The White House has strongly come out today in favor of S.30 formally titled  as the "Hope Offered through Principled and Ethical Stem Cell Research Act." It should be titled the "No Hope for Patients Act." http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=44110

The bill is a Trojan Horse. It contains language directing the Secretary of HHS "to conduct and support basic and applied research having pluripotent potential" so long as "That the isolation, derivation, production, or testing of such cells will not involve-(1) the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes"

SCNT involves just such technique. The clear implication is that under this language SCNT is "unethical." Passage of this bill would make the day for NIH funding of SCNT difficult or impossible.

It also excludes research where "the destruction or discarding of, or risk of injury to, a human embryo or embryos other than those that are naturally dead." In other words, this language codifies aspects of the Dickey Amendment, which forbids NIH funding of research where a human embryo is destroyed or harmed. How can the Pro-Cures Movement ever muster the political will to overturn Dickey, if we stand by and let the Senate pass this bill?

There is major mischief afoot with this legislation. Once passed it will be hard to undo.

This is a "decoy bill" and serves as political cover for the White House and anti- embryonic stem cell research foes. While not filed in the House (yet), it might very well be filed and passed, especially if our movement is silent.

Next week several major scientific societies are expected to publicly oppose this measure. I understand CAMR has not openly opposed this disastrous bill yet, though I hope they might reconsider on Monday, especially today given the huge White House publicity push today. I fear victory for S.5 will be overshadowed by passage of S.30 unless we take action.

 I think we, as a grassroots movement, are morally, strategically and tactically on the right track to openly call for the defeat of this measure. I do not think saying "only support S.5" goes far enough. Not by a long shot.

What is your thinking on this? Please let me know if you agree and can suggest some tactics we might use to derail this bill.

Much thanks.