Yates Cancer Research Bill [Failed]

[DownWithTheLeft]

I would prefer, noting PBrunsel's sound objection, that references to David Yates are not included.

Yes, we now you believe Yates is a fake

[The Man From G.O.P.]

I would prefer, noting PBrunsel's sound objection, that references to David Yates are not included.

Yes, we now you believe Yates is a fake

Resign now, you are unbelieveably out of line.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I would prefer, noting PBrunsel's sound objection, that references to David Yates are not included.

Yes, we now you believe Yates is a fake

Resign now, you are unbelieveably out of line.

Obviously you missed the thread were this occured, please research and then get back to me

[The Man From G.O.P.]

I would prefer, noting PBrunsel's sound objection, that references to David Yates are not included.

Yes, we now you believe Yates is a fake

Resign now, you are unbelieveably out of line.

Obviously you missed the thread were this occured, please research and then get back to me

I don't have to, I'm fully aware of some people's opinion on the validity of the Yates story, however your rhetoric is insane, please save whatever face you have and step down.

[PBrunsel]

I must oppose the President Pro Tempore's amendment. I feel the $50 million could be better spent on furthering research in adult stem cell research. Embryonic Stem Cell research has not been studied enough, and could easily be too dangerous to be tried on human beings.

Adult stem research is far superior and much safer than embryonic stem cell research. Many diseases, at least 65 to date, have been treated with adult stem cells (ASCs).  Many of these are either cancers or immune deficiencies, in which stem cell transplants are used to repair these defects.  Although using ASCs to create other kinds of cells is a much newer field, there have been some striking successes.

 Adult stem cells can be obtained from many sources, including bone marrow, blood, liver, nerves, fat, baby teeth, and umbilical cord blood. (The second largest umbilical cord blood bank in the world is at Cardinal Glennon Children’s Hospital in St. Louis.)  A clear advantage of ASCs is that ASCs can be obtained from the patient; we all have our own stem cells. Finally, ASCs have not demonstrated the potential to form tumors. 

An example of the progress of ASC research is their use for the treatment of heart attacks and heart failure.  A recent article in the Annals of Internal Medicine reviews this approach in animal models and in humans.  Nine published trials of adult stem cells in humans for the treatment of heart disease have been successful, and what you and I both want is for people to be healthy.

There have been numerous experiments of ASCs in animal models of Parkinson’s disease.  While clinical use of ASCs in Parkinson’s disease is clearly in its infancy, one notable success has been reported.  In 2001 Levesque, a neurosurgeon at UCLA, treated a patient with his own nerve ASCs, with dramatic improvement.  Levesque has FDA approval to conduct a phase II trial.

Initiative proponents have aggressively promoted ESCs as a treatment for spinal cord injury, often citing a rat experiment.  ASCs have been used with similar results in mice and in rats. Meanwhile a Portuguese neurologist reports having treated 34 spinal cord injury patients with nasal stem cells with success.  Impressive experiments have also been conducted in animal models of diabetes.  In one remarkable case a German surgeon used bone marrow ASCs to grow a new jaw for a patient who had been disfigured by cancer surgery!

The above argument is why I feel we need to give more money to ASC than to ESC, it just makes sense.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I think the bill as it stands now, giving money to cancer in honor of our Fmr. VP is a good idea.  However, I would support an amendment to make it go directly to a David Yates Brain Cancer Fund

[Colin]

I am very much against using Yates name on this bill for the reasons stated by Senator PBrunsel.

[SPC]

I think the bill as it stands now, giving money to cancer in honor of our Fmr. VP is a good idea.  However, I would support an amendment to make it go directly to a David Yates Brain Cancer Fund

I recommend that you withdraw this bill.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

I think the bill as it stands now, giving money to cancer in honor of our Fmr. VP is a good idea.  However, I would support an amendment to make it go directly to a David Yates Brain Cancer Fund

I recommend that you withdraw this bill.

I agree, enough of this already

[Ebowed]

I change my vote to Aye on DWDL's amendment.


The amendment passes.

[Ebowed]

We are voting on the following amendment.

The text of the bill shall be struck and replaced by the following:

1. There shall be established in the National Cancer Institute a David Yates Brain Cancer Research Fund (hereinafter known as the Fund).

2. The Fund may accept donations of monies and other assets.

3. The sum of $10,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated to the Fund each fiscal year and $10,000,000 is appropriated to the Fund for fiscal year 2008.

4. The Fund shall be used to pay for one or more David Yates Brain Cancer Fellowships.  Such fellowships shall be for one year and shall be renewable.  They shall be awarded and renewed at the discretion of the Director of the Institute for research into the detection, prevention, and treatment of brain cancer. David Yates Brain Cancer Fellows shall receive pay and allowances from the fund equivalent to that which would be disbursed to specially qualified scientific personnel hired under section 3104 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, but shall not otherwise be considered a government employee.  In addition, the cost of the research undertaken by the Fellow shall be paid from the Fund as authorized by the Director of the Institute.

Aye, though I will be introducing an amendment to remove references to Yates.

[Brandon H]

Aye

[Јas]

Aye

[Colin]

Aye

Though I agree with the PPT that mention of Vice President Yates should be struck.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Aye

[PBrunsel]

Aye

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Abstain, I'm not sure this is a good idea all together, and if someone wants real cancer research, I'd prefer if they'd start writing their own bills, not re-writing DWTL's

[Ebowed]

The amendment passes.

I motion to strike all references to David Yates from the legislation.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Nay

[DownWithTheLeft]

I have decided to withdraw the bill for a few reasons:

1.) As pointed out by SPC, the bill calls for tax increases rather than the original balance of breaks and raises that the bill originally contained.

2.) It appears that many senators are against including David Yates name in the bill, which is what was making me accept the tax increase

3.) I am worried that Porce will try to turn this into a debate on funding for embroynic stem cell research and sidetrack the senate.

Thank you,
DWTL

[Јas]

For the first time, I'm disappointed about the withdrawal of one of your bills from the Senate floor.

[DownWithTheLeft]

For the first time, I'm disappointed about the withdrawal of one of your bills from the Senate floor.

Well, I felt I had to do it mostly because of the fact Porce was making a mockery out of it by trying to increase stem cell funding, something if he wants it will have to wait.  Also, I was disappointed we were not honoring Yates, however, if anyone wishes to draft a new bill honoring Yates that is perhaps more thought out, I would support and/or co-sponsor it

[SPC]

I have decided to withdraw the bill for a few reasons:

1.) As pointed out by SPC, the bill calls for tax increases rather than the original balance of breaks and raises that the bill originally contained.

2.) It appears that many senators are against including David Yates name in the bill, which is what was making me accept the tax increase

3.) I am worried that Porce will try to turn this into a debate on funding for embroynic stem cell research and sidetrack the senate.

Thank you,
DWTL

I'm glad to see that you see it my way.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I have decided to withdraw the bill for a few reasons:

1.) As pointed out by SPC, the bill calls for tax increases rather than the original balance of breaks and raises that the bill originally contained.

2.) It appears that many senators are against including David Yates name in the bill, which is what was making me accept the tax increase

3.) I am worried that Porce will try to turn this into a debate on funding for embroynic stem cell research and sidetrack the senate.

Thank you,
DWTL

I'm glad to see that you see it my way.

I was going to continue to fight it if I thought it would honor the Fmr. VP

[Јas]

I have decided to withdraw the bill for a few reasons:

1.) As pointed out by SPC, the bill calls for tax increases rather than the original balance of breaks and raises that the bill originally contained.

2.) It appears that many senators are against including David Yates name in the bill, which is what was making me accept the tax increase

3.) I am worried that Porce will try to turn this into a debate on funding for embroynic stem cell research and sidetrack the senate.

Thank you,
DWTL

I'm glad to see that you see it my way.

I was going to continue to fight it if I thought it would honor the Fmr. VP

Was it therefore not premature to withdraw the bill before an amendment to remove such references were voted upon?