Stem cell Fraud
1. The stem cell debate entails many different concerns and opinions but as is so often the case when an issue has not been officially settled people take it upon themselves to investigate firsthand rather than wait for the debate to finish. While bans have been lifted and some moratorium removed there are still many things to be resolved and some people have decided to try experimenting with stem cells. Many Scientists are and health care professionals are alarmed at the number of ways salespeople are trying to market stem cells, usually with little real science to back up their claims.
2. I am interested in this issue because I work in a lab that performs stem cell research and it is a lot of work. So when someone tries to sell stem cells for the purpose of making money rather than to improve the science and application of the technology I resent it. I dislike it particularly because it creates great health risk and unrealistic expections of the technology
3. The stakeholder are legitimate pharmaceutical companies looking to make a profit through hard work, swindlers trying to take a shortcut to getting rich at any price, health care workers, and people who may or may not benefit from stem cell science but believe that they need them.
4.The most difficult aspect of this problem is how to prove that the scammers out there are advertising falsely when researchers have been held back from making progress and discoveries by legislation for so long. Everyone know what a stem cell is now in contrast to other new drugs which, by the time the public hears about them, are already tested.
5. I support responsible ethical use of stem cells as careful consideration of their applications. Many people do not know that certain regular cells can be turned back into stem cells though many projects require pluripotent cells.
6. http://media-newswire.com/release_1122621.html
Fusion power
- Fusion power is possible so why haven’t we done it yet? That is a question many might ask themselves after looking at how much money and resources we have spent fighting over oil. ITER the latest and largest fusion research facility will cost roughly twice its original 5 billion dollar price tag. The figures on the Iraq war are well known but many people may not know the us has a 711 billion dollar defense budget.
- This issue is interesting to me because its yet another example of how we just seem to have so much trouble doing the right thing. We could have a big expensive trillion dollar (including long term consequences) war so we can continue burning up an interesting and useful natural resource to push cars around and turn on light bulbs or we could spend a tiny fraction of that money harnessing the power of the sun; clean, efficient independent energy.
- Something that is rarely mentioned in this debate is that the military spend a lot of money on research. That means jobs for engineers, chemists, social workers, just about anyone from any CSU major could work on military funded projects. These projects are often not profitable so they would not get done without Federal support. Military projects lead to good things sometimes. But, these days I think most CSU students would rather see the money going straight to the school rather than following a circuitous bureaucratic route back to professors and students.
- Anyone who breaths air, uses plastic things, or drives a car could be affected by what type of energy we choose to use.
- Some of the statistics on military spending are classified and traditional energy companies will baffle even the most dedicated researcher with waves of pictures and public relations propag…advertising depicting habitats for seals around oil derricks and bald headed eagles nesting on specially built power line poles. Also, at least for me, it is hard for me to criticize an industry that provides me with fuel to drive to class when I should be riding my bike.
- I want to see fusion power developed so I think ITER is great though if we had spared a few more million or even a billion from our colossal defense budget I think ITER would have been up and running a long time ago. It was planned well before the first Iraq war. Military spending provides a lot of jobs but this topic segues into another argument about whether the federal government should take money and dole it back out using their presumably sound budgetary planning. Or maybe States should be allowed to keep it and blow it all on things like student aid, teachers’ salaries, roads, and public resources for the unemployed to help jumpstart local economies.

FPIF, A Unified Security Budget for the United States, 2007, By Lawrence Korb and Miriam Pemberton, May 2, 2006