          No federal funds will be used for: (1) the derivation or use of stem cell lines derived from newly destroyed embryos; (2) the creation of any human embryos for research purposes; or (3) the cloning of human embryos for any purpose. Today's decision relates only to the use of federal funds for research on existing stem cell lines derived in accordance with the criteria set forth above.

          See:
          http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20 010809-1.html [whitehouse.gov]
      • It would be unethical, but funny, to tie any use of end-therapy based on the results from California based stem cell reseach to being a resident of California, as established by a tax return or three. Of course, we couldn't exclude our French pals, that wouldn't be fair. But Texans...
      • There's a ban on federal funding for stem cell research

        There is a ban of federal funding for stem cell research that involves killing a human fetus. The government funds over 60 different stem cell resreach groups, they just all get their cells from other sources. (ambilical cords, bady teeth.)

        Check out http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20 010809-1.html [whitehouse.gov]

      • Re:"Ban" --- Pleeeeze... Get it Right just once. (Score:4, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 08, 2005 @01:20AM (#12466186)
        The ban is on stem cell research derived from human embryos. And to be much more specific it is a federal ban on *NEW* embryos.

        Here is an actual snippet from the prez:

        "As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist" I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cell lines " where the life and death decision has already been made", This allows us to explore the promise and potential of stem cell research" without crossing a fundamental moral line by providing taxpayer funding that would sanction or encourage further destruction of human embryos that have at least the potential for life."
        -- George W. Bush

        The Real Thing [whitehouse.gov]

        And yes, that means that FEDERAL FUNDING *IS* ALLOWED for embrionic stem cells.

        There is *NO* limitation on other types of stem cells.

        And we already have created products from adult hair, skin, bone and blood stem cells. Most medical researchers insist that embrionic stem cells have less potential than other types of stem cells.

        California has literally jumped the shark [wikipedia.org]. Any facility that would like to touch that money *MUST* do embrionic stem cell research exclusivily.

        This is equilivent to Wyoming deciding that ARM processors may save lives and setting up a research fund. In order to touch the fund you must do verifiable research on the ARM processor.

        And yes, it really *IS* as silly as that. And we are not talking about magical money.... It is strictly tax payer money. Remember that last pizza... well forget it...
        • Most medical researchers insist that embrionic stem cells have less potential than other types of stem cells

          This simply is not true. Perhaps you heard this claim from someone else and accepted it, but please stop repeating this claim.

          Unfortunately people who know better are lying about the usefulness of embryonic stem cells, because it serves their agenda. It's one thing to oppose embryonic stem cell research because one believes it is unethical, but it's deceptive and insulting to attempt to shape publi

  • Obligatory dead baby joke... (Score:3, Funny)

    by SpartanVII ( 838669 ) on Saturday May 07, 2005 @11:52PM (#12465819)
    How do you get a baby out of a blender With- *is overrun by thousands of stem-cell protestors*

  • I Know (Score:3, Informative)

    by certsoft ( 442059 ) on Saturday May 07, 2005 @11:53PM (#12465827) Homepage
    They could just remodel "Colossus" programming headquarters. How's that for an obscure reference?

  • Bad pun... (Score:3, Funny)

    by evenprime ( 324363 ) on Saturday May 07, 2005 @11:56PM (#12465840) Homepage Journal
    ...but someone has to say it.

    I bet they can't STEM the tide of calls from reporters....

    [thank's I'll be here all week]
  • Heard about it on NPR. Free rent, free furniture, plasma screens, etc. All for 50 bureaucrats that won't actually do any research--they are strictly oversight. SF is hoping the Center will attract biotech firms to set up offices and labs in the city. A "prestige" coup. I kind of doubt it. You can get a lot more labspace a LOT cheaper not too far away. Not to mention the fact that a lot of biotech companies (Amgen, Genentech, IDEC, &c.) already have big centers in the state and don't need to set up facilities to land the bids.
    • And those are some FAT beurocrats they're putting in there... 17,000 square feet / 50 employees = 340 sq ft per beaurocrat. That's some fat cats they have there. Or a really, really spacious server room and a Mr. Burns style executive washroom.
    • Yeah... The article is very poorly written. Take a look at this one, [smdailyjournal.org] which explains a few more details.

      All the finalists offer free rent and a wide range of incentives that include free office furniture, free parking and free gym memberships for agency employees.

      I don't live in SF, nor have I been following the proposal, but this seems like a big waste of money. Since when do benefits such as free gym memberships for employees have to do with anything? This place isn't even doing any research, they a
    • Yes, but South San Francisco, where most of the biotech companies are located, has a pretty symbiotic relationship with San Francisco.

      Almost nobody with a good job at any of those companies actually lives in South City - they either live in the 'burbs, in the Valley, or in the City.

      And being a good corporate citizen in those parts means supporting things in SF proper. Genentech is a corporate sponsor of the SFMOMA, the opera and lots of other things.

      In short, what's good for local (SSF) biotech is gener
    • 1. borrow money you don't have
      2. use it to fund an office of people who won't actually work
      3. ...
      4. profit!

  • Your tax dollars at work in California (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MerlynEmrys67 ( 583469 ) on Sunday May 08, 2005 @12:20AM (#12465937)
    So california voters decide to spend 300 Million a year for 10 years on a science project. Where does the funding start - well 50 people at 100,000 a piece (and that is cheap, assume some of those people are high ranking folks making a ton more) is 5 million a year.

    I don't even want to know how much a new 17,000 ft office building is going to cost in San Fransisco - but that can't be cheap (assuming you can build it after the environmental impact).

    All this and no real science being done yet.

    • So california voters decide to spend 300 Million a year for 10 years on a science project.

      Yes. Considering the the federal government doesn't even fund certain types of stem cell research that have the potential to be extraordinarily useful, California is doing an awesome thing by providing a place (and motivation) to carry out this research.

      I don't even want to know how much a new 17,000 ft office building is going to cost in San Fransisco - but that can't be cheap (assuming you can build it after the
      • This whole stem cell research thing is nothing more or less than California very directly and publicly giving Bush and the Neocons the finger.

        If the current federal mandates didn't place severe restrictions on what sorts of stem cell research could be done with federal funds, this wouldn't have been proposed, and certainly wouldn't have passed, given California's current significant financial issues.

        I hope something useful comes from it, but don't kid yourself...this was and is primarily California postur
    • So california voters decide to spend 300 Million a year for 10 years on a science project.

      No, voters approved state backing for a bond sale to raise funds for research. A big difference.

  • why are we funding an industry rolling in dough? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Sunday May 08, 2005 @12:34AM (#12465998)
    Question- why are we funding an industry that is rolling in record amounts of dough? Biotech research and development is almost 100% government-funded already, and we're giving them even more?

    What do we get for all these tax dollars? Why, scandals like Vioxx...and drugs like Nexium, which don't work much better than the pill they replaced, but have some little bit patented so it can't be cloned by generic drug companies...and a new catchy name or color for the public to run to their doctors, demand these premium drugs, and rip off our health insurance companies.

    • CA is funding this to stick a fork in Bush's eye. It's basically "You've banned federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, well, we'll do it anyway, so take that!". It's no surprise the most liberal area of the state won the project, they would are desparately willing to do anything to show Bush the error of his ways. The whole thing will wind up being a bureaucratic boondogle, and lots of already-wealthy investors will laugh all the way to the bank with state money.

      • They're doing something like $3B in bond issues up front, and after they've borrowed all the money and gotten it locked in to their non-profit corporation, *then* they'll start doling it out over many years. That means that there's no way for the state government to control it, or to cut back the amount of money if they get into budget trouble or if they're not satisfied with the results. It's a great deal for the scammers who end up running it, but it's also going to cut down on the state's willingness t

    • We're not... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by hung_himself ( 774451 )
      The funding is going to be like NIH funding, providing peer-reviewed grants for scientists, mostly from academia since the pharmaceuticals do very little of this type of research. If research money did not come from public or charitable funds, it would not be done since the short term profitability of trying to find a cure for Parkinson's or diabetes is rather dubious

      The anger and frustration you seem to have about the drug industry should not be directed at the (relatively scant) tax dollars for basic re
    • scandals like Vioxx...

      I'll say this... as a medical student, I believe that Vioxx, Celebrex and Bextra are 3 of the greatest medications created in the last 25 years. They have helped HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of arthritis, lupus, scleroderma, spondylitis and dozens of other disease-sufferers with their pain that was NOT helped by typical ibuprofen-like drugs.

      The whole anti-Vioxx thing is, in my opinion, driven largely (not *entirely*, but largely) by the malpractice lawyers. I was visiting my grandmother

  • Oblig. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dachannien ( 617929 ) on Sunday May 08, 2005 @12:35AM (#12466003)
    Professor Farnsworth: Is it true that stem cells may fight the aging process?
    Stem Cell Agency Staffer: Well, yes, in the same way an infant may fight Muhammad Ali, but....
    Professor Farnsworth: One pound of stem cells please!
    Stem Cell Agency Staffer: (setting container labeled "Stem Cells" on the counter) Of course, any age-reversing effects will be purely temporary.
    (Professor Farnsworth opens the container and starts slopping the stem cells on his face.)
    Stem Cell Agency Staffer: Auugghh!!

  • Sigh...... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 08, 2005 @12:38AM (#12466013)
    California voted for embryonic stem cell research, even though cord blood stem cells, as well as adult stem cells, show more promise. Right now california has a bufget defcit that is out of control, basic infrastructure is growing obselete, and health care and retirement benefits are bankrupting local governments. The UC medical system is turning away emergency room patients, UC Davis can no longer afford to pay for it's life flight helicopters, and a major trauma center in Los Angeles is being closed. Imagine what could have happened if the money for this "Feel Good", initiative had been used for...........HEALTHCARE

    • Re:Sigh...... (Score:3, Informative)

      by eluusive ( 642298 )
      I hear what you said repeated by Anti-Abortionists repeatedly. Honestly though, It's not true. For a simple explanation of the difference see this FAQ entry: http://www.stemcellresearchfoundation.org/About/FA Q.htm#4 [stemcellre...dation.org]

      For many years, scientists have conducted studies to determine whether the stem cells in adult tissue have the same developmental capability as embryonic stem cells. The general consensus is that adult stem cells seem to be less versatile. Scientists think that embryonic stem cells have a

    • Re:Sigh...... (Score:2, Informative)

      by isurge ( 574887 )
      and healthcare 'costs' will not be solved with more money .... :-) lol you got to read more about health care costs basically the good ole USA is getting ripped off day after day .... you give more money and the health care industry will bleed you more .... money is not the solution ... what I do when I feel like I am getting ripped off is go some place else and try and get back my money where I got ripped off ... I suggest you do the same... I go to ***** **** once a year for more than the beaches.
  • There are only a few thousand people in Emeryville. Eventually, they will be forced out by all the retail and businesses brought in.
  • Support of stem cell research, even going against the White House party line to do so, is the only good thing I know of that The Governator has done during his term in office.

    As a biotechnological monster himself, he knows that we shouldn't be running away from technology. Also, he may be getting worried that the cancer chickens are going to come home to roost.
  • It never amazes me how ignorant the CA voting population is. People wonder how this state got into so much debt, well it's exactly because of things like this where the public gets swayed into voting for more tax increases on unneccessary services.

    If companies want to make a profit on stem cell research, let them do it with their own wallet. These grants are simply going to make the state go further into debt.

    Plans call for a 17,000-square-foot office with a maximum of 50 employees who will help dole out

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close